LeBrun: Juuse Saros to sign 8 year extension worth 7.74 M AAV

[hurdemz]

7.74 is fine. 8 years is the problem. Too bad they couldn't get it to 4 or 5

 

[Frank Drebin]

7.74 is fine. 8 years is the problem. Too bad they couldn't get it to 4 or 5

one or the other likely.

7.74 is pretty decent cap hit. Makes Carey Prices 10.5 signed back in 2018 look all the more absurd

 

[Viqsi]

Do tell, what high level forward was Saros bringing back? Ullmark just won a vezina and was essentially traded for nothing (the cap dump and the 1st basically cancel out). Fleury won a vezina and was traded for nothing. Markstrom was traded with retention for a late 1st.

So please do tell, what could you possibly have that I don't, that shows Saros was bringing back a top level forward?

This. Seeing what Ullmark brought back basically made this signing inevitable. Of course bringing back a big-time forward for Saros would have been preferable, but clearly nobody was offering.

 

[Viqsi]

Are we just going to ignore that Saros was a FOURTH round pick and not the 11th OVERALL pick, there's a massive difference.

Who gives a flying f*** where they were drafted? We have the assets and we're using them as necessary. Trying to play this hindsight card to rationalize hating the deal is absurd.

 

[Viqsi]

7.74 is fine. 8 years is the problem. Too bad they couldn't get it to 4 or 5

The extra years certainly aren't great, but I don't think they're the horrible killer some folks are assuming, especially given the pace at which the cap is expected to go up.

 

[dgibb10]

Good deal getting him for less than Helle and Sorokin

 

[herzausstein]

Contract AAV is decent
He should be good/great for 5 or so more years
After that is where it gets iffy
Hopefully by then the cap has risen a fair amount and there isnt trade protections.
Not a fan of the contract length and think this is a mistake for where Nashville is competitively since Nashville has so many holes in their roster but trotz isnt done cooking yet ... will make a better judgement after free agency

 

[robertocarlos]

Maybe it's a bonus for past play? It's only two years too long. Big deal.

 

[milehigh11]

Avs should be trying to get Askarov

 

[dgibb10]

One meh year and people are against this deal?
.917% regular season save % even after this down year and .911% in the playoffs.
He has never had a under .914% season in the NHL before this year.

Goalies age like wine usually, just ask Rinne & Bob or many others.

Anecdotal evidence of goalies doesn't change the fact that the goalie aging curve is actually generally very steep, and most goalies do not age well

 

[GeeoffBrown]

I feel like teams usually just kinda get out of the term on deals like this with almost no consequence, so I like this. Cheap AAV for one of the best goalies in the league

 

[aqsw]

Reminds me of when the Devils had Ahonen. Great prospect that was wasted because they had Brodeur.

 

[ZachaFlockaFlame]

Who gives a flying f*** where they were drafted? We have the assets and we're using them as necessary. Trying to play this hindsight card to rationalize hating the deal is absurd.

Because it's easier to back seat a goalie that you got in the 4th round than an 11th overall pick. How is that hard to understand at all? And cool, enjoy Askarov making an impact 7-10 years after he was taken, that's great asset management for an 11th overall pick goalie. No one said the actual deal was terrible, the circumstances surrounding it are

 

[Armourboy]

The extra years certainly aren't great, but I don't think they're the horrible killer some folks are assuming, especially given the pace at which the cap is expected to go up.

Yeah problem is if Askarov follows his trajectory you are going g to be burning 12-14 million on goalies. Even with a higher cap that's not smart.

 

[Viqsi]

Because it's easier to back seat a goalie that you got in the 4th round than an 11th overall pick. How is that hard to understand at all?

Where the goaltender was drafted has f***-all to do with ease about this sort of thing. We're talking about goaltenders here. That's part of the risk of taking a goaltender. What you're suggesting amounts to "then Askarov never should have been picked at all", which would leave the Preds without a future option.

You're trying to retroactively overoptimize something for no better reason than to attempt to rationalize your gut reaction.

And cool, enjoy Askarov making an impact 7-10 years after he was taken, that's great asset management for an 11th overall pick goalie.

Don't give a crap so long as Askarov eventually pans out. Quality goalies developed properly can last an incredibly long time, after all. If you thought picking Askarov at #11 overall was a bad idea, the time to object to that was when the pick was made, not several years later.

 

[Viqsi]

Yeah problem is if Askarov follows his trajectory you are going g to be burning 12-14 million on goalies. Even with a higher cap that's not smart.

We were spending comparable cap percentages on Rinne/Saros at the height of that combo. And if Askarov manages the sort of Instant Superstar arc such that we end up spending that much that quickly, that's arguably a nice "problem" to have. I think it far more likely he'll be bridged for his next deal and we'll be at or below the approximately 10% of the cap total Rinne/Saros managed during the SCF/Prez Trophy years.