Player Discussion Kaapo Kakko
- Thread starter Leonardo87
- Start date
No, I don't believe there was a deal in place, simply because of the lack of cap space we had available. I also don't believe the Rangers had any interest in offering him an extended deal. Brodzinski was more productive than KK last year. Drury did the right thing and offered him a 1 year, show me deal and Kakko has stepped it up. It made no sense for us, nor Kakko to commit to a longterm deal.
noncents
Registered User
- Feb 25, 2022
- 1,764
- 2,165
i didn't say deal in place. i say an opportunity to sign a deal that made sense for both sides.
why didn't it make sense for us?
oh i see where you said it: "brodz was more productive"
your problem there is that you're basing your understanding of a hockey players value on results rather than process.
noncents
Registered User
- Feb 25, 2022
- 1,764
- 2,165
a longer term deal extending into UFA years at a modest cap hit, providing security for a player who had shown very little in the way of production and for a team looking at a tight cap sheet.
with what cap space? lindgrens, and smiths.
noncents
Registered User
- Feb 25, 2022
- 1,764
- 2,165
There will be a long term extension this summer or sooner that makes sense for both of parties. IMO Drury did the right thing last summer. Kakko needed to show more for a long term deal. He still won’t get crazy money, I’d bet both sides will be happy with it, and so will the fans.
noncents
Registered User
- Feb 25, 2022
- 1,764
- 2,165
Kakko re-upped for 1 year/2.4M. Newhook 2.9 X 4. 1/2M extra doesn't buy you 3 additional years. That contract makes sense for us, but not for him. Adding 300k? 3.2M per. I still don't see that making sense for Kakko. He'll get more than that if he continues at this pace.
Again, extensions have to mutually make sense. Some people here think we could have locked up Laf for 7 years in the 5M range. Those are the same people who live in fantasy land. You think the Habs are satisfied with Newhook right now? We're 1/4 into the season and he has 4 points - all goals. The fanbase wants to see him benched. Not all extensions work. Look at Dubois. 8.5M per until 2030. Woof.
I do agree, and would like to see us try and lock up our young talent earlier than we have. But there are restrictions, mostly self imposed that prevent us from doing so. A 1 year deal made sense for us and Kakko. If he keeps this up, pay the kid. I've never wanted him gone. He'll probably never live up to his draft pick but that doesn't mean he can't be a successful NHL player that helps us win.
McRanger92
Registered User
- Jun 7, 2017
- 11,640
- 21,665
I genuinely believe the Rangers have tapped into something with Kaapo Barkov
noncents
Registered User
- Feb 25, 2022
- 1,764
- 2,165
you are deciding, out of nowhere, that you know what Kakko would or wouldn't have accepted. saying "that doesn't make sense for him" 5x3.25 is life changing money for a player coming off a bad year with an injury. i say he would have taken it. we're not gm or player, so it means absolutely squat.
the point you're missing is where you say "he'll get more than that if he continues at this pace." you're still just looking at results.
myself and a few others looked at kakkos season in the context of his career abd said: This is an undervalued player. This is a player primed to put it together. This is a player who should be signed longterm at a discount and be a core piece.
Most others said "meh." Many said "no way he sucks sell him for pennies i eat lead paint chips!"
I am vindicated in my position.
noncents
Registered User
- Feb 25, 2022
- 1,764
- 2,165
i pressed send before finishing my message. We're both assuming what could have happened. This discussion is who in hindsight was right about saying what *should* have happened (or at least been attempted).
In this hindsight though? If Kakko had another shitty season would you telling the world you wanted him extended last year?
