I'm suggesting that Kings fans thought he was a Norris-worthy defenseman before anyone in the Central or Eastern time zone. Calm down.
Confirmed Signing with Link: [LAK] Cal Petersen signs extension with the Kings (3 years, $5M AAV)
- Thread starter Tuggy
- Start date
TheKrebsCycle
Throwing Confetti for Perfetti
- Oct 9, 2012
- 31,785
- 30,515
Who care what he says. Goalies are notorious for being good one season and shit the next. The king's aren't contending anytime soon. What was the point of this?? To over pay for three years?
Artorius Horus T
sincerety
Some perspective...(i know i know, different era, could use any goalie from any era before now, yada yada....)
At 26, Marty Brodeur, about 350 career games in the NHL, was making 3.8 million...
At 26, Cal Petersen, about 50 career games in the NHL, is making 5.0 million.....
At 26, Marty Brodeur, about 350 career games in the NHL, was making 3.8 million...
At 26, Cal Petersen, about 50 career games in the NHL, is making 5.0 million.....
Raccoon Jesus
Draft em but don't play em
Quick's time is up soon, and there's a huge gap between Petersen and the rest of the Kings' system. They COULD sign a stopgap, but as is easy to observe, they prefer to promote from inside, and there's something to be said for stable goaltending, even in a rebuild. In addition, as has been spoken throughout this thread, no matter what YOU and other non-Kings fans think about him, we watched him perform very well on a shit team, matching his excellent pedigree, he's earned the job.
I don't understand what's so hard to understand that signing a #1 goalie in his prime with upside for short term and average money vs. comps shouldn't be nearly as controversial as this thread is making it.
Master Yoda
LA Legends
A different perspective.
Cal Petersen, at 26, will make $1,000,000. His $5M extension starts when he is 27 (almost 28).
Marty Brodeur, at 42, was making $4.5M.
Goalie contracts are always hard to judge because the potential for so much range in play. Based on what he's done so far he deserves to be in line with the recent comps, but at the same time, having it be only 3 years makes it seem like it should be cheaper. On the flipside, shorter term for goalies can be good because it offers more flexibility if someone better comes along or he falls off. Realistically, Peterson should be a good starter and might even be a very good one over this deal, which makes it more than worth it. When it comes time to re-up though, it'll be interesting because the Kings should be in a better position to compete, but you don't necessarily want to give a long term contract to a 30 year old goalie.
Our Lady Peace
Registered User
I feel for Kings fans having to repeatedly justify why this guy is better than what those who don't watch him play think he is.
It's only a 3 year deal. As noted already, the Kings have 20million left in cap AFTER this signing and have no other option than a declining 35 year old Quick... Petersen has constantly shown growth and already shown game-breaking ability in the NHL. What more can you want from a guy who's 27 in a month and in the place he's currently in?
It's only a 3 year deal. As noted already, the Kings have 20million left in cap AFTER this signing and have no other option than a declining 35 year old Quick... Petersen has constantly shown growth and already shown game-breaking ability in the NHL. What more can you want from a guy who's 27 in a month and in the place he's currently in?
Since when anything Lehner says about hockey is relevant. He also studied Caufield's patterns, guess what happened next...
kilowatt
the vibes are not immaculate
- Jan 1, 2009
- 18,609
- 21,536
brodeur was 26 in 1998-99, the f*** you on about
smh gretzky's salary in 89-90 was $1,720,000, can't believe lucic earns 3x that
SettlementRichie10
Registered User
- May 6, 2012
- 10,174
- 8,316
Quick is like 43% broken down. His days are numbered.
Peterson is a great young goalie. Wtf is HF on about here?
Peterson is a great young goalie. Wtf is HF on about here?
Quid Pro Clowe
Registered User
kevsh
Registered User
- Nov 28, 2018
- 3,520
- 4,921
Cal is a solid goalie and glad he's locked in, but he got $5m because of leverage: Not only does it buy a few of his UFA years but it's clear Quick is no longer going to be the man, and the Kings don't have an alternative.
Well, played, young man and/or his agent.
Well, played, young man and/or his agent.
King's aren't contending any time soon? They have been rebuilding for the better part of three years, have a fully stocked cupboard of prospects and signed Danault, Edler and traded for Arvidsson. So if you think they won't be contending any time soon then that's a shock to Kings fans and ownership.
Besides, what happens if they don't sign Peterson to an extension? He's a UFA next year and walks and then you have one year left of a 36 year old Jonathan Quick with no goalie prospect coming up in the wings. That doesn't seem like great asset management on Peterson plus you're probably have to trade for a decent goalie (Kuemper for a prospect, a 1st and a 3rd anyone?) or spend more than $5MM on the UFA market for a decent goalie. And yes, Cal Petersen is better and younger than Darcy Kuemper (who makes $4.5MM).
They'll have $24M in cap space next Summer (when this contract kicks in), if that's what you mean, but a roster of only 12 players. They'll have to spread out that $24M over 11 additional players (including Vilardi, Kempe and M. Anderson needing raises). By the time that they're done, they should be up near the cap, and that's likely how it's going to be from now on.
Last edited:
Our Lady Peace
Registered User
While them being closer to the cap may be an issue for them, Petersen's current contract will IMO be a far cry from being a reason for those potential cap issues. Doughty and Danault's contracts are brutal handcuffs for them at this time.
Raccoon Jesus
Draft em but don't play em
Aside from the other cap discussion, the goalie money has to go to someone. If we aren't paying Petersen 5, we'd be paying some veteran something around that anyway. IIRC there's only one year of Quick and Petersen at 5.
kingsfan28
Its A Kingspiracy !
Not even close. You're buying into what the bloggers say because they're obsessed with points and if you're not scoring 70 a year, your contract sucks. Doughy will still be better than 80 pct of the guys in the league, especially the new young guys who put up all the points, but get caught time after time jumping into the play to get their pointz , only to be burned [ Karlsson ring a bell]. There are plenty of teams with looming cap issue way more than the Kings [because there isn't], but hey if there is , they can always dump a few guys in the players cap graveyard know as the Arizona Coyotes.
Last edited:
Frolov 6'3
Unregistered User
Danault just signed so perhaps its kinda early to call it a brutal handcuff. Personally I had not give him 5.5$.
Doughy is still good but should just get a competitive team again.
Doughy is still good but should just get a competitive team again.
Our Lady Peace
Registered User
Bloggers? Hm? Sorry I don't follow any sports bloggers. I'm not talking about other teams in the league though.
Doughty is still a fine #1 defenseman, but he's 31 and playing for 11m a year for what, 6 or 7 more years? LA needs to move on from him eventually and I'm not sure he fits in with the current team's plans seeing as the rebuild has been well underway. Since he's past his prime, his contract is a burden during that time to the franchise IMO. Nobody said Doughty was a bad defenseman. I just don't like his AAV and term for the Kings and their future.
Danault declined last year and the contract given to him was puzzling honestly. But he's 29 and has plenty of time to prove himself worth again. I'm not sure his offense ever comes around again but still a solid shut down 3C. 5.5m for 6 years is an overpayment for what he is IMO.
Why compare the most extreme Goalie trade of this off season.
Its amusing that you didnt compare it to to getting nedeljkovic for a third rounder and signing him for 3m a year/2 years.
