Nick Foligno

[Cowumbus]

Starting to think his contract is going to not only suck this year but later on... paying him until he is 34 years old 5.5 mill a year. Looking back it seems crazy to offer 5.5 to a guy who has hit 40 points twice Am I the only one thinking we wont be able to be good with these contracts.. even dubinskys is scaring me down the road

Click to read more...

 

[Johansen2Foligno]

I've been assured by many on here that it was a good contract when it was signed and we have several options going forward if he keeps underperforming:

1. The cap will keep rising
2. We can make him available in the expansion draft
3. We can buy him out in the last year of his contract and save $1M
4. We can trade him to a team looking to get to the cap floor



But seriously, I think he'll be fine. He won't produce like he did last year, but he isn't as bad as he's been so far. I am not particularly worried about the Foligno or Dubsinky contracts. Maybe the last year...maybe the last two years

 

[Mayor Bee]

Starting to think his contract is going to not only suck this year but later on... paying him until he is 34 years old 5.5 mill a year. Looking back it seems crazy to offer 5.5 to a guy who has hit 40 points twice Am I the only one thinking we wont be able to be good with these contracts.. even dubinskys is scaring me down the road

Compared to paying David Clarkson (40 points once, 25 points twice in his career) $5.25 mil a year until he's 36, Foligno is a bargain no matter what happens.

 

[EDM]

Not sure Clarkson is the proper standard for measuring good versus bad contracts.

 

[major major]

Foligno is better than we've seen him so far. Even still I appreciate the totality of his game. He slides over to center two days ago and has been our best faceoff man. I'll start worrying about his contract if he doesn't pick up his game this year, but there's not much sense in freaking out over 5 weeks of one player's hockey.

 

[MAHJ71]

I'm in the he'll be fine camp..

 

[Samkow]

It's easy to second guess this decision, but I think Jarmo should have grown a pair and let him test the market. We have too many similar players.

I think he'll improve but I don't see any way he'll ever earn that contract.

 

[Tulipunaruusu*]

It's easy to second guess this decision, but I think Jarmo should have grown a pair and let him test the market.

Jarmo letting Foligno leave this summer is the main reason behind the eight-loss start to the season. Foligno simply has not been properly replaced. Saad. Rychel?

 

[niflheim]

I think Jarmo should have grown a pair and let him test the market

Sorry, do You mean Clarkson?

 

[CBJWerenski8]

It's easy to second guess this decision, but I think Jarmo should have grown a pair and let him test the market. We have too many similar players.

I think he'll improve but I don't see any way he'll ever earn that contract.

Imagine selling that one to the fanbase.

 

[Cyclones Rock]

Jarmo letting Foligno leave this summer is the main reason behind the eight-loss start to the season. Foligno simply has not been properly replaced. Saad. Rychel?

Asinimov maybe?

 

[EspenK]

It's easy to second guess this decision, but I think Jarmo should have grown a pair and let him test the market. We have too many similar players.

I think he'll improve but I don't see any way he'll ever earn that contract.

I tend to agree. He had one year that was worth more than what Jarmo paid; hadn't had one before and I seriously doubt he has another. I'd be happy if he could average 50 pts for the life of his deal.

 

[Samkow]

Imagine selling that one to the fanbase.

The "LEADERSHIP!" crowd would have gotten over it if it produced a winner. Assuming the money was spent on upgrading the blueline, I think we would have had a winner.

Regardless of my beliefs, no way we'd have ended up in a position ******** than the one we're currently in.

 

[jackets4life]

I think he will get back to his pre-All Star numbers, but the contract we signed him to will be viewed negatively by most by the time it is up.

 

[CBJSlash]

He'll be okay. Lets let him pot one to see if he can get off the snide.

 

[Viqsi]

The "LEADERSHIP!" crowd would have gotten over it if it produced a winner.

Not hardly. Folks presumed this team was a winner coming into the season, so producing a winner would have been seen as routine, and the response would have been "we'd have been doing EVEN BETTER if idiot Jarmo hadn't let Foligno walk".

 

[We Want Ten]

Not hardly. Folks presumed this team was a winner coming into the season, so producing a winner would have been seen as routine, and the response would have been "we'd have been doing EVEN BETTER if idiot Jarmo hadn't let Foligno walk".

Pretty much agree with you. I only have a slight bit of doubt due to the fact that most people recognized he was having a career year and realized there would be some drop off.

 

[major major]

I tend to agree. He had one year that was worth more than what Jarmo paid; hadn't had one before and I seriously doubt he has another. I'd be happy if he could average 50 pts for the life of his deal.

Total agreement. Players who consistently score 70+ points and have the full range of intangibles get a lot more than what Foligno got from Jarmo. More like $7-12m per year. People act like Jarmo paid for a consistent 70+ player, but he did not. Jarmo and Foligno and Foligno's agent agreed on a salary that is in line with a 50-60 pt player with an intangibles bonus. His salary is in line with a regression of output from last year.

The "LEADERSHIP!" crowd would have gotten over it if it produced a winner. Assuming the money was spent on upgrading the blueline, I think we would have had a winner.

Regardless of my beliefs, no way we'd have ended up in a position ******** than the one we're currently in.

Who would you have spent it on? Sekera? He has been okay in Edmonton but no top pair gem. I can't remember if there was another free agent D who was even in that range.

The only way we were going to get a top D in the summer was through trade. Which makes the Saad trade the appropriate counterfactual.

 

[major major]

Pretty much agree with you. I only have a slight bit of doubt due to the fact that most people recognized he was having a career year and realized there would be some drop off.

Jarmo recognized this too. That's why he didn't pay Foligno like a 70+ pt player.

 

[Samkow]

Who would you have spent it on? Sekera? He has been okay in Edmonton but no top pair gem. I can't remember if there was another free agent D who was even in that range.

The only way we were going to get a top D in the summer was through trade. Which makes the Saad trade the appropriate counterfactual.

It's tough to say if the FO believed this blue line was playoff caliber (it isn't) but if you spread the Foligno money out among two players, say Paul Martin and Nik Grossman, the bluelineer situation is 100x better.

 

[Viqsi]

It's tough to say if the FO believed this blue line was playoff caliber (it isn't) but if you spread the Foligno money out among two players, say Paul Martin and Nik Grossman, the bluelineer situation is 100x better.

Grossman is an unfortunate choice of hypothetical names. I'd have suggested Ehrhoff, myself, seeing as though we were actually in talks with the guy.

 

[Samkow]

Grossman is an unfortunate choice of hypothetical names. I'd have suggested Ehrhoff, myself, seeing as though we were actually in talks with the guy.

Probably a better choice.

 

[We Want Ten]

Jarmo recognized this too. That's why he didn't pay Foligno like a 70+ pt player.

I'm referring to fans expectations of a guy following a career year, not a thing to do with his pay scale.

 

[major major]

It's tough to say if the FO believed this blue line was playoff caliber (it isn't) but if you spread the Foligno money out among two players, say Paul Martin and Nik Grossman, the bluelineer situation is 100x better.

I don't know if it would even be 1.00x better, let alone 100x better with those two. UFA D are unfortunately mostly cast-offs.

 

[major major]

The easiest way to determine whether a scorer is in a secular decline or whether he's just not getting the bounces, is to look at shots and shooting percentage. Foligno has a 2.2% shooting percentage right now. Let's say that returns to a more normal 11% by the end of the year. If he keeps getting about 3 shots per game, as he is now (near the team lead), that's 246 shots * .11 = 27 goals. He also happens to be on pace for 27 assists. 54 points is in line with expectations.