Ryan Johansen
- Thread starter Matthews34
- Start date
- Status
TheOllieC
cajun filet
To me, it isn't about saving on the total cost for Johansen, but about when you are spending the money. I would rather be spending less later, so we can go out and get more players, than spending less now.
EspenK
Registered User
- Sep 25, 2011
- 15,842
- 4,446
I don't think the money is the issue - a million here, a million there in a 70 mill plus cap isn't going to make a difference. I think the bigger thing is he for real? I'm guessing he is but I'd rather hold the term down to make sure.
TaketheCannoli
RIP
That's what Edmonton was thinking when they signed Eberle, Hall and Nugent-Hopkins to those deals. That's what Howson was thinking with the Brassard and Umberger deals. Snow with the Dipietro deal too. Hey the Flyers thought the same thing with the Carter and Richards contracts, then before they even kicked in traded both away. Look how well it's worked out for those teams!
Those who forget the past are likely to repeat it.
I don't see a single example of a bad contract except MAYBE Umberger's. Who doesn't even belong on that list anyway cause he was signed past his UFA years and was way older than the other guys.
I have no idea what relation a team performance has to contracts value of its players.
The Edmonton kids are their best players and can't be responsible for bad team management. Every single NHL team would trade valuable assets for any of those guys.
Carter and Richards won the Cup! Are their contracts look bad or what?
Brassard's contract also was traded in the package for a star player.
And it sure worked well for Chicago. Kane and Toews would have commanded way more money if were signed for 2-3 years instead of 5.
Yeah you managed to include Umberger (who wasn't RFA age), Dipietro (who had a 15 year or so deal, absurd), Carter and Richards (who are considered great value), Brassard (ambiguous value), and Eberle Hall and Nuge (who haven't played under their deals yet), and didn't include any number of players signed to extremely good value deals at an early age (Toews, Kane, Tavares, etc.. etc.. )
I don't think Edmonton is really upset about any of those deals and lumping Brass and RJ is off. One was a RFA that didn't do anything and a UFA that had some history. Are you just trying to say that long term deals are bad?
I think I get your premise, but I think your examples could use some improvement.
At any rate, I'm not sure I would give money or term on a breakout year; but that's me. It's premature to discuss, which I stated earlier, until we see how Johansen finishes.
TaketheCannoli
RIP
Umberger was an RFA when the Jackets gave him a 4 year 3.75 million per year contract.
The Oilers 3 forwards look good on paper. Are they developing? Do they play a 200 ft. game? IMHO, they have already slowed any significant improvement. Hell, Eberle looks to be regressing, Hall has yet to exceed 27 goals or 54 pts. RNH? He hasn't come anywhere near Hall's numbers. I watched them again Saturday night. There's no D in that top line. Why kill themselves improving?
That was a brilliant set of money saving contracts! Now none of them compete.
Brassard? Did he continue to develop? Is he even the guy who had 25 pts. in 31 games his rookie year?
Carter and Richards- how did that work out for Philly? They apparently decided to party on dude! until Homer decided to cash out. Yes they won a Cup in LA. Did the trades shake them up?
How has Philly done since giving out those contracts?
Why didn't I include Toews or Kane? Kane had years of 70, 72 and 88 points. Toews had 54, 69 and 68; not to mention they already led the Hawks to a Cup when they got the big contract!
Tavares already had seasons of 54 pts. 81 pts., and 67 when he got his and it's a 6 yr. $5.5 million average deal.
Hey should I explain Malkin and Crosby's deals too?
If Johansen had the history of Tavares, Toews, Kane etc. before getting a long term deal I would agree with you. So far his career highs are 17 goals and 33 points. He is on pace 32g and 65 pts. He hasn't actually done much yet.
I have no issue with paying Johansen big money. In fact, I think he is blossoming into a 2-way franchise #1 center. I think he needs to be as proven as your examples before he gets the term length they got from their teams, but it really doesn't matter what I think.
John Davidson has a history of doing shorter term bridge deals with high potential players. I am predicting JD's history is a good indicator of what is most likely to actually occur.
I'm not sure what your point is with the Umberger RFA deal, but good points on Tavares, Toews, and Kane.
I'm not sure you can blame the problems they are having on their contracts. It may some effect, but I would think the team structure and just overall failings have much more to do with it.
I full well understand what you're saying (and strongly agree with the bolded. That'll probably be the path they take) but if you want to be a cup winner/have sustained success, you're going to have to roll the dice on some players, pay them for potential, and hope for the best. You can't build the depth required for extended success paying everybody market value.
I guess wanting to skip the bridge contract with Johansen is a referendum on the core of the team. Do you bet on last season's Bob being the real Bob? Is Murray a guaranteed #1 defensemen? Can Atkinson find the consistency to be a 60 point player? Do we have a 2-3 gems in the system? If the management feels that the answer to most of these questions is yes, I see no reason to not give Johansen 7x6 years.
Last edited:
If the answer is no..What the hell are we doing..Plus if bob or any other guy dosent pan out its not like we have to completely blow this team up. Like said before at some point you have to pay based on talent and hope for the best. Find a few guys to build around and lock them up.
Richards' and Carter's contract history is different and you can't put them in the same sentence.
Richards' 12 years extension kicked in in 2008-09 right after his ELC expired. And he took the Flyers to the Stanley Cup finals with Leghton/Boucher in net in 2009-10! So, how did that long term contract work out for Philly? Are you sure you chose a good example to support your point?
Carter has signed the 3-years bridge contract in 2008. And got his extension during the 2010-11 season.
Mayor Bee
Registered User
- Dec 29, 2008
- 18,087
- 535
Two important factors to consider.
1) When Nash's ELC contract expired, it looked like the next deal was one where his agent opened with, "Here's what we're looking for" and MacLean said, "WHERE DO I SIGN????"
2) When Nash was re-signed to the huge deal on July 3, 2009, it was when the league had made it clear that anything that could be seen as cap-circumventing would be dealt with extremely harshly.
Up until about July 15, 2009, every major long-term deal had a huge cap hit. Lecavalier's deal was questioned, even though the cap hit was $7.72 mil per year (signed July 13, 2008). Eric Staal (signed September 11, 2008) was $8.25 mil per year. Brian Campbell (signed July 1, 2008) was $7.143 mil per year. Dany Heatley (signed October 3, 2007) is $7.5 mil per year. Among young players at the time, Paul Stastny (signed November 17, 2008) was $6.6 mil per year, and Anze Kopitar (signed October 11, 2008) was $6.8 mil per year.
The first deal that really raised eyebrows as being obviously designed to circumvent the cap was Roberto Luongo, signed September 2, 2009. Most everyone was shocked when the league approved it, and then the floodgates of cap-circumventing deals really opened up.
Johansen has mostly struggled in his games against Boston and the Pens. Not really a last two games issue. I spoke about this in the GDT. He's came a long way. For now, it might be in Richards best interest to adjust a bit more in these big games. I know Johansen needs to play in these games to learn, but if he's struggling you need to make adjustments for the sake of the team. With Dubinsky going and Joey struggling in the faceoffs maybe you move Dubinsky (who was going) on that line and let him take some of the draws. Maybe take some of that pressure off.
I wouldn't agree with Derby that he was invisible last night. There was some sustained pressure by that line. I just don't think he had that extra gear and he looked a bit tentative at times - especially when taking draws in the third. He still got 3 shots on goal, but he didn't strike me as dangerous. That might be because of game plan by the Pens.
I wouldn't agree with Derby that he was invisible last night. There was some sustained pressure by that line. I just don't think he had that extra gear and he looked a bit tentative at times - especially when taking draws in the third. He still got 3 shots on goal, but he didn't strike me as dangerous. That might be because of game plan by the Pens.
cbjgirl
Just thinking
I haven't actually looked at the ice time comparisons, but other than at the start of the game, it seemed like Richards was putting the Arty line out against Crosby rather than the Joey line. It was just an impression last night, I have no data to back up this idea.
Fro
Cheatin on CBJ w TBL
- Status
