CBJWerenski8
Rest in Peace Johnny
- Jun 13, 2009
- 43,672
- 26,710
Rumor: Sillinger close to signing 2 year extension?
- Thread starter CBJWerenski8
- Start date
- Status
Let's go. Portzline earlier speculated on the Inside Edge that they'd be looking at 3 or 5 years. I'd probably prefer longer than two but many folks here will be happy with a low AAV two year contract I imagine...
Xoggz22
Registered User
This will be a mistake at 2 years. He's typically one of the first guys mentioned by GMDW... If he shows the growth they seem to anticipate, he'll be a costly 3C on his next deal.
That said, the AAV will be interesting to see. Will tell a lot about what they really think I suspect.
That said, the AAV will be interesting to see. Will tell a lot about what they really think I suspect.
Only if he produces. If he doesn't continue to grow he won't have any justification to back up those claims of wanting paid more outside of the rising cap.
Cyclones Rock
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2008
- 10,909
- 7,074
I don't look at Sillinger as a "high upside" player.
If a 2 years deal results in the CBJ paying an extra million or two more per year on the next deal then so be it. Sillinger is not a PPG player-in-waiting.
Once again, Waddell is not bound by the previous regime's draft choices, where in the draft they were picked or any expectations that might have been had. Keeping the number of long term commitments to a minimal level as Waddell & Co. have is a sound strategy IMO.
When he gets rid of Laine (hopefully soon even with half retained), he'll have a cap structure that he can work within to acquire talent that he wants-even with the terrible Severson and Gaudreau deals.
If a 2 years deal results in the CBJ paying an extra million or two more per year on the next deal then so be it. Sillinger is not a PPG player-in-waiting.
Once again, Waddell is not bound by the previous regime's draft choices, where in the draft they were picked or any expectations that might have been had. Keeping the number of long term commitments to a minimal level as Waddell & Co. have is a sound strategy IMO.
When he gets rid of Laine (hopefully soon even with half retained), he'll have a cap structure that he can work within to acquire talent that he wants-even with the terrible Severson and Gaudreau deals.
ColumbusTrill
Registered User
- Mar 15, 2021
- 761
- 1,240
Willing to take that risk imo. It’s a good problem to have if he really starts to produce and is deserving of a higher aav deal. But so far he’s just held on for someone his age and that’s about it
EspenK
Registered User
- Sep 25, 2011
- 15,842
- 4,445
No way they were going longer than 3 years this time around. If they did and he improved dramatically in each year of that deal his next deal would be higher due to the extra year this time around. 2 yrs to justify a longer term deal makes sense to me.
Xoggz22
Registered User
Admittedly, I hold Sillinger in higher regard than some of you. Maybe I'm jaded by hearing the pundits, beat writers and even CBJ brass speak highly of him as a 20-21 year old in his 3rd year. He's scored on par with higher end players and, to be clear, I do not expect a PPG player out of him. I do expect a 50+pt guy at his peak with a 200ft game and leadership skills...much like I've seen Jenner. We'll see where it goes. Either way, I hope it's a reasonable deal that will support short term performance and long term opportunity to grow with this team.
Cyclones Rock
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2008
- 10,909
- 7,074
I think of Sillinger as a long term NHL type of player who will become solid defensively and grow in his offensive game. A solid bottom 6er who will become able to move up the line up in a pinch. I just put him in the "use your RFA leverage" category. He can be had at lower term without risk so I think that's the best negotiating strategy with him.
Xoggz22
Registered User
I agree it's a low risk position. I don't agree that he's just held on for someone his age when he's outperformed many of his age. That's the rub for me. Statements like this make him sound like a plug and he is far from it. Again, that's my opinion, others (yourself?) may feel he's a plug.
ColumbusTrill
Registered User
- Mar 15, 2021
- 761
- 1,240
I guess if I were to give a longer term deal to an young/unproven guy, I'd rather do it with someone with high end attributes. Cole seems like he has great intangibles, but I'm not sure what he does even above average skill/skating wise
Some of the best players from that draft class haven't even started in the NHL yet. It's the same way from any draft class you look at in hindsight. So for his age, sure he's done well, it just doesn't mean that much this early.
Ignoring the age stuff, Sillinger is hanging on to an NHL job by his fingernails. When he's on the ice we're more likely to be stuck in our own zone. Call it what you will, so far I say it's been plug caliber. If you want to talk up Sillinger you better keep the talk in terms of his age, because relative to mature NHLers he isn't a good player.
PredIctions on AAV? Does somewhere between 1.9 and 2.1 sound about right?
I was guessing a 3x 2.088M AAV, so for a two year deal I'll go with a simple 2x 2M. So yeah between 1.9 and 2.1 sounds pretty much spot-on.
After signing Johnson and Marchenko each to 3 year deals, I was thinking a 2 year deal for Sillinger made sense. I thought he showed a lot of growth last season and I really like his potential - more than some others do. Hope to see him signed soon and I'm hopeful he takes another step this season.
Xoggz22
Registered User
So he's done well for his age but he's not good enough as a mature NHLer? He's hanging by his fingernails if you ignore his age but he's done well for his age? Ok. That's all I'll say in this one with you as it's just an area we disagree. That's ok. Just how it is sometimes. I'm hoping he makes us all happy in the future.
Xoggz22
Registered User
Initially I thought he would be closer to $2.5, but seeing the Chinakhov and KJ deals make me think this is probably closer than my $2.5. I figured as a center he'd get a little more, but your range feels right
I respect your opinion and I've agreed with many of your assessments. To me, this one feels overly harsh.
Yes those aren't contradictions. There are young players that look ok relative to their age group and they're currently still worse than your average $1.5m 30 year old player.
And more than half of the time, the younger player with more runway is the one who’s going to get the deal over the older one who “is what he is.” Even the biggest draft bust this century took six years to wash out of the league, and the first four of those were with his drafting team.
Saying 21-year-old Cole Sillinger, a legacy player who was drafted in the first half of the first round and while mismanaged by a tire fire organization still hasn’t failed completely, is “hanging onto his career by his fingernails” is an objectively stupid thing to say. Even if the Jackets do what you apparently want and cut bait, totally nontender him and let him walk into the sunset for nothing since he’s a worthless plug, he’ll have a new NHL deal with another team by the next weekend, and he’ll sign at least two more NHL deals after that.
Now the discussion whether legacy players or name-brand guys get more chances than they deserve is a good topic, but Sillinger is not on the verge of needing to cash in a second or third chance. He’s still very solidly a part of his first one.
You've actually misquoted me and then misunderstood what I was saying.
I did not say that he was hanging on to his career by his fingernails. He's 21 and of course he has plenty of opportunity. My comment was specifically about how he rates if you set aside his age as a factor.
In another organization he might not even be in the NHL right now - which is what I mean by "he's hanging on to an NHL job by his fingernails". In this case the "mismanagement by a tire fire organization", to borrow your excuse, is putting him in the NHL too early.
Double-Shift Lasse
Just post better
- Status
