Only problem with that is that he's going to want $5-6m as an RFA, and we still have Mason, Jake and Filatov, which except Filly, have played more games then Brassard. There is no way we'll have Nash, Brassard, Mason, Vorachek and Filatov, all making $5m+. The baseline has been set for those guys with this contract
Would you rather have him be an UFA where we get no compensation if he does want $5M+?
You see, I think Brassard could put up near a ppg. He hits it once or twice in his 4 year, 3.2 is a steal. You gotta think that by 26, he could hit his prime. Thats when if he does keep hitting near a ppg, he could be asking for more (around 5-6 mil per yr)
So, we are paying Brassard less than Chicago is paying Bolland AND Brassard will still be an RFA at the end of the contract.
Howson clearly doesn't know what he's doing. He should have made a big splash at the start of free agency so he wouldn't have the money to waste on deals like this...
Heard of the signing on 97.1 as I was headed to work. Got the numbers here.
That's about 1.3m/yr lower than my fears. Happy viqsi is happy and is doing the Happy Viqsi Dance.
__________________
Remember - when you're a hockey fan, it's not "reckless driving", it's "good forechecking".
"Viqsi, you are our sweet humanist..." --mt-svk on the CBJ boards
Thanks, Howson, for cleaning up MacLean's toxic waste. Welcome, Kekalainen; let's get good things built!
There is risk with every player getting hurt. I'm sure S.H saw Brassard work hard this offseason on his recovery. He could have played in the playoffs, which shows his work ethic, and desire.
I love the move, and the long term thinking of S.H. The CBJ continue to move in the right direction.
I think that this is a good move. As everyone has said, there is a bit of risk involved, but I think it is a risk worth taking. If Brassard comes out this season and puts up numbers all year like he was on track for last year, his market value would have skyrocketed when it was time to re-sign him. If Brassard turns into a bust, we have bigger problems anyway considering that he is expected to be a big part of the "future" of the CBJ. Also, I am not so worried about his health considering the shoulder was a bit of a fluke injury, which he sustained while performing an aspect of the game outside of his realm: fighting. As long as he keeps the gloves on, I do not think this will be a problem.
Why would Brass sign this? He seemed to be sitting in the cat'sbird seat this year - if he does well the whole year he can command the $4-5 million range; if he gets hurt he falls back on the flashes of potential he showed last year; if he doesn't meet expectations, write it off to a sophomore slump.
Does anyone else think that he might have been influenced by Nash - signing for slightly less to keep the cap hit down, maybe enable the team to sign the other youngsters and maintain team continuity & chemistry?
Two guys, leading by example. I like what I'm seeing.
I guess you would have rather we waited, had him put up 60-80 points and paid him $5m per year?
If he's scoring 60-80 points a year -- in a full year -- I could absolutely live with a deal like that.
But if we're going to play the what if game, what if he's only capable of playing half seasons and by that I mean he either gets hurt or he doesn't have the stamina for 82 good NHL games. How awesome is the deal then? Not very, I say.
I understand the risk-reward prospect of this deal and completely acknowledge that Brass is talented enough to make every penny worth it and make Howson look like a genius (and certainly hope that will be the case), but what I'm also mentioning is the fact that we haven't seen Brassard play more than 30 good NHL games.
To go back to your Bolland comparison, he's played 120 games. That's a pretty good sample.
Brassard has played 48 games (including a lackluster 17 in his first season). Not as good a sample.
This isn't the worst gamble in the world by any means. I get it. But there is a definite and obvious down side to it too.
I'm simply saying, for me, the jury is still out on this one.
But if we're going to play the what if game, what if he's only capable of playing half seasons and by that I mean he either gets hurt or he doesn't have the stamina for 82 good NHL games. How awesome is the deal then? Not very, I say.
Are you happy with how that turned out then? I mean, the majority of folks thought that was a good idea at the time, including Hitchcock.
What? Where did that come from?
It was a joke.
If we're going to take it seriously though, it could be worse. If Brassard turns into the new Modin, that sucks, but he'll still have value. I'd rather have 30 games of Modin because he's injured instead of 30 games of Backman because he sucks.
If you don't think he'd have any value if he gets injured again this year (or next year) just look at Leclaire. This deal isn't so outrageous that it's an untradeable contract. I'd rather have him signed to this deal rather than to have a PPG pace all season, be signed to $4+ million and THEN get injured again. We could go in circles about those scenarios all day.
48 NHL games and we're signing an extension? I hope it's not paying him much. He has yet to prove he can hold up for even half an NHL season.
I like what I've seen, but I just haven't seen enough to be excited about this.
Such is the new NHL. I don't care for it much, but guys are going to get paid for potential. If you don't adhere to that philosophy, you're going to have a lot of problems keeping your team together in the future.
I love this deal. Of Brass, Filatov, and Voracek, Brassard will be the best IMHO, assuming he can stay healthy (which admittedly, is a more of an if than I'd care to admit)
And ****, if Jeff Finger is worth a 3.5 million cap hit, Brassard is fine at 3.1 mil.
__________________
Truth should never get in the way of a good persecution complex.
No complaints. I, personally, like the move. As others pointed out, there are risks. In this case I think the potential rewards outweigh the risk.
Quote:
I'm simply saying, for me, the jury is still out on this one.
It should be for everyone. Big deal though, we can all complain later if it doesn't work out. This gives Howson some idea of how to deal with the other signings now that he knows what the dollars are going to be.
Quote:
Are you happy with how that turned out then? I mean, the majority of folks thought that was a good idea at the time, including Hitchcock.
In hindsight, it was still a good move. Just didn't pay off like we hoped. Any player is one hit from retirement.
Such is the new NHL. I don't care for it much, but guys are going to get paid for potential. If you don't adhere to that philosophy, you're going to have a lot of problems keeping your team together in the future.
I don't mind paying for potential. Just wanted to see a little more from Brassard first.
I guess for me, if this deal had been 2 years instead of 4, I'd be happy with it. If he outperforms it and stays healthy then so what if he wants 5 mil/season on his next contract? He's worth it.
