HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Canucks Sign Stefan Schneider (D turned Centre)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-29-2010, 11:21 PM
  #76
DoctorDoak
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 985
vCash: 500
Haven't seen this guy play since his Giants' days... but I don't like his chances as anything better than a call-up or utility guy, 13th forward/7th dman.

DoctorDoak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-29-2010, 11:22 PM
  #77
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,862
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gman3 View Post
Once again, I know they can probably afford it, the question is does a player of Volpatti's calibre really deserve it, I think not, especially not over some guy who has been playing pro in Europe and playing better than Volpatti has ever shown.
it's not about Volpatti "deserving it" ... it's the club seeing some potential in him, whether they feel he can turn into another Rypien or even Desbiens and help the organization in some way. And while I'm sure in your opinion Desbiens isn't even worth a contract (considering that he's likely not going to help the NHL team at all, while being a valuable piece to the Moose), IMO he deserves that contract from the Canucks and it was a good signing for the team overall.

And as far as deserving his contract, most UFAs that any club signs rarely "deserve" their contracts... they are pretty much always overpaid. As MS detailed as well, even guys like Gilroy and Bozak and other top end NCAA UFAs are often overpaid and don't deserve the contracts they get. That's the price you pay for signing a guy for free though - without having to use a limited draft pick or trade another asset to acquire his rights. And it's no different with European UFAs either... look at Brunnstrom now - doesn't look like he deserved his contract... neither have several European UFAs signed in the past, many of who have returned soon after... in fact, since you're arguing that guys playing pro in Europe are somehow any better bets and "more deserving" of contracts - how many European UFAs have we seen come over in recent years that have deserved their contracts? Not Brunnstrom... according to you Gustavsson hasn't been earning his contract either (though I disagree, he is playing fantastic hockey right now!)... who else? The Flyers signed Mika Pyorala this season, who was playing very well in the Finnish elite league and hasn't turned out that well... Pittsburgh brought over Janne Pesonen a year ago under the same type of hype, after he tore up the Finnish league, and he lasted 1 season in the AHL where he was very good, then a 7-game audition with the Pens and he's now in the KHL.

And even in Vancouver, though he wasn't a UFA, we brought over Shirokov after he led his team in scoring in the KHL and doesn't look like he's NHL ready at this point and he may even head back in a year.

So where exactly is this track record of quality Europeans signed that makes you think that they're any better signings than NCAA players?

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-29-2010, 11:44 PM
  #78
Scouter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,393
vCash: 830
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO View Post
it's not about Volpatti "deserving it" ... it's the club seeing some potential in him, whether they feel he can turn into another Rypien or even Desbiens and help the organization in some way. And while I'm sure in your opinion Desbiens isn't even worth a contract (considering that he's likely not going to help the NHL team at all, while being a valuable piece to the Moose), IMO he deserves that contract from the Canucks and it was a good signing for the team overall.

And as far as deserving his contract, most UFAs that any club signs rarely "deserve" their contracts... they are pretty much always overpaid. As MS detailed as well, even guys like Gilroy and Bozak and other top end NCAA UFAs are often overpaid and don't deserve the contracts they get. That's the price you pay for signing a guy for free though - without having to use a limited draft pick or trade another asset to acquire his rights. And it's no different with European UFAs either... look at Brunnstrom now - doesn't look like he deserved his contract... neither have several European UFAs signed in the past, many of who have returned soon after... in fact, since you're arguing that guys playing pro in Europe are somehow any better bets and "more deserving" of contracts - how many European UFAs have we seen come over in recent years that have deserved their contracts? Not Brunnstrom... according to you Gustavsson hasn't been earning his contract either (though I disagree, he is playing fantastic hockey right now!)... who else? The Flyers signed Mika Pyorala this season, who was playing very well in the Finnish elite league and hasn't turned out that well... Pittsburgh brought over Janne Pesonen a year ago under the same type of hype, after he tore up the Finnish league, and he lasted 1 season in the AHL where he was very good, then a 7-game audition with the Pens and he's now in the KHL.

And even in Vancouver, though he wasn't a UFA, we brought over Shirokov after he led his team in scoring in the KHL and doesn't look like he's NHL ready at this point and he may even head back in a year.

So where exactly is this track record of quality Europeans signed that makes you think that they're any better signings than NCAA players?
I was not referring to the overhyped Brunnstroms of the world who get massively inflated deals, I am referring to guys who have played well in the pros, who have actually shown something there, Volpatti has done squat to get that deal, Pyorala was not a hype signing, Pyorala is getting barely any money at all, not as much as nobody right now Volpatti is, Pyorala's deal is $105,000 AHL money which he deserves that and more IMO, and $500,000 NHL money which is the league minimum, at least he's good enough to have played in the NHL and be a good call-up player for them, and like you say a good vet for the AHL club to have to help them, the guy is 28 has tons of pro experience, and like I said was gotten for a great price, he was a great signing, I would take that signing over Krog or Volpatti anyday.

Shirokov I don't think was a hype signing, he wanted to come over, maybe the nucks did overpay him, maybe they did not, but to have led a KHL team in scoring is way more than Volpatti has ever done, and it was kind of known that he might take some time to adjust to NA, his season maybe could have gone better yes, but it hasn't been that bad either.

Why do you say that they see some potential in him now, before weren't you arguing that they sign college players just to be farmhands?

Edit: Gustavsson is not playing well because he is the 32nd best goalie in the league, what more evidence do you need than that.


Last edited by Scouter: 03-30-2010 at 01:09 AM.
Scouter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-29-2010, 11:57 PM
  #79
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,862
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gman3 View Post
Why do you say that they see some potential in him now, before weren't you arguing that they sign college players just to be farm hands?
no I didn't... I said that they could very well be signing some players just to help the farm... I didn't say that they sign college players just to be farm hands... there's a world of difference there!

And again, since you're the one that brought up European players - lets see this list of successful European UFAs that have been signed in the past and how they are somehow better than their NCAA counterparts?

There's a list of successful college UFAs (Rafalski, Madden, Penner, Kunitz, Clarkson, etc)... how many Euro UFAs have come over and had anywhere near that impact?

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-29-2010, 11:59 PM
  #80
knivez
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 851
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gman3 View Post
Once again, I know they can probably afford it, even if you can afford it though, no one likes to waste cash, the question is does a player of Volpatti's calibre really deserve it, I think not, especially not over some guy who has been playing pro in Europe and playing better than Volpatti has ever shown.
Years ago, I heard those exact same words said about Burrows and Rypien.

knivez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2010, 12:17 AM
  #81
kanuck87
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,209
vCash: 500
It's free talent. If Volpatti or Schneider turns into something, cool. If they don't, whatever. Odds are slim that they'll ever play with the Canucks, but if we didn't sign them, those odds would be 0%. 1 is better than 0.

MG obviously saw some potential in those two, so instead of letting some other team grab them, MG signed them. It's one of those moves that noone will care about if they don't amount to anything, but then if they become NHLers, then MG looks like a genius. Can't see any downside to these signings.

kanuck87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2010, 12:29 AM
  #82
MS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 13,097
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefeebster View Post
Can you give me an example of the bolded text? Bozak is the ONLY player i know that has a bonus laden contract similar to those chosen #1-3 overall. And he is not mediocre. I have watched him numerous times and he has really transitioned well, compared to Gilroy. Using the hindsight that you use, Burke is looking like a smart manager to me. He got essentially a top 6 forward for nothing.
Don't have to look very far for examples.

Evan Oberg carries a $1.6 million cap hit for this and the next two years if he's in the NHL. That's *double* what Grabner gets on his ELC, and Grabner was taken in the top half of the first round.

So if Oberg overachieves and cracks our roster for next year as a 3rd pairing guy, he'll be getting 3X what a guy like Aaron Rome made this year. And will essentially be overpaid for his role immediately despite being an undrafted rookie.

Walsky carried a $900k cap hit this year.

__________

Again, I'm not saying this isn't an avenue to be explored.

But you have to be careful you don't end up paying so much that the signing ends up defeating its purpose.

You want to sign/develop young players so you get quality cheap assets.

If you pay huge tickets for them right off the rattle, you're losing that advantage.

MS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2010, 12:29 AM
  #83
thefeebster
Registered User
 
thefeebster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 5,601
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gman3 View Post
1) Gustavsson is not really playing well.

2) Teams won't have less viewings of players in Europe if they have dedicated scouts in Europe.

3) No I did not.

4) You clearly did not understand what that meant.

5) Once again no I did not.
Wow, i am done arguing with you, because you clearly lack any common logic or a lot of hockey knowledge. I don't know if there is a language barrier here or what. But all you do is respond that you are correct and we mis-read what you wrote when we didn't.

Gustavsson has won 7 games in a row. I would consider him playing quite well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MS View Post
Don't have to look very far for examples.

Evan Oberg carries a $1.6 million cap hit for this and the next two years if he's in the NHL. That's *double* what Grabner gets on his ELC, and Grabner was taken in the top half of the first round.

So if Oberg overachieves and cracks our roster for next year as a 3rd pairing guy, he'll be getting 3X what a guy like Aaron Rome made this year. And will essentially be overpaid for his role immediately despite being an undrafted rookie.

Walsky carried a $900k cap hit this year.
A #1-3 pick contract is worth $3.75 million and thats an example i was looking for because you said a #1 pick. Oberg's is half that and not just a mediocre player. His actual salary is stepped per year, $637500, $737500 and $875000, and it is very unlikely that he will get the bonuses. But if he does, it will be well worth it because of the criteria that it requires.

But i do understand your point that we shouldn't over-pay for services. But i really don't see $612500 as being "too much" if the guy can actually become an impact player, even a 4th line player. Hordi makes more than that and imo, is ineffective. I enjoy these signings because it adds options and free assets at usually minimal cost.


Last edited by thefeebster: 03-30-2010 at 12:56 AM.
thefeebster is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2010, 01:20 AM
  #84
Scouter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,393
vCash: 830
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefeebster View Post
Wow, i am done arguing with you, because you clearly lack any common logic or a lot of hockey knowledge. I don't know if there is a language barrier here or what. But all you do is respond that you are correct and we mis-read what you wrote when we didn't.
Gustavsson has won 7 games in a row. I would consider him playing quite well.




A #1-3 pick contract is worth $3.75 million and thats an example i was looking for because you said a #1 pick. Oberg's is half that and not just a mediocre player. His actual salary is stepped per year, $637500, $737500 and $875000, and it is very unlikely that he will get the bonuses. But if he does, it will be well worth it because of the criteria that it requires.

But i do understand your point that we shouldn't over-pay for services. But i really don't see $612500 as being "too much" if the guy can actually become an impact player, even a 4th line player. Hordi makes more than that and imo, is ineffective. I enjoy these signings because it adds options and free assets at usually minimal cost.
You think I lack those things, yet you can't even read my posts right, and no it's not just me saying that you can't, because you have not, take a look in the mirror.

You think that that's how I post, if you knew anything about how I post you would know that's not the case at all.


Last edited by Scouter: 03-30-2010 at 02:02 AM.
Scouter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2010, 03:04 AM
  #85
alternate
Registered User
 
alternate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,055
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO View Post

And that's why spending $200K on a minor leaguer that may have an outside chance of making it, but could be a helpful addition to their development system in Manitoba, is worth it.
these signings also (potentially) bring intangibles to the dressing room, which is always a bonus. it's been posted a few times how one of them won an award given for "character" and the other went to Brown. Obviously I'm not saying they'll come in and be leaders in the dressing room as professional rookies, but I'd bet Gilllis and co. spoke with both coaches and heard things like "good work ethic" "leadership" etc.

It's never a bad thing to add character players to your organization, at whatever level.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gman3 View Post
Once again, I know they can probably afford it, even if you can afford it though, no one likes to waste cash, the question is does a player of Volpatti's calibre really deserve it, I think not, especially not over some guy who has been playing pro in Europe and playing better than Volpatti has ever shown.
agreed. who'd you have in mind?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MS View Post
__________

Again, I'm not saying this isn't an avenue to be explored.

But you have to be careful you don't end up paying so much that the signing ends up defeating its purpose.

You want to sign/develop young players so you get quality cheap assets.

If you pay huge tickets for them right off the rattle, you're losing that advantage.
the fact that we miss out on as many guys we have interest in as we land suggests GMMG has a pretty definite line drawn in the sand as to what he'll offer any particular UDFA.

so far he hasn't over committed in cap hit or term with any of the signings imo. I don't think there's any reason to be concerned that any college UFAs will hamper future roster moves because of their cap hit.

alternate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2010, 03:32 AM
  #86
MS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 13,097
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefeebster View Post
A #1-3 pick contract is worth $3.75 million and thats an example i was looking for because you said a #1 pick. Oberg's is half that and not just a mediocre player. His actual salary is stepped per year, $637500, $737500 and $875000, and it is very unlikely that he will get the bonuses. But if he does, it will be well worth it because of the criteria that it requires.

But i do understand your point that we shouldn't over-pay for services. But i really don't see $612500 as being "too much" if the guy can actually become an impact player, even a 4th line player. Hordi makes more than that and imo, is ineffective. I enjoy these signings because it adds options and free assets at usually minimal cost.
Again, Oberg's contract is comparable to those of Schneider and Grabner. He basically got #1 pick money, or damn close to it.

And with the change in how bonuses are applied, his $1.6 million cap it is substantial.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alternate View Post
the fact that we miss out on as many guys we have interest in as we land suggests GMMG has a pretty definite line drawn in the sand as to what he'll offer any particular UDFA.

so far he hasn't over committed in cap hit or term with any of the signings imo. I don't think there's any reason to be concerned that any college UFAs will hamper future roster moves because of their cap hit.
And I agree with this, for the most part.

My posts were mainly in reference to the posters who were upset we weren't signing these very expensive middle-aged prospects - specifically missing out on Bozak and Gilroy.

We've stuck our nose in there more than most teams. And we haven't done anything really stupid yet while adding a pretty solid asset in Oberg.

MS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2010, 05:07 AM
  #87
Scouter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,393
vCash: 830
Quote:
Originally Posted by alternate View Post
these signings also (potentially) bring intangibles to the dressing room, which is always a bonus. it's been posted a few times how one of them won an award given for "character" and the other went to Brown. Obviously I'm not saying they'll come in and be leaders in the dressing room as professional rookies, but I'd bet Gilllis and co. spoke with both coaches and heard things like "good work ethic" "leadership" etc.

It's never a bad thing to add character players to your organization, at whatever level.



agreed. who'd you have in mind?



the fact that we miss out on as many guys we have interest in as we land suggests GMMG has a pretty definite line drawn in the sand as to what he'll offer any particular UDFA.

so far he hasn't over committed in cap hit or term with any of the signings imo. I don't think there's any reason to be concerned that any college UFAs will hamper future roster moves because of their cap hit.

I would be interested to see what Julien Sprunger would do over here, he's 24 6-4 200 pounds, a very NA style of player and basically a PPG player in the Swiss league, he had an alright Olympics for the Swiss potting 2 goals in 5 games.


Last edited by Scouter: 03-30-2010 at 06:12 AM.
Scouter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2010, 05:52 AM
  #88
thefeebster
Registered User
 
thefeebster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 5,601
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MS View Post
Again, Oberg's contract is comparable to those of Schneider and Grabner. He basically got #1 pick money, or damn close to it.

And with the change in how bonuses are applied, his $1.6 million cap it is substantial.
I reiterate that 1st overall pick money is $3.75 million, not 1.6, which isn't close. I know its nit-picky, but i think it makes a substantial difference of $2.15 million. I only quote this amount because you said this...
Quote:
Signing 25 year-olds with mediocre pedigrees to contracts on a level with #1 picks is not smart management to me.
As i said earlier, the only player i know that has gotten the 1st to 3rd overall pick contract and the type of bonuses they have is Tyler Bozak and he did not have mediocre pedigree upon signing. Thus, i was interested in seeing if there were others because i have been looking, only to no avail.

If you said a late first round pick, then yes it is substantially higher. I completely agree, if they have the type of skill-set and likely potential of a Volpatti-type of player, that there is no reason to be paying them $3.75 mill, 1.6 mill, or even 0.9 mill, which some of the top college players have signed for this year. However, many of them have signed for much less [in the 500-700K range]. Like alternate said, it does seem like Gillis does have an internal cap limit for these signings in terms of their talent level and potential.

thefeebster is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2010, 06:20 AM
  #89
Scouter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,393
vCash: 830
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefeebster View Post
I reiterate that 1st overall pick money is $3.75 million, not 1.6, which isn't close. I know its nit-picky, but i think it makes a substantial difference of $2.15 million. I only quote this amount because you said this...

As i said earlier, the only player i know that has gotten the 1st to 3rd overall pick contract and the type of bonuses they have is Tyler Bozak and he did not have mediocre pedigree upon signing. Thus, i was interested in seeing if there were others because i have been looking, only to no avail.

If you said a late first round pick, then yes it is substantially higher. I completely agree, if they have the type of skill-set and likely potential of a Volpatti-type of player, that there is no reason to be paying them $3.75 mill, 1.6 mill, or even 0.9 mill, which some of the top college players have signed for this year. However, many of them have signed for much less [in the 500-700K range]. Like alternate said, it does seem like Gillis does have an internal cap limit for these signings in terms of their talent level and potential.

He means 1rd pick money, not 1st overall money.

Scouter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2010, 07:10 AM
  #90
thefeebster
Registered User
 
thefeebster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 5,601
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gman3 View Post
He means 1rd pick money, not 1st overall money.
If you had actually read the rest of my post, you would have read that i addressed that already. But looks like you have mis-read my post yet again.

Using your words "Newsflash", 1st round picks all don't make the same money when bonuses are included in their cap hit.

Draft 2009 of those signed[listed according to draft position]
John Tavares » EL SR + $3,750,000+ $3,750,000+ $3,750,000
Victor Hedman » EL SR + $3,500,000+ $3,500,000+ $3,500,000
Matt Duchene » EL SR + $3,200,000+ $3,200,000+ $3,200,000
Evander Kane » EL SR + $3,100,000+ $3,100,000+ $3,100,000
Brayden Schenn » EL SR + $3,140,000+ $3,140,000+ $3,140,000
Nazem Kadri » EL SR + $1,750,000+ $1,750,000+ $1,750,000
Jared Cowen » EL SR + $1,325,000+ $1,325,000+ $1,325,000
Ryan Ellis » EL SR + $1,500,000+ $1,500,000+ $1,500,000
Dmitri Kulikov » EL SR + $1,325,000+ $1,325,000+ $1,325,000
John Moore » EL SR + $1,025,000+ $1,025,000+ $1,025,000
Jordan Schroeder » EL + $1,750,000+ $1,750,000+ $1,750,000
Carter Ashton » EL SR + $1,100,000+ $1,100,000+ $1,100,000
Simon Despres » EL SR $900,000 $900,000 $900,000

thefeebster is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2010, 07:22 AM
  #91
Andy Dufresne
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: Kazakhstan
Posts: 1,526
vCash: 500
Some of you might want to check this out:
http://www.nhlscap.com/els.htm

Scroll down and click on the link to bonuses:

Which includes this:

SCHEDULE B BONUSES - INDIVIDUAL AWARDS

All players signed to an Entry-Level Contract is eligible for a bonus paid by the league in the amount shown below, even if the player's contract does not specify an award for any Exhibit 5 bonuses. Payments made by the league do not count against a Club's Upper Limit, but do count against the Players Share for the purpose of determining escrow.

If I'm reading that right, that's 2M$ in bonuses that don't count against the cap, and all ELC players are elibible. That means that CapGeek is wrong. Unless this site is wrong?

One other point I feel is getting muddled in this thread is that 25 yr olds (Gilroy,Volpatti) should never be compared with younger guys (Bozak, Oberg) because they don't have to sign an ELC.

Andy Dufresne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2010, 01:08 PM
  #92
BigZ65
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,983
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern_Canuck View Post
Luckily, the Canucks and Aquilini have shown the willingness to pay higher contracts in the minors (eg. Jason Krog, Michel Ouellet, Jeff Cowan, Curtis Sanford, Brad Lukowich, etc) that don't count against the cap.

If you have a team need - bigger, tougher players that can skate - and your current "prospects" in that category may not make the NHL (Desbiens, Pope, Bolduc), I think this is a very good prospect signing.

S_C
You mean the Moose have been willing to pay higher contracts in the minors. The Moose paid 100% of Krog's 1-way deal while he was with the Moose, same with Baumer. Not sure about Ouellet, I'm sure the Moose were paying some part of his deal.

BigZ65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2010, 02:51 PM
  #93
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,862
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gman3 View Post
I would be interested to see what Julien Sprunger would do over here, he's 24 6-4 200 pounds, a very NA style of player and basically a PPG player in the Swiss league, he had an alright Olympics for the Swiss potting 2 goals in 5 games.

I asked this question twice now without an answer, so I'll ask you again - please show me a list of European UFAs that have come to the NHL and had any success at all?

You can list of a bunch of players that put up good stats in Europe, but the question is what's the history of such players and their transition to the NHL, compared to that of NCAA players?

Maybe it's because you're evaluating players playing on a bigger ice surface, with a different style of game altogether, that when they come here, most of them play well below expectations. But I'm fairly certain that when you look at the actual numbers and see the big gap in successful cases, it looks like it's much tougher for a successful European pro league player to make that transition, especially at a later age, than NCAA players coming over.

I haven't personally looked at the concrete numbers, but my guess is that for every one European UFA signed that has made a successful transition to the NHL, you'll find at least 5 NCAA players that have made that successful jump.

That alone should tell you something... but again, I haven't looked at the numbers in detail, so I may be wrong here... but since you keep bringing up European UFAs, I'd be interested in seeing what actual data you have to backup with that shows that it's a better route to take than going after NCAA players.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2010, 02:59 PM
  #94
RobertKron
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 8,642
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by knivez View Post
Years ago, I heard those exact same words said about Burrows and Rypien.
Keep in mind, though, that Volpatti is on a contract for more NHL money than Burrows was making last year, and Rypien makes now.

RobertKron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2010, 03:02 PM
  #95
thefeebster
Registered User
 
thefeebster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 5,601
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Dufresne View Post
If I'm reading that right, that's 2M$ in bonuses that don't count against the cap, and all ELC players are elibible. That means that CapGeek is wrong. Unless this site is wrong?

One other point I feel is getting muddled in this thread is that 25 yr olds (Gilroy,Volpatti) should never be compared with younger guys (Bozak, Oberg) because they don't have to sign an ELC.
I believe they are in the process of negotiating a new CBA, which leads the league to not have a Bonus Cushion as they have in the past and this year. Thus, i think most posters believe that it is likely we won't have a bonus cushion next year. If you want a more thorough read, i thought this thread was helpful: http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t...ight=elc+bonus

I am glad someone recognizes it as well. Gilroy and Volpatti both fall under an exception in the ELC rules. Both have birthdays that put them at age 25 before Sept 15th.

Quote:
Players under age 25 as of September 15 in the calendar year their first NHL contract is signed are subject to the terms of Article 9 and must sign an entry-level contract (ELC). This means the amount of salary and team-paid performance bonuses is capped, depending on his draft year or the year he signs. The length of the ELC is also specified based on the player’s age, and may not be modified for any reason.

Age Length of ELC
18-21 3 years
22-23 2 years
24 1 year
25+ Not Subject

thefeebster is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2010, 06:39 PM
  #96
Scouter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,393
vCash: 830
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO View Post
I asked this question twice now without an answer, so I'll ask you again - please show me a list of European UFAs that have come to the NHL and had any success at all?

You can list of a bunch of players that put up good stats in Europe, but the question is what's the history of such players and their transition to the NHL, compared to that of NCAA players?

Maybe it's because you're evaluating players playing on a bigger ice surface, with a different style of game altogether, that when they come here, most of them play well below expectations. But I'm fairly certain that when you look at the actual numbers and see the big gap in successful cases, it looks like it's much tougher for a successful European pro league player to make that transition, especially at a later age, than NCAA players coming over.

I haven't personally looked at the concrete numbers, but my guess is that for every one European UFA signed that has made a successful transition to the NHL, you'll find at least 5 NCAA players that have made that successful jump.

That alone should tell you something... but again, I haven't looked at the numbers in detail, so I may be wrong here... but since you keep bringing up European UFAs, I'd be interested in seeing what actual data you have to backup with that shows that it's a better route to take than going after NCAA players.
Speaking of ignoring, looks like you just decided to totally ignore the post I made about Pyorala and come back with this.

Scouter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2010, 09:04 PM
  #97
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,862
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gman3 View Post
Speaking of ignoring, looks like you just decided to totally ignore the post I made about Pyorala and come back with this.
sorry, I should have responded to it.

Pyorala signed a 1yr deal and isn't of any help to the Flyers at all... at 28, he's got no upside. He basically signed to play for the Phantoms, not as a young player that might have a chance to be a NHLer.

This isn't comparable to bringing in young players that can develop with the organization.

And your example of Pyorala should fit in exactly with the type of contracts you suggested NHL teams shouldn't give out - a 28YO who's a longshot at making the NHL, has no upside at all, on a 1-yr deal. Basically he was help for their AHL team.

I'd rather sign a younger NCAA player that has some hope of helping the NHL team at some point, than a guy at 28, who's a UFA after just a one-year tryout.

But again, this wasn't the question I had for you... My question - again - is can you provide a list of actual *successful* European UFA signings that have helped the NHL club?

Pyorala is basically a bust, if you're expecting him to have any kind of positive impact on the NHL team. So, who hasn't been a bust?

I'll name 5 NCAA players that have had solid impacts as UFA signings - Rafalski, Penner, Kunitz, Madden, and Danny Boyle (there is of course a much more extensive list than that).

Can you name even 3 European UFAs that have had a similar impact for their clubs? If signing European UFAs makes any sense, over going after NCAA players instead, maybe you can provide some examples of players that actually helped their NHL clubs -ie. not 28YO guys like Pyorala who aren't good enough to earn a regular spot on the NHL team.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-30-2010, 09:12 PM
  #98
LickTheEnvelope
6th Overall Blows
 
LickTheEnvelope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 28,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MW View Post
Keep in mind, though, that Volpatti is on a contract for more NHL money than Burrows was making last year, and Rypien makes now.
But he wont make that money unless he's actually in the NHL....

LickTheEnvelope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-31-2010, 12:05 AM
  #99
Horrorshow
Registered User
 
Horrorshow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 611
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO View Post
sorry, I should have responded to it.
I'll name 5 NCAA players that have had solid impacts as UFA signings - Rafalski, Penner, Kunitz, Madden, and Danny Boyle (there is of course a much more extensive list than that).
I agree with you on the most part, but technically Rafalski is a European UFA signing.

Horrorshow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-31-2010, 01:34 AM
  #100
MS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 13,097
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefeebster View Post
If you had actually read the rest of my post, you would have read that i addressed that already. But looks like you have mis-read my post yet again.

Using your words "Newsflash", 1st round picks all don't make the same money when bonuses are included in their cap hit.

Draft 2009 of those signed[listed according to draft position]
John Tavares » EL SR + $3,750,000+ $3,750,000+ $3,750,000
Victor Hedman » EL SR + $3,500,000+ $3,500,000+ $3,500,000
Matt Duchene » EL SR + $3,200,000+ $3,200,000+ $3,200,000
Evander Kane » EL SR + $3,100,000+ $3,100,000+ $3,100,000
Brayden Schenn » EL SR + $3,140,000+ $3,140,000+ $3,140,000
Nazem Kadri » EL SR + $1,750,000+ $1,750,000+ $1,750,000
Jared Cowen » EL SR + $1,325,000+ $1,325,000+ $1,325,000
Ryan Ellis » EL SR + $1,500,000+ $1,500,000+ $1,500,000
Dmitri Kulikov » EL SR + $1,325,000+ $1,325,000+ $1,325,000
John Moore » EL SR + $1,025,000+ $1,025,000+ $1,025,000
Jordan Schroeder » EL + $1,750,000+ $1,750,000+ $1,750,000
Carter Ashton » EL SR + $1,100,000+ $1,100,000+ $1,100,000
Simon Despres » EL SR $900,000 $900,000 $900,000
When I said #1 pick, I meant first-rounder, not #1 overall.

And the point holds.

Evan Oberg got a bigger contract last summer than Jared Cowan did, and Cowan was taken 8th overall.

That's amazing when you think about it, and why I'm saying this market is *incredibly* inflated.


Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO View Post
I'll name 5 NCAA players that have had solid impacts as UFA signings - Rafalski, Penner, Kunitz, Madden, and Danny Boyle (there is of course a much more extensive list than that).

Can you name even 3 European UFAs that have had a similar impact for their clubs? If signing European UFAs makes any sense, over going after NCAA players instead, maybe you can provide some examples of players that actually helped their NHL clubs -ie. not 28YO guys like Pyorala who aren't good enough to earn a regular spot on the NHL team.
First off, you have Rafalski in the wrong list as he played in Finland for several years and was signed out of that league.

Second, you're forgetting that overage Euros had to be drafted prior to 2005. So the list of guys who would have been signed as UFAs if the current rules were in place is enormous :

Daniel Alfredsson
Marek Zidlicky
Johan Franzen
Sami Salo
Jarkko Ruutu by the Canucks
Mark Streit
Tomas Holmstrom

... just off the top of my head. The list is *much* longer than the college UFA list who have been successful.

Since 2005 and the rule change, Jonas Hiller, Nicklas Backstrom, and Jonas Gustavsson have all come in and established themselves as #1 NHL netminders as Euro UFAs. I know there have been a couple defenders come in and play as well but they're eluding me right now.

MS is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:17 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.