HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Jeff Carter: 11-year Contract Extension, $58M $5.27+ AAV

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-13-2010, 09:12 PM
  #151
KimiFerrari
Messi Is God
 
KimiFerrari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Montreal, Qc
Country: Argentina
Posts: 3,818
vCash: 500
WOW! Man this is going to be a great core for many years.

KimiFerrari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2010, 09:33 PM
  #152
TheDrizzle81
Registered User
 
TheDrizzle81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Marlton NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 5,357
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to TheDrizzle81
Can someone explain what "Modified no trade" mean in english?

TheDrizzle81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2010, 09:35 PM
  #153
TheDrizzle81
Registered User
 
TheDrizzle81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Marlton NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 5,357
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to TheDrizzle81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garbage Goal View Post
http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?p...1#post28928931

Some laughable comments in there. Particularly this one:
Thats funny. They say he's a 5 mil a year guy, we get him at 5.27. If overpaying by $270,000 is not a break then i dont know what is... I was prepared for 6....

TheDrizzle81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2010, 09:37 PM
  #154
MsWoof
Registered User
 
MsWoof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,018
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDrizzle81 View Post
Can someone explain what "Modified no trade" mean in english?
I don't think they gave specifics but it means they can trade him to teams he specified he would go to. They might have agreed on 5 or 10 teams or something.

MsWoof is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2010, 09:37 PM
  #155
Terence Peterman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 5,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDrizzle81 View Post
Can someone explain what "Modified no trade" mean in english?
It's not a full no-trade clause. Modified just means it has some sort of stipulation or limitations on it.

Terence Peterman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2010, 09:50 PM
  #156
John Flyers Fan
Registered User
 
John Flyers Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 22,345
vCash: 500
No trade clause breaks down as follows

Year one - No, no trade clause
Years 2-4 - Full no trade clause
Years 5-11 - Carter can give a list of 10 teams, that he will not accept a trade to


Last edited by John Flyers Fan: 11-13-2010 at 09:59 PM.
John Flyers Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2010, 09:52 PM
  #157
TheDrizzle81
Registered User
 
TheDrizzle81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Marlton NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 5,357
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to TheDrizzle81
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Flyers Fan View Post
No trade clause breaks down as follows

Year one - No no trade clause
Years 2-4 - Full no trade clause
Years 5-11 - Carter can give a list of 10 teams, that he will not accept a trade to
Thanks to everyone, i kind of assumed thats what it meant. thanks everyone appreciate it

TheDrizzle81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2010, 09:54 PM
  #158
Flyerfan808
Registered User
 
Flyerfan808's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Honolulu, HI
Country: United States
Posts: 2,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Flyers Fan View Post
No trade clause breaks down as follows

Year one - No no trade clause
Years 2-4 - Full no trade clause
Years 5-11 - Carter can give a list of 10 teams, that he will not accept a trade to
Thanks for breaking this down. I like his new contract. The length and the modified NTC is a little scary. But I feel like the number is VERY reasonable.

Flyerfan808 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2010, 10:03 PM
  #159
BernieParent
Registered User
 
BernieParent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Montreal, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,089
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Love the cap hit.

Do not like the length.
This sums up my take on the contract. It's a great cap hit for the player, but this team has very little flexibility over the next few years, and if something goes wrong, things could go south very fast.

BernieParent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2010, 10:06 PM
  #160
BernieParent
Registered User
 
BernieParent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Montreal, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,089
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
shortstop: "easy play, i got this....oh it accidentally went through"

holmgren: "ok easy contract, sign a goalie, i got this....oh i accidentally signed shelley for 1.1 mil per"
This past off-season:
"So the winning FA goaltender is at second base, with two signed, three million and two years to Turco. (A) little roller up along first... behind the bag! It gets through Holmgren! It gets through Holmgren! Here comes Leighton, and the Flyers lose it!"

(Apologies to Red Sox fans.)

BernieParent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2010, 10:11 PM
  #161
1865
Registered User
 
1865's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chester, UK
Country: England
Posts: 9,185
vCash: 50
Carter appears to be a highly athletic, perfectly fit young gentleman and i have no concerns about whether he will be able to play at 35.

1865 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2010, 10:18 PM
  #162
FreshPerspective
We don't need one!
 
FreshPerspective's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Italy
Posts: 10,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Flyers Fan View Post
No trade clause breaks down as follows

Year one - No, no trade clause
Years 2-4 - Full no trade clause
Years 5-11 - Carter can give a list of 10 teams, that he will not accept a trade to
Ok so he has this year and next year when his new contract kicks in where he can still be traded? If that is the case I'm surprised the full no trade clause kicks in the second year....although that seems like some kind of compromise between him and the Flyers?

FreshPerspective is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2010, 10:45 PM
  #163
mercury
Registered User
 
mercury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: South Philly/SoCal
Country: United States
Posts: 11,099
vCash: 500
You don't sign a guy to a 11-year, $58 million contract if you plan on trading him within 4 years, anyway. Not even if you're Paul Holmgren.

mercury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2010, 11:23 PM
  #164
Larry44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,107
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woof View Post
If he's that far off, yeah, why bother reporting it? Those are two pretty big screw ups by the Philly media so something is not right.
C'mon, really. Timmy had 60-63 over 10 a few days ago while it was being negiotiated - so he clearly got something from one of the camps. The final deal was pretty close, and Mackenzie wasn't reporting a rumour, he was reporting the actual deal.

I don't know what that would be a problem. Panotch broke the story of a long extension and he was in the ballpark.

Larry44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2010, 11:44 PM
  #165
healthyscratch
Registered User
 
healthyscratch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Philly
Posts: 5,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woof View Post
If he's that far off, yeah, why bother reporting it? Those are two pretty big screw ups by the Philly media so something is not right.
It's a conspiracy I tell ya!!

I may be sorry for asking this, but what in the world are you trying to get at by saying "something's not right". Not right about what?!


Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Blaine View Post
Well...it's not like he works for Comcast or anything.
My brother-in-law is a comcast tech, he didn't know anything about it.

healthyscratch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2010, 12:00 AM
  #166
Larry44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,107
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDrizzle81 View Post
Thats funny. They say he's a 5 mil a year guy, we get him at 5.27. If overpaying by $270,000 is not a break then i dont know what is... I was prepared for 6....
Exactly. Carter again shows he gets it. He and Richards signed their first ELCs without bonuses and for the same money (Carter COULD have demanded more, being picked much earlier but didn't). Then Richards signed long term, but Carter just signed for $5M x 3, agreeing to a have it expire while he was RFA. Now he signs for a very, very good cap hit long term.

I'm quite sure that many teams in the league would have paid him well over $6M, but he realizes the benefits of being part of a great team over the long term. And he's already made almost $20M in his career, so his great-great grandkids are already well taken care of by this contract...

Larry44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2010, 12:26 AM
  #167
Garbage Goal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 17,170
vCash: 500
It's funny now that I think about it, but all these mid-season re-signings and long-term deals make sense when you consider who our GM is. Homer has proven that he has a fear of negotiating in an open market (meaning, free agency) and he's actually quite good at throwing money at players (which is essentially all that these long-term deals are).

Garbage Goal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2010, 02:35 AM
  #168
might2mash
Post-apocalyptic
 
might2mash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: South Bend
Country: United States
Posts: 4,616
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to might2mash
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1865 View Post
Carter appears to be a highly athletic, perfectly fit young gentleman and i have no concerns about whether he will be able to play at 35.
Many would have issues with this part.

Hide your girls of 7 and older. Now that he knows he'll be here for 11 years he might start keeping tabs.

might2mash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2010, 02:37 AM
  #169
Andrew Knoll
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Andrew Knoll's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 2,352
vCash: 500
This deal is very very fair and that's why it makes me uneasy. When you commit to a guy for that long, you want it to be a decisive win for the franchise.

To me the best LONG deals are still 1) Richards 2) Ovechkin. Both guys signed at the exact right time. Richards was a huge value and there was serious meaning in the commitment to him to boot. Ovie was more a matter of locking him in at the current rate and locking him down as a top five skater in the league but it was also fabulous.

I have pretty much hated all these other deals and almost all these teams will live to regret them.

This deal is sort of interstitial. He's not too old--like the Detroit guys. He's not too much of a gold-or-glitter question--like Luongo and Kovalchuk. He's getting paid the right money at the right time for the right production.

That said, the Flyers could have made out just as well had he been willing to take a *slight* hometown discount, which is reasonable since he's been here his whole career, he likes the organization and the city and, if I am not mistaken, he was headed for restricted free agency, not unrestricted free agency. Was it really that far-fetched to imagine him taking a 5yr/30M deal? Is 700K in savings really worth this type of commitment? Yes, you're saying a good $1.5M, maybe as high as $2.5M over his open-market price, but he was not going to hit the open market.

I am very happy he is back in the fold, I cannot say it's a BAD deal but I'm also a little hesitant to celebrate too heartily. That said, the Flyers have money, they can buy guys out or bury them in the minors and it's going to be a LONG time before they have to cross that bridge with Carter.

Andrew Knoll is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2010, 07:48 AM
  #170
Hockeypete49
How you like me now!
 
Hockeypete49's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: South Jersey
Country: Isle of Man
Posts: 4,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
It wasn't really Lindros' physical play that truly did him in... it was Kasparitis knocking his head off (which can certainly happen to Carter). Then there's the potential issue of stuff like a knee injury (look what happened to Peca).

Richards' deal is a concern on similar lines, but at the same time it's understandable in his case because they literally chose to build the team around him. Additionally, even if he loses a bit going up ice, he's such a heady player (isn't like raw athleticism carries him as is) that I think he'd be OK. Carter lives off his athletic ability, he loses that and his effectiveness will disappear with a quickness.

Now, the cap hit is quite nice, and he should outperform it over the next 5 years or so... but "scorers" also tend to peak in their 20s and be a bit more hit and miss after that.
Wow Jeff will be finished when he is 30

Hockeypete49 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2010, 08:10 AM
  #171
Cartsiephan*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,488
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertine View Post
Eat it, haters. Carter's going to be here for the rest of his career.
He had better win at least one Stanley Cup and show up in the playoffs for this to be worth anything, period. ECF's or just showing up in the SCF's, this is clearly on Richards and Carter to carry this team to a Stanley Cup, anything else and the legacy is that they got paid good money for a lot of years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Rainbow Express View Post
I don't like him, but how can I be mad at a guy with a 5.27 cap hit?

Was expecting over 6, but he took almost 1 million less. Love it. Can't stay mad at him. I'll learn to appreciate him over the next 11.
I agree, Carter has the skills to be a good scorer, will he keep it up? He is paid now so no excuses.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Love the cap hit.

Do not like the length.
See, we can agree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KimiFerrari View Post
WOW! Man this is going to be a great core for many years.

See above, nothing short of a Stanley Cup is this a good deal. Homer is locking into these guys to show up during the regular season and in the playoffs, they need to be professional and take this responsibility seriously on and off the ice. The face of the franchise means the success of failure of the team lies directly on their shoulders.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Flyers Fan View Post
No trade clause breaks down as follows

Year one - No, no trade clause
Years 2-4 - Full no trade clause
Years 5-11 - Carter can give a list of 10 teams, that he will not accept a trade to
Thanks for that, I was wondering where the NTC was going to fall and if they would attempt to negotiate a NMC?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mercury View Post
You don't sign a guy to a 11-year, $58 million contract if you plan on trading him within 4 years, anyway. Not even if you're Paul Holmgren.
This deal is for him to stay, but it does offer one thing....an out if they need it, now that he is signed to this type of deal it is very easy to trade if needed. I do not think they will, but it certainly makes for a very attractive deal for a team to take on in a trade if Homer did contemplate a move in this window of time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Danny Duberstein View Post
This deal is very very fair and that's why it makes me uneasy. When you commit to a guy for that long, you want it to be a decisive win for the franchise.

To me the best LONG deals are still 1) Richards 2) Ovechkin. Both guys signed at the exact right time. Richards was a huge value and there was serious meaning in the commitment to him to boot. Ovie was more a matter of locking him in at the current rate and locking him down as a top five skater in the league but it was also fabulous.

I have pretty much hated all these other deals and almost all these teams will live to regret them.

This deal is sort of interstitial. He's not too old--like the Detroit guys. He's not too much of a gold-or-glitter question--like Luongo and Kovalchuk. He's getting paid the right money at the right time for the right production.

That said, the Flyers could have made out just as well had he been willing to take a *slight* hometown discount, which is reasonable since he's been here his whole career, he likes the organization and the city and, if I am not mistaken, he was headed for restricted free agency, not unrestricted free agency. Was it really that far-fetched to imagine him taking a 5yr/30M deal? Is 700K in savings really worth this type of commitment? Yes, you're saying a good $1.5M, maybe as high as $2.5M over his open-market price, but he was not going to hit the open market.

I am very happy he is back in the fold, I cannot say it's a BAD deal but I'm also a little hesitant to celebrate too heartily. That said, the Flyers have money, they can buy guys out or bury them in the minors and it's going to be a LONG time before they have to cross that bridge with Carter.

I agree, if he scores 35+ goals during the season, team makes the ECF's and gets booted by the Pens while Carter is not a significant contributor this deal is an albatross. The only way this deal is good is is when the Flyers win the Cup, I cannot reiterate this enough. Locking in on these players is much like Lindros in the late 1990's, the move is made to win a Cup and nothing short. This lies on Carter and Richards, the core of the franchise who the organization has invested into the future on what they "will do" not like Pronger, Timonen, or even to a certain extent Briere where the organization was investing into what they could bring to the team to fill needs and based on those skills.

That being said, I like the deal but it is still a wait and see for how these guys perform over the length of the contracts and whether in 3 years we are seeing the results we expect.

Cartsiephan* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2010, 08:36 AM
  #172
Bob Clarke Fan Club
Registered User
 
Bob Clarke Fan Club's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,985
vCash: 500
Great deal, Carter at 6+ million would have choked me a bit. The term is an issue but it's what has to be done in a cap environment with your top young goal scorer.

Bob Clarke Fan Club is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2010, 10:27 AM
  #173
reza87
Registered User
 
reza87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 347
vCash: 500
Leaf fan coming in peace.
As you can imagine this signing broke my heart. Great signing.
I would have easily gone as high as $8 million.

reza87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2010, 10:50 AM
  #174
TheDrizzle81
Registered User
 
TheDrizzle81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Marlton NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 5,357
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to TheDrizzle81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry44 View Post
Exactly. Carter again shows he gets it. He and Richards signed their first ELCs without bonuses and for the same money (Carter COULD have demanded more, being picked much earlier but didn't). Then Richards signed long term, but Carter just signed for $5M x 3, agreeing to a have it expire while he was RFA. Now he signs for a very, very good cap hit long term.

I'm quite sure that many teams in the league would have paid him well over $6M, but he realizes the benefits of being part of a great team over the long term. And he's already made almost $20M in his career, so his great-great grandkids are already well taken care of by this contract...
When talk broke that they were planning to extend him I fully expected something over 6.5. 5.2 is wonderful. Ill be jumping off the hate train at that price. Ive seen the 5 got us, so if hes making slightly more, and plays better, whats to hate? Hes played better as of late, but 11 more years at a similar rate is fine with me

TheDrizzle81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2010, 12:34 PM
  #175
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 110,394
vCash: 5602
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woof View Post
If he's that far off, yeah, why bother reporting it? Those are two pretty big screw ups by the Philly media so something is not right.
Funny thing with the Philly media, is while they're still good for the day-to-day information, basically any signings or trades TSN was getting it first. McKenzie had the Giroux and Carter signings before anyone in Philly, and it was funny watching the Philly guys scramble and see things like "confirmed by my sources." Maybe I think that way because unlike most people in Philly, they don't have the means or want to be in touch with the Canadian media.

The coverage of the Hamhuis dealings last year was epic. Everyone in Canada was adamant Hamhuis was never signing with us, and then adament that Holmgren was shopping him on Draft Day. Meanwhile, in Philly we see from some people "Relax, you'll get your Hamhuis," and something along the lines of "the reports of Hamhuis being shopped are false and the Flyers intend to sign him."

GKJ 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 04:35 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.