HFBoards

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

Dupuis turns down 1 million for 1 year.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-04-2003, 09:54 AM
  #1
ceber
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Wyoming, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,500
vCash: 500
Dupuis turns down 1 million for 1 year.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp...72&hubName=nhl

Last week, the Wild rejected a two year proposal which would have paid Dupuis $2.4-million. The team's latest offer of one year, $1-million has also been rejected.



ceber is offline  
Old
10-04-2003, 10:12 AM
  #2
Kristofer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 365
vCash: 500
That must be a typo. If not I think you said it best ceber

Kristofer is offline  
Old
10-04-2003, 11:31 AM
  #3
GaborikRules10!!!
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Section 110 at the X!!!
Posts: 375
vCash: 500
Makes No Sense At All
Wonder what Walsh's Counter Proposal Looked like???

GaborikRules10!!! is offline  
Old
10-04-2003, 11:32 AM
  #4
Dan-o
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 457
vCash: 500
Well, 2 weeks ago, Walsh said he had submitted 1 and 2 year proposals. The 2-year deal was for $2.4, the one year deal was for "around $1 million." They've got to be haggling over incentives at this deal. They're right with each other in terms of base salary.

Am I the only one that wants this to be more than a 1-year deal. I really don't want the Wild dealing with this next year again.

Dan-o is offline  
Old
10-04-2003, 10:51 PM
  #5
MN_Gopher
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Mpls
Posts: 3,360
vCash: 500
In the end is Walsh the good agent for getting everything his clients are worth. Or he is he just money hungry, cares nothinng for his clients, or the game of hockey and could care less if they play or not? I tend to think at this point he could care less. All or nothing. What will this do to Gab or Dupuis. They sit out go somewhere for big money and they are going to have to produce 48 and 65 are good for the wild but i tend to think those would be let down numbers if they played the market. No longer kids under LeMaire. Both guys could really take a turn for the worse.

MN_Gopher is offline  
Old
10-05-2003, 07:31 AM
  #6
theo6060
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,801
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MN_Gopher
In the end is Walsh the good agent for getting everything his clients are worth. Or he is he just money hungry, cares nothinng for his clients, or the game of hockey and could care less if they play or not? I tend to think at this point he could care less. All or nothing. What will this do to Gab or Dupuis. They sit out go somewhere for big money and they are going to have to produce 48 and 65 are good for the wild but i tend to think those would be let down numbers if they played the market. No longer kids under LeMaire. Both guys could really take a turn for the worse.
Is it the same agent as Canucks prospect RJ Umberger has? Because I was reading on the Canucks board that his agent couldn't care less and is really set on what he wants RJ to sign for. Even if it means RJ sits out all year. (same guy?)

theo6060 is offline  
Old
10-05-2003, 08:42 AM
  #7
Hecht
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,107
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by theo6060
Is it the same agent as Canucks prospect RJ Umberger has? Because I was reading on the Canucks board that his agent couldn't care less and is really set on what he wants RJ to sign for. Even if it means RJ sits out all year. (same guy?)
per this article..it says Brian Lawton is his agent


http://insidecollegehockey.com/7Arch...es/rj_0204.htm

Hecht is offline  
Old
10-05-2003, 09:16 AM
  #8
theo6060
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,801
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hecht
per this article..it says Brian Lawton is his agent


http://insidecollegehockey.com/7Arch...es/rj_0204.htm
Oh. It just sounded too familiar with the two situations. Thanks for the link.

theo6060 is offline  
Old
10-05-2003, 03:13 PM
  #9
MN_Gopher
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Mpls
Posts: 3,360
vCash: 500
Walsh does rep. holdout Havlat and rooky MA Fleury.

MN_Gopher is offline  
Old
10-06-2003, 12:19 PM
  #10
Mr. Tri
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 6
vCash: 500
I think the CBA is a main part of the problem especially because dupuis and gabby are so young. The free agency rules will most likely be different and I've heard the NHL wants to eliminate some of the incentives in contracts for younger, restricted players. In that case I think a one year deal should be worked out with both of them, so we can start next year, hopefully, with both sides knowing where they stand. If I'm not mistaken most of our veterans' contracts expire this year so will be doing a lot of negotiating next year. My conspiracy theory thought is DR wants to tank this year and draft Ovchekin, which wouldn't be bad in the francise's 5 year plan.

Mr. Tri is offline  
Old
10-06-2003, 12:36 PM
  #11
Dan-o
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Tri
I think the CBA is a main part of the problem especially because dupuis and gabby are so young. The free agency rules will most likely be different and I've heard the NHL wants to eliminate some of the incentives in contracts for younger, restricted players. In that case I think a one year deal should be worked out with both of them, so we can start next year, hopefully, with both sides knowing where they stand. If I'm not mistaken most of our veterans' contracts expire this year so will be doing a lot of negotiating next year. My conspiracy theory thought is DR wants to tank this year and draft Ovchekin, which wouldn't be bad in the francise's 5 year plan.
I guarantee that Lemaire has to much pride to take a dive. Look at Year 1. We had a shot at a top-5 pick (Kovalchuk, Spezza, Svitov, Chistov) and we had a late-season surge if I remember right.

Welcome to the boards by the way.

Dan-o is offline  
Old
10-06-2003, 01:06 PM
  #12
strib
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Longview, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 154
vCash: 500
Jacque Lemaire wouldn't agree to tank a game to save his life. Let alone the number which we would need to get the no 1.

strib is offline  
Old
10-06-2003, 01:50 PM
  #13
thestonedkoala
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Tri
I think the CBA is a main part of the problem especially because dupuis and gabby are so young. The free agency rules will most likely be different and I've heard the NHL wants to eliminate some of the incentives in contracts for younger, restricted players. In that case I think a one year deal should be worked out with both of them, so we can start next year, hopefully, with both sides knowing where they stand. If I'm not mistaken most of our veterans' contracts expire this year so will be doing a lot of negotiating next year. My conspiracy theory thought is DR wants to tank this year and draft Ovchekin, which wouldn't be bad in the francise's 5 year plan.
While I agree that getitng the first overall pick wouldn't be bad, the top ten are clearly stand out players compaired to this year and all wouldn't be bad to take. Shremp, Wolseki, Barker...I wouldn't mind seeing any of them in the Wild uniform.

 
Old
10-08-2003, 12:30 PM
  #14
LightningFast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: North Korea
Posts: 304
vCash: 500
...

Unlike Gaborik, Pascal Dupuis's stock will drop very fast if he starts holding out.

LightningFast is offline  
Old
10-08-2003, 01:31 PM
  #15
Kristofer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 365
vCash: 500
Alan Walsh was just on KFAN and talked about Dupuis and Gaborik.
He said that the wild offered a 2 year deal at about 500k and 700k. Then Walsh said he counter offered a deal that would make sure Dupuis would be in the opening night lineup, for 2 years at 750k and 900k.

I'm pretty sure that's what the numbers were.

Walsh also said that last year Dupuis was the lowest paid player in the NHL.

Walsh sounded like a very angry agent.

Kristofer is offline  
Old
10-08-2003, 02:11 PM
  #16
ceber
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Wyoming, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pillmont
Alan Walsh was just on KFAN and talked about Dupuis and Gaborik.
He said that the wild offered a 2 year deal at about 500k and 700k. Then Walsh said he counter offered a deal that would make sure Dupuis would be in the opening night lineup, for 2 years at 750k and 900k.

I'm pretty sure that's what the numbers were.

Walsh also said that last year Dupuis was the lowest paid player in the NHL.

Walsh sounded like a very angry agent.
That's interesting. Could it be he's angry because he's starting to lose? Seems like he's moving more on the money than the team is.

I sure hope when this is done there aren't bad feelings between the holdouts and the organization. Seems like that's going to be hard to avoid.

ceber is offline  
Old
10-08-2003, 02:16 PM
  #17
thestonedkoala
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Hehehe Walsh...You aren't going to win this one pal. You picked the wrong year for holdouts.

I hope you have a nice piece of cardboard handy because you'll need it after the CBA is done with you.

 
Old
10-08-2003, 02:28 PM
  #18
Hecht
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,107
vCash: 500
TSK....

you forget he signed fluery so instead of a card board box..he'll be able to use foodstamps

Hecht is offline  
Old
10-08-2003, 02:32 PM
  #19
thestonedkoala
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Oh yeah...

Hehehe, one down- three to go and he was lucky to have Fleury. Fleury's contract at least had a blueprint, saying I can get this much for base ONLY.

I think he needs a blueprint for the other contracts. Because he's either...ummm well he either doesn't know how to count or for some bad, bad reason he took financial tips from Hicks...

 
Old
10-08-2003, 08:57 PM
  #20
Dan-o
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 457
vCash: 500
Well, like I said on the Wild.com board, I think Walsh's offer for Dupuis is pretty fair. Come on, 2 years, $1.7 million is pretty reasonable. He'll still be paid less than Marshall, Laasksonen and 1/2 the rest of the team. I've supported Doug from the beginning, but I might find myself shifting if he leaves Pascal flopping in the breeze when that offer is on the table. It's fair. Take it. Or at least negotiate. I can't imagine the Wild are too far off now.

Dan-o is offline  
Old
10-09-2003, 05:45 AM
  #21
Surly Furious
Registered User
 
Surly Furious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: frozen north
Posts: 6,991
vCash: 728
On the other hand:
"The Wild reportedly offered Dupuis a two-year deal for $550,000 and $800,000, which was rejected."

Dupuis isn't exactly Gaborik here - the guy has 1 20 goal season - last season may have been his career year for all we know - he just doesn't have the track record to be turning down a pretty fair offer here IMO. If the Wild had offered him any of these deals before last season he would have jumped on them, but after 20 measly goals he's worth 1 million a season?! I don't think so. This along with Walsh's threat to sell Dupuis to Europe has killed any sympathy I may have had for this guy at the bargaining table. Good riddance!

Surly Furious is offline  
Closed Thread

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 11:46 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.