HFBoards

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

Karlsson's next contract?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-20-2011, 12:35 PM
  #26
Northern Neighbour
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,683
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Mars Volchenkov View Post
Keith wasn't even in the NHL at Karlsson's age, so how would you know? Norfolk Admirals fan? Keith didn't hit the NHL until he was 22. Karlsson will have 3 full seasons under his belt by then.

Keith's first few years in the NHL were bumpy. Chicago fans will tell you that. It wasn't until he turned 25 or so that he got it together.
You're right. I got mixed up with all the ages and numbers being thrown around. I was thinking of Keith's second season compared to Karlsson's second season as oppose to their 20-age seasons. There's definitely a difference in the two, and Karlsson is obviously ahead of Keith in terms of development.

But the problem I have with these arguments and others (see the Cowen=Chara Potential thread) is that people treat players equally and assume because a prospect has a similar stature as a more established player that the youngster will develop just like the star player. Of course, players develop at different speeds and have different ceilings. A player may be ahead of an established star at the same age (see Karlsson and Keith), but that doesn't mean that the younger player will, at the end of the day, be better than the star.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pitlick View Post
15 years, $44 million.
No way Karlsson's agent lets his client agree to such a low offer.

Northern Neighbour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2011, 12:35 PM
  #27
Pyke*
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto / Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,616
vCash: 500
The main problem I have with a long-term deal is Karlsson's size makes it likely he'll have injury troubles. I'd like to see something like 8 years, $5 million average.

Pyke* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2011, 01:13 PM
  #28
koreaboy
Registered User
 
koreaboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,673
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenzZen View Post
Who said anything about $6-8M?
take the extra 6-800K you seem to be willing to pay him and multiply that by 10 years.

koreaboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2011, 01:16 PM
  #29
koreaboy
Registered User
 
koreaboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,673
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Afro Thunder View Post
WTF you talking about, Karlsson is already miles ahead of what Keith was when he was 20 years old and has the potential of being better than Keith when he's at his age.
the key word is bolded. if you get into the business of paying millions of extra dollars for POTENTIAL you will screw your team.

when EK goes out there, wins a norris, and is the best defenceman at the olympics, then we can start talking about giving him duncan keith money. until then, anyone who pays him like duncan keith isn't being smart.

koreaboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2011, 01:34 PM
  #30
SpezDispenser
Registered User
 
SpezDispenser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 14,390
vCash: 500
10 years, 50 million. Lock 'em up long term, cap hit is 5 million, structure it how he wants, done and done. He's a superstar, you don't mess with letting him get to UFA any time soon.

SpezDispenser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2011, 01:40 PM
  #31
Highbrow
Alfie, Alfie, Alfie!
 
Highbrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,659
vCash: 500
3 years, $4 million per.

Highbrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2011, 01:44 PM
  #32
Pellegrino
Registered User
 
Pellegrino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 901
vCash: 500
You shouldn't give him a long-term deal just yet. In a long-term perspective, you'll probably have to choose between him and Rundblad. I can't see them both play in a successful Senators team. Way too risky.

Pellegrino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2011, 01:48 PM
  #33
aragorn
YES WE CAN
 
aragorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Country: Azores
Posts: 10,926
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pellegrino View Post
You shouldn't give him a long-term deal just yet. In a long-term perspective, you'll probably have to choose between him and Rundblad. I can't see them both play in a successful Senators team. Way too risky.
I tend to agree with this, especially if Rundblad turns out to be the better all around defenceman.

aragorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2011, 02:22 PM
  #34
Nabokov20
Karlsson for Chuck
 
Nabokov20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,677
vCash: 1706
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Neighbour View Post
I think Karlsson will be looking for a shorter-term deal so that he can cash again later. I think he'll end signing for 3 years at $12M.
This. I'd be shocked if he signed for more than 4 years to be honest.

Edit: i can't type

Nabokov20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2011, 02:33 PM
  #35
koreaboy
Registered User
 
koreaboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,673
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpezDispenser View Post
He's a superstar, you don't mess with letting him get to UFA any time soon.
no, he's not. he simply isn't. we HOPE he will be, he could end up being that, but right how after a season and a half he hasn't proven that he's a superstar yet. until he does, you can't pay him like one.

koreaboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2011, 03:04 PM
  #36
Smeddy
Intangibles
 
Smeddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Kanata
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,799
vCash: 177
If he goes, we officially have the ugliest team in the NHL...no homo.

Smeddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2011, 03:24 PM
  #37
SenzZen
Registered User
 
SenzZen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,829
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by koreaboy View Post
take the extra 6-800K you seem to be willing to pay him and multiply that by 10 years.
OK I see where you got the number from now- but in theoretical reality the deal would be longer- so actually more real dollars.

Quote:
Originally Posted by koreaboy View Post
no, we don't pay 800Kx 8-10 years too much for him. you don't just dismiss $6-8mil as insignificant, and you have to watch how your salaries are scaled. if you pay one guy too much, how do you not pay everyone else too much?

Because everyone else is not as good as Karlsson. It's like Detroit saying: if you want to play here, you won't be making more than Lidstrom.


to run an NHL team, you can fall in love with your own players and screw yourself by overpaying them. you can't. we live in a salary cap era and you have to carefully manage your cap. i'm sorry, but a 22-year old EK is probably not going to be worth anywhere near a $5mil+ cap hit.
Well he's already our 2nd best player, but I can see what you mean by saying he's not a $5M+ cap-hit at 22. The rationale for signing him is that he'll be a $6-7M cap-hit at 28, and we have him at $5M+ still and for years to come. Besides- who are we spending our cap on in the interim? Gonchar's getting $5.5M right now...

And I'd just like to say that I think Keith's deal was a bit of a discount- but it will end with him 1 month shy of turning 40. How good do you think he'll be for the last 5 years of his deal? How good do you think Karlsson would be at the end of a 13 year deal that ends with him turning 35? From your opinion of him I'd guess not very good- but I greatly disagree on that.

This all does depend on the new CBA, but if it was me spending Eug's $$$ that's what I'd do.

SenzZen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2011, 03:27 PM
  #38
Minister of Offence
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 23,091
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by koreaboy View Post
the key word is bolded. if you get into the business of paying millions of extra dollars for POTENTIAL you will screw your team.

when EK goes out there, wins a norris, and is the best defenceman at the olympics, then we can start talking about giving him duncan keith money. until then, anyone who pays him like duncan keith isn't being smart.
It's funny because Duncan Keith isn't even making close to Brian Campbell money.

Think about it.

Minister of Offence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2011, 03:33 PM
  #39
Minister of Offence
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 23,091
vCash: 500
Chances are, Karlsson's camp probably isn't going to want to talk long-term extension until AFTER this season.

It's not out of the realm of possibility that he puts up 55-65 points next year...and cleaner defensively (especially considering we may have a real live goalie).

I expect both sides will be happy to see him break out this year, and they can find a compromise between long term and solid money.

Too hard to speculate as I really don't expect it to come any time soon, and we have no idea what's going to happen with him next year.

If he duplicates this season he'll probably get 3-4 years at a modest price. If he has a break out year, another ASG appearance, improved defensive game I think they look into making a big commitment while keeping the cap hit manageable.

Minister of Offence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2011, 04:02 PM
  #40
SenatorsLegionary
Member of Sens Army
 
SenatorsLegionary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Montreal, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 370
vCash: 500
I'd try to get him signed for 4 years, thats one year before his UFA years start to kick in. By then, we will have a better idea of the type of player he is and what he can consistently bring to the team. I'm not a fan of long contracts because they limit a team's flexibility and you never know what can happen to a player or team during that time (lots of bad contracts similar to Chicago with Campbell and Huet or significant injuries like Dipietro in NY); so it is always nice to have contracts that gives the team room to manoeuvre if moves need to be made.

I would attempt to sign him to a 4yr/$13-16 million contract and then make a more insightful decision on his extension a year before he hits free agency. I liked Fuhr's deal as well even though it condradicts my philosophy on contracts, but the way he structured it is smart with a nice cap hit and I'd have no problems with it.

SenatorsLegionary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2011, 04:14 PM
  #41
ShotDownCrosby
Registered User
 
ShotDownCrosby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by koreaboy View Post
no, he's not. he simply isn't. we HOPE he will be, he could end up being that, but right how after a season and a half he hasn't proven that he's a superstar yet. until he does, you can't pay him like one.
He definitely shows he could easily become a superstar. I mean, 45 points on a team who, well, lacked a HUGE amount of offense, is pretty awesome. I mean, as far as points goes, he was 17th in the league for defensemen. Getting 45 points on a team who is 29th for scoring is even MORE impressive.

Of course, I think for Karlsson to be a complete superstar he needs to be more defensive. But I'd say he's already got the offensive super-star status.

That being said, I would hope he'd get more like 3-3.5 million a year for 3-4 years... rather than 4+ million (maybe that's low balling, but its been one year). I don't think he's QUITE there yet.

ShotDownCrosby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2011, 04:18 PM
  #42
SpezDispenser
Registered User
 
SpezDispenser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 14,390
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by koreaboy View Post
no, he's not. he simply isn't. we HOPE he will be, he could end up being that, but right how after a season and a half he hasn't proven that he's a superstar yet. until he does, you can't pay him like one.
He's well on his way. An All-Star already, 40+ points IIRC, only gonna improve. The shorter a contract you give him as an RFA, the more you'll have to pay when it's over. Luckily for all of us, Murray can handle this.

SpezDispenser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2011, 04:51 PM
  #43
OmniSens
@OmniSenators
 
OmniSens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 37,823
vCash: 106
Send a message via Skype™ to OmniSens
4 years - 15.75M

2.5
3.75
4.0
5.5

OmniSens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2011, 05:42 PM
  #44
Northern Neighbour
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,683
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruutu Culo View Post
I'd try to get him signed for 4 years, thats one year before his UFA years start to kick in. By then, we will have a better idea of the type of player he is and what he can consistently bring to the team. I'm not a fan of long contracts because they limit a team's flexibility and you never know what can happen to a player or team during that time (lots of bad contracts similar to Chicago with Campbell and Huet or significant injuries like Dipietro in NY); so it is always nice to have contracts that gives the team room to manoeuvre if moves need to be made.

I would attempt to sign him to a 4yr/$13-16 million contract and then make a more insightful decision on his extension a year before he hits free agency. I liked Fuhr's deal as well even though it condradicts my philosophy on contracts, but the way he structured it is smart with a nice cap hit and I'd have no problems with it.
Four years actually takes him to his UFA age, as a four-year deal would be added to his 3-year entry level contract. Three years takes him to one year before UFA.

Northern Neighbour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2011, 05:50 PM
  #45
Droc
Classless
 
Droc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: In my house.
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,352
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OmniSens View Post
4 years - 15.75M

2.5
3.75
4.0
5.5
this


I cant see him going over 4 years....
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenzZen View Post
We've never had a player like this coming off an ELC. Actually- we've just flat out never had a player like this.
True, and he knows that, and that means money.

Droc is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2011, 11:13 PM
  #46
SenatorsLegionary
Member of Sens Army
 
SenatorsLegionary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Montreal, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Neighbour View Post
Four years actually takes him to his UFA age, as a four-year deal would be added to his 3-year entry level contract. Three years takes him to one year before UFA.
Oops! my bad! I was basing off of the OP who mentioned that he had 5 years left before UFA.

In that case I think the smartest move would be a three year contract.

SenatorsLegionary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2011, 11:36 PM
  #47
Lexicon Devil
Registered User
 
Lexicon Devil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 8,343
vCash: 500
Ideally, 12 years at less than $60 million.

Offering a 4-year contract is stupid. Offer either 8+ years or a 2-year. Make him turn down $50 million if he wants his UFA so bad.

Lexicon Devil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2011, 01:17 AM
  #48
Batali Crocs*
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,163
vCash: 500
I'd wait on signing him to a monster 6+ year deal until he actually commits to playing adequate NHL defense.

Batali Crocs* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2011, 08:47 AM
  #49
TheSpaceCoyote
Sens fan in NL
 
TheSpaceCoyote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Rand McNally
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,534
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OmniSens View Post
4 years - 15.75M

2.5
3.75
4.0
5.5
This would be perfect. 4 Years is a great length, he will still be a RFA when it's over and then if he earns it he can cash in big.
Also if we're careful with the cap I don't think we would have to chose between Karlsson and Runblad in a few years (especially after having learned from the Chara/Redden error).

TheSpaceCoyote is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2011, 09:29 AM
  #50
Northern Neighbour
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,683
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by In Anderson We Trust View Post
This would be perfect. 4 Years is a great length, he will still be a RFA when it's over and then if he earns it he can cash in big.
Also if we're careful with the cap I don't think we would have to chose between Karlsson and Runblad in a few years (especially after having learned from the Chara/Redden error).
As I stated before, 4 years wouldn't be the ideal length for an extension because that takes him to UFA. Karlsson has played two years in the NHL and has one year remaining on his entry-level contract. A four-year extension takes him to 7 years of NHL experience and, therefore, to UFA.

Players have to be 27 years old or have a minimum of 7 years of NHL experience to become a FA. Karlsson is eligible to be a FA when he's 26 years old.

With this in mind, the Sens should try to sign him to either a 3-year contract, which would take him to one year before UFA, or to a deal that is 5 years or longer. A four-year deal would be a bad decision.

Northern Neighbour 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 01:59 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.