HFBoards

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

Kings open contract talks with Jonathan Quick

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-26-2012, 06:53 PM
  #76
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post
Top 10 Highest Paid Goalies:
http://capgeek.com/leaders.php?type=...ion=G&limit=25
Pekka Rinne, 7 yrs, $7M
Henrik Lundqvist, 6 yrs, $6.875M
Roberto Luongo, 12 yrs, $6.714M
Ilya Bryzgalov, 9 yrs, $6.5M
Cam Ward, 6 yrs, $6.4M
Ryan Miller, 5 yrs, $6.25M
Niklas Backstrom, 4 yrs, $6M
Marc-Andre Fleury, 5 yrs, $5.5M
Miikka Kiprusoff, 6 yrs, $5M
Rick DiPietro, 15 yrs, $4.5M

All of those goalies are older than Quick. In five years, Quick will be 31, in his prime, and if he continues to be among the best goalies in the league, he is going to be even more expensive to retain at 31 (which is how old Luongo was when he signed his 12 year deal).

If you listened to Lombardi talk about Quick yesterday on NHL Live, you'll realize just how much him and the organization values Quick as a person and as a player. He was the most consistent King this past season and should have been in contention for the Hart Trophy. The Kings will make Quick among the richest goalies in the league and he will be locked up for a very long time.
And the goalies that are in bold all play for teams that are not exactly happy with their current situation in terms of goaltending.

If Quick is still great at age 31, pay him again for another 3 or 4 seasons. Just because Dean jokingly said they are working on a 25-year deal for Quick, doesn't mean an extremely long term is a good idea.

KINGS17 is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 06:55 PM
  #77
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 31,402
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
And the goalies that are in bold all play for teams that are not exactly happy with their current situation in terms of goaltending.

If Quick is still great at age 31, pay him again for another 3 or 4 seasons.
Look at what Bryzgalov, Luongo, Miller and Backstrom signed when they were in their 30s. Your nuts if you think Quick is going to sign a 3 or 4 year deal when he's 31. When a player reaches that point in his career, he's going to want long term security, just as those players did.

Your sadly mistaken if you think Quick is going to do that.

Ziggy Stardust is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 06:58 PM
  #78
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post
Look at what Bryzgalov, Luongo, Miller and Backstrom signed when they were in their 30s. Your nuts if you think Quick is going to sign a 3 or 4 year deal when he's 31. When a player reaches that point in his career, he's going to want long term security, just as those players did.

Your sadly mistaken if you think Quick is going to do that.
Then it would be time to say goodbye. That's why Dean keeps the goalie pipeline well stocked. You don't give a 31 year old goalie a long term deal. It's dumb. I think the fact that the teams you brought up aren't happy about it proves my point.

No reason to repeat another organization's mistake.

KINGS17 is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 07:19 PM
  #79
CNS
A World Alone
 
CNS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 10,252
vCash: 672
15 years, $75-80M.

CNS is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 08:05 PM
  #80
spicychicken
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 23
vCash: 500
Wait until the new CBA is signed then talk $$

spicychicken is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 08:08 PM
  #81
KopitarFAN
Reno Sucks!
 
KopitarFAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Lost Wages, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 9,440
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by spicychicken View Post
Wait until the new CBA is signed then talk $$
No way.

For all we know that could be in early september and Quick could decide he doesn't want to talk during camp and into the season, then we're ****ed.

KopitarFAN is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 08:09 PM
  #82
Shellz
Registered User
 
Shellz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: California
Posts: 17,312
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by spicychicken View Post
Wait until the new CBA is signed then talk $$
Why? Seems pretty idiotic.

Shellz is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 08:11 PM
  #83
Asheru
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 585
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
Then it would be time to say goodbye. That's why Dean keeps the goalie pipeline well stocked. You don't give a 31 year old goalie a long term deal. It's dumb. I think the fact that the teams you brought up aren't happy about it proves my point.

No reason to repeat another organization's mistake.
It's not going to be a popular opinion, but I agree. The league is full of examples of huge goalie contracts that turned out to be a bad idea.

There's a lot more danger in overspending on goaltending since the salary cap was put in than any other position. We don't know what kind of performance Quick is going to put in next year, let along the next seven or ten. It pays to be able to be flexible.

Rinne is good, but Nashville was dumb. I don't want to be like them.

Asheru is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 08:20 PM
  #84
saintsnsoldiers
The Nolanator
 
saintsnsoldiers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Logan, Utah
Country: United States
Posts: 2,026
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
Locking him up is fine. Locking him up for 8 years and more than $56M is dumb.

As I said, I think 5 years and $33M is fair to both sides. The Nashville contract with Rinne is stupid.
This is my thinking to, it seems all the teams with overpaid goalies struggle keeping a team together. 7 for Doughty and 7 for Quick is alot on the backend. Its about keeping a good team together with good salaries that fit. Not just throwing money around because he may have deserved it. Personaly I think DL is smarter then that and will keep thigs in check,

saintsnsoldiers is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 08:22 PM
  #85
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 31,402
vCash: 500
The Rinne signing hasn't hampered the Predators one bit. I don't get where a few of you think it has harmed them. How has it harmed them in any way? They defeated the Red Wings in the first round and Rinne was hung out to dry against Phoenix on many of the goals that the Predators surrendered.

I don't see the Rangers being dissatisfied with the contract they gave to Lundqvist. It isn't as if the Kings are extending an old veteran on the downside of his career or an unproven netminder. It's a goalie who is years away from entering his prime who has been getting better every year and has been the most consistent performer on the team.

Given the comments made by Lombardi, he seems to indicate that the talks are just a formality, which leads me to believe that they already may have a dollar figure in mind and that the term of the deal is being negotiated.

Ziggy Stardust is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 08:41 PM
  #86
KingLB
Registered User
 
KingLB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 7,198
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post
The Rinne signing hasn't hampered the Predators one bit. I don't get where a few of you think it has harmed them. How has it harmed them in any way? They defeated the Red Wings in the first round and Rinne was hung out to dry against Phoenix on many of the goals that the Predators surrendered.

I don't see the Rangers being dissatisfied with the contract they gave to Lundqvist. It isn't as if the Kings are extending an old veteran on the downside of his career or an unproven netminder. It's a goalie who is years away from entering his prime who has been getting better every year and has been the most consistent performer on the team.

Given the comments made by Lombardi, he seems to indicate that the talks are just a formality, which leads me to believe that they already may have a dollar figure in mind and that the term of the deal is being negotiated.
Really Ziggy? Really? Your better than this. You know the Preds are a budget team, that 1.5-2 mil that Rinne is getting paid is 1.5-2m that could be going to a real first line center or a real first line winger...Or hell keeping their 2 best players....

I agree with others, goalies to anything over 5 years is just bad news...especially a goalie like Quick that depends so much on his athletic ability.

KingLB is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 08:42 PM
  #87
Live in the Now
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Live in the Now's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: LA
Country: United States
Posts: 31,498
vCash: 50
It would only go towards keeping their best players if they wanted to stay there. Which they don't. And it would go towards a first line forward if they could attract one in FA. Which they never will.

The latter applies to us which is why we have to keep our best players, including Quick.

Live in the Now is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 08:46 PM
  #88
bobafettish*
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,961
vCash: 500
40/6

bobafettish* is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 08:49 PM
  #89
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 31,402
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingLB View Post
Really Ziggy? Really? Your better than this. You know the Preds are a budget team, that 1.5-2 mil that Rinne is getting paid is 1.5-2m that could be going to a real first line center or a real first line winger...Or hell keeping their 2 best players....

I agree with others, goalies to anything over 5 years is just bad news...especially a goalie like Quick that depends so much on his athletic ability.
They committed to Rinne to show that they'd be willing to show the same commitment to Suter and Weber. It prevented Rinne from hitting the UFA market. How has his contract prevented them from adding players? Show me an example, because I don't see how you can support this statement without any. How can you prove that the Rinne contract is handcuffing them from signing Suter and Weber? You can't, thus your claims are silly.

The Predators aren't the biggest spenders, they never have been, but the Rinne deal isn't going to prevent them from making moves. They might lose Suter because he wants to test free agency, not because they can't afford him. And Weber is a RFA who will get signed, but we don't know for how long as he may also choose to test free agency a year from now.

Ziggy Stardust is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 09:01 PM
  #90
KingLB
Registered User
 
KingLB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 7,198
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post
They committed to Rinne to show that they'd be willing to show the same commitment to Suter and Weber. It prevented Rinne from hitting the UFA market. How has his contract prevented them from adding players? Show me an example, because I don't see how you can support this statement without any. How can you prove that the Rinne contract is handcuffing them from signing Suter and Weber? You can't, thus your claims are silly.

The Predators aren't the biggest spenders, they never have been, but the Rinne deal isn't going to prevent them from making moves. They might lose Suter because he wants to test free agency, not because they can't afford him. And Weber is a RFA who will get signed, but we don't know for how long as he may also choose to test free agency a year from now.
Can't we say the exact same thing about there being no evidence it hasn't hurt them?? Hell if it was to used to try and keep Suter/Weber if one goes somewhere else does that prove its a failure? And if you think the contract was only given to intice others, doesn't that show that you really don't think he was worth it, but they had to do it to "look good".

Also, the Preds had to ship out Franson so the Leafs would eat Lombardi's contract....wouldn't that show that they were impacted financially??

KingLB is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 09:08 PM
  #91
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post
The Rinne signing hasn't hampered the Predators one bit. I don't get where a few of you think it has harmed them. How has it harmed them in any way? They defeated the Red Wings in the first round and Rinne was hung out to dry against Phoenix on many of the goals that the Predators surrendered.

I don't see the Rangers being dissatisfied with the contract they gave to Lundqvist. It isn't as if the Kings are extending an old veteran on the downside of his career or an unproven netminder. It's a goalie who is years away from entering his prime who has been getting better every year and has been the most consistent performer on the team.

Given the comments made by Lombardi, he seems to indicate that the talks are just a formality, which leads me to believe that they already may have a dollar figure in mind and that the term of the deal is being negotiated.
Yet. Again I am not so much against Rinne's cap hit, while I do think they overpaid by about a $1M as season, as I am agaisnt the term. What is Nashville going to do if Rinne starts sucking in 3 or 4 years? They aren't going to be able to unload that contract, and as good as Rinne is he hasn't won jack yet.

Way to cherry pick with Lundqvist.

The term may be the most complicated part of the Quick deal. I am sure Dean probably offerred him at least a couple of choices. I hope none of them are more than 5 years.

KINGS17 is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 09:10 PM
  #92
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 31,402
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingLB View Post
Can't we say the exact same thing about there being no evidence it hasn't hurt them?? Hell if it was to used to try and keep Suter/Weber if one goes somewhere else does that prove its a failure? And if you think the contract was only given to intice others, doesn't that show that you really don't think he was worth it, but they had to do it to "look good".

Also, the Preds had to ship out Franson so the Leafs would eat Lombardi's contract....wouldn't that show that they were impacted financially??
The Rinne contract signing and Suter and/or Weber walking as UFAs are two different matters. It helps to show the commitment, but it is out of their control if Suter or Weber aren't as committed. In order for them to prevent Rinne from becoming a UFA, they had to make that large of a commitment.

It is a tad bit more than Lundqvist's contract, but look at the situation and market for both clubs. Poille was in a more compromising position in having to secure Rinne. He has been the best player on Nashville, back-to-back Vezina nominations, his record over the past four years has been phenomenal, and he just came off a season recording 43 wins and only 18 regulation losses. Rinne is showing no signs of regression and he's 29, his best years are still ahead of him.

What's to happen if the Kings sign Quick to a four or five year deal, continues to be among the top 5 goalies in the NHL throughout the contract, and is set to hit free agency at 30-31. The Kings could be in a rather crappy situation then, and that is something you have to consider and something you would want to avoid.

Ziggy Stardust is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 09:11 PM
  #93
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post
They committed to Rinne to show that they'd be willing to show the same commitment to Suter and Weber. It prevented Rinne from hitting the UFA market. How has his contract prevented them from adding players? Show me an example, because I don't see how you can support this statement without any. How can you prove that the Rinne contract is handcuffing them from signing Suter and Weber? You can't, thus your claims are silly.

The Predators aren't the biggest spenders, they never have been, but the Rinne deal isn't going to prevent them from making moves. They might lose Suter because he wants to test free agency, not because they can't afford him. And Weber is a RFA who will get signed, but we don't know for how long as he may also choose to test free agency a year from now.
How is that working out for the Preds so far?

Again, not talking about Rinne's cap hit, talking about the 7 years.

KINGS17 is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 09:13 PM
  #94
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 31,402
vCash: 500
What should the Predators regret about signing Rinne? I don't follow. The guy is one of the top three goalies in the NHL and one of the few who posted over 40 wins. He had a stretch of 11 consecutive wins. I somehow doubt that they're displeased by having their best player locked up for a long time. As for how it's working out for the Predators, they ousted the Red Wings in 5 games in the playoffs with Rinne posting solid numbers in 10 playoff games. They also prevented Rinne from becoming a UFA this summer. How is that a bad thing? You guys are not making any sense.

Ziggy Stardust is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 09:21 PM
  #95
KingLB
Registered User
 
KingLB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 7,198
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post
The Rinne contract signing and Suter and/or Weber walking as UFAs are two different matters. It helps to show the commitment, but it is out of their control if Suter or Weber aren't as committed. In order for them to prevent Rinne from becoming a UFA, they had to make that large of a commitment.

It is a tad bit more than Lundqvist's contract, but look at the situation and market for both clubs. Poille was in a more compromising position in having to secure Rinne. He has been the best player on Nashville, back-to-back Vezina nominations, his record over the past four years has been phenomenal, and he just came off a season recording 43 wins and only 18 regulation losses. Rinne is showing no signs of regression and he's 29, his best years are still ahead of him.

What's to happen if the Kings sign Quick to a four or five year deal, continues to be among the top 5 goalies in the NHL throughout the contract, and is set to hit free agency at 30-31. The Kings could be in a rather crappy situation then, and that is something you have to consider and something you would want to avoid.
How would it be any different then the situation now? Except the Kings would have 5 more years experience to evaluate Quick not to mention would mitigate risk.

Also using wins/losses is weak as well...how many wins has Quick had the last couple years vs how many he had this year....which season was better??

KingLB is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 09:36 PM
  #96
Rorschach
Fearful Symmetry
 
Rorschach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 6,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
Then it would be time to say goodbye. That's why Dean keeps the goalie pipeline well stocked. You don't give a 31 year old goalie a long term deal. It's dumb. I think the fact that the teams you brought up aren't happy about it proves my point.

No reason to repeat another organization's mistake.
Agree, we got here by not making the mistakes the other teams have made.

Rorschach is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 09:38 PM
  #97
Gentle Ben Kenobi
That's no moon......
 
Gentle Ben Kenobi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Tatooine
Posts: 20,587
vCash: 863
My guess

Hometown discount 5-6 aav
What I expect 6-6.5 aav
If he bends us over 7+

Gentle Ben Kenobi is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 09:55 PM
  #98
Reclamation Project
#BeatLA
 
Reclamation Project's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 18,822
vCash: 592
7 years, 48 million. Without blinking.

Reclamation Project is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 10:07 PM
  #99
Martyros
Registered User
 
Martyros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Holly Hood
Country: Armenia
Posts: 5,456
vCash: 500
i'm thinking 8 years, 6.8 AAV

Martyros is offline  
Old
06-26-2012, 10:09 PM
  #100
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 31,402
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reclamation Project View Post
7 years, 48 million. Without blinking.
That would be ideal. Once they have that commitment, they could also look into moving Bernier and maybe sign a cheaper backup (say Montoya or Clemmensen) and look into upgrading the #2 LW spot since it seems that Penner won't be back.

Ziggy Stardust 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 04:18 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.