HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Dallas Stars
Notices

Stars re-sign Lehtonen (5 years/$29.5M)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-14-2012, 09:17 AM
  #1
Ambassador Of Fun
Registered User
 
Ambassador Of Fun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,213
vCash: 500
Stars re-sign Lehtonen (5 years/$29.5M)

Per Heika and Mark's Twitter.

Ambassador Of Fun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-14-2012, 09:22 AM
  #2
Eller81
Registered User
 
Eller81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 170
vCash: 500
5-yr 29.5 million hahhahaha

Eller81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-14-2012, 09:23 AM
  #3
MB94
@MBFarina94
 
MB94's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Ottawa, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,345
vCash: 500
UNREAL

MB94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-14-2012, 09:33 AM
  #4
Stars99Lobo37
Moderator
Away Games Seen: 13
 
Stars99Lobo37's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sec 315 - Richardson
Country: United States
Posts: 42,916
vCash: 1495
5 years? good Lord

__________________
"Now when people ask me where I'm from, I tell them Texas. Dallas, Texas." - Mike Modano, March 8th, 2014

Bossier-Shreveport Mudbugs - 1997 to 2011 - WPHL Champions 1998, 1999, 2000 - CHL Champions 2011
Stars99Lobo37 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-14-2012, 09:48 AM
  #5
Juzmo
|Ässät|Stars|Sabres|
 
Juzmo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Country: Finland
Posts: 36,983
vCash: 6969
Very nice signing if he stays healthy.


Last edited by Juzmo: 09-14-2012 at 09:54 AM.
Juzmo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-14-2012, 10:05 AM
  #6
Ambassador Of Fun
Registered User
 
Ambassador Of Fun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,213
vCash: 500
I guess I'm fine with it. Would have liked it to have been 3-4 years, but he's been our best player the past 2 years so I can't complain.

Ambassador Of Fun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-14-2012, 10:07 AM
  #7
BigG44
HFB Partner
 
BigG44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,336
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stars99Lobo37 View Post
5 years? good Lord
I have to be honest ... I couldn't care less that it was 5 years.

I don't think he'll play out his contract in Dallas if Campbell's career goes as some project, but the fact that this contract is worth less than $6 million and 5 years is unbelievable to me.

To me ... yeah that's good on GMJN and his staff to get the deal .. but more importantly it makes me feel like Lehtonen took a discount to be here which is so so amazing.


A player of his caliber can easily command close to $7 million.

BigG44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-14-2012, 10:19 AM
  #8
Ampersand
Dallas Stars Fan
 
Ampersand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Calgary
Country: Sweden
Posts: 1,448
vCash: 500
I don't understand how getting this deal done is so much easier, and cut n' dry when compared to Benn.

Still pleased with this though.

Ampersand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-14-2012, 10:26 AM
  #9
BigG44
HFB Partner
 
BigG44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,336
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ampersand View Post
I don't understand how getting this deal done is so much easier, and cut n' dry when compared to Benn.

Still pleased with this though.
This is just a guess, but I do feel like this could be the reason ....

Benn's camp probably would prefer a long-term deal like you're seeing for Hall, Eberle, Seguin, etc.

The Stars would ultimately prefer a short, probably 2 year, bridge contract, but at the very least I believe they want to stick to no more than 5 years. If the owners get their way on contracts, Benn's camp would have to take that type of deal. Based on the high number of extensions for 6+ years in the last few weeks, I'd say agents feel like there's a real possibility of term limits on contracts.

This is just wild speculation ... but the other thing that could be holding this up is Benn and the Stars want him to play in the AHL during the lockout. The NHL and NHLPA have agreed that only players on two-way contracts can play in the AHL in the event of a lockout. That means players like Larsen and Bachman who recently signed one-way deals can't play in Austin. We all know Jamie loves the novelty of playing with his brother. I for one wouldn't be shocked to see him sign a contract with the Texas Stars, but that couldn't happen if he's signed with Dallas.

BigG44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-14-2012, 10:30 AM
  #10
BigG44
HFB Partner
 
BigG44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,336
vCash: 500
Speaking of Benn ....

Quote:
Mike Heika ‏@MikeHeika

By the way, Stars have had discussions with Jamie Benn and his agent, but a new contract will probably have to wait until after new CBA.

BigG44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-14-2012, 11:11 AM
  #11
MetalGodAOD
Moderator
Star Rangers
 
MetalGodAOD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: New York City
Country: United States
Posts: 10,852
vCash: 500
I'm OK with this. Fair deal, not a steal and not really too overpaid. I think I would have been happier with 5.5mil and more importantly probably 4 years, but these aren't game breakers.

As far as Campbell's development goes, this probably is OK. Jimmy Howard didn't become a full starter until he was 25, which is what age Campbell will be when Lehtonen retires. Give him 2-3 years in the AHL, then 2 years as a backup with slightly more games started if his play warrants it. By 2017 he'll be ready to be the starter (or won't be if he's not good enough).

Worst case scenario we move Lehtonen in his last year like Big said. I'm just happy we tied him up instead of playing with uncertainty the next few years, hoping Campbell turns out for the best.

MetalGodAOD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-14-2012, 11:28 AM
  #12
MetalGodAOD
Moderator
Star Rangers
 
MetalGodAOD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: New York City
Country: United States
Posts: 10,852
vCash: 500
Oh my math was off since Kari has one more year left on his current contract.

Still the point stands, if Campbell forces us to trade Kari in 2015/2016/2017, he'll have 1-3 years left on his contract still, making us get more than just a rental's return. And if he doesn't, well we still have our proven goalie to fall back on.

MetalGodAOD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-14-2012, 11:54 AM
  #13
Cin
Buck Fettman.
 
Cin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Country: Thailand
Posts: 6,135
vCash: 513
Good deal, could command $7mil (open market) if he wanted to. Elite goalie stays in Dallas.

Cin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-14-2012, 12:48 PM
  #14
Alistar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Country: Azores
Posts: 8,294
vCash: 500
I don't care for this deal. Not one bit.

There's enough decent goaltenders in the league that the Stars could have found someone for 2-3 million short term to give them decent a performance until Campbell is ready. Goaltending performance is just too volatile to predict, taking a gamble on Lehtonen is risky even though he's been great for us so far.

Alistar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-14-2012, 01:12 PM
  #15
BigG44
HFB Partner
 
BigG44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,336
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alistar View Post
I don't care for this deal. Not one bit.

There's enough decent goaltenders in the league that the Stars could have found someone for 2-3 million short term to give them decent a performance until Campbell is ready. Goaltending performance is just too volatile to predict, taking a gamble on Lehtonen is risky even though he's been great for us so far.
I think the Chicago Blackhawks would disagree. Being cheap with goaltenders has taken them from a Stanley Cup Contender to just a good team that flames out in the playoffs.

There is no universal rule with goalies. Some teams win without them, some teams don't. When you have a guy that works as hard as Lehtonen has for this team, buys in 100% to your ideas, and he's your MVP ... you pay him. You got him for quite a bit less than the market value for a goalie. Those contracts I came up with were players mostly re-signing with their teams. On the open market, there's no question Lehtonen would have commanded top dollar ... likely up to $1+ million more a year.

More importantly ... it's not an albatross contract. Dallas has a comparatively small payroll to 75% of the teams in the league. A guy eating up a large chunk of cap space has to be an impact player. It's hard to argue that no one has made a bigger impact on Dallas in two years than Kari Lehtonen.

BigG44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-14-2012, 01:31 PM
  #16
Alistar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Country: Azores
Posts: 8,294
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigG44 View Post
I think the Chicago Blackhawks would disagree. Being cheap with goaltenders has taken them from a Stanley Cup Contender to just a good team that flames out in the playoffs.

There is no universal rule with goalies. Some teams win without them, some teams don't. When you have a guy that works as hard as Lehtonen has for this team, buys in 100% to your ideas, and he's your MVP ... you pay him. You got him for quite a bit less than the market value for a goalie. Those contracts I came up with were players mostly re-signing with their teams. On the open market, there's no question Lehtonen would have commanded top dollar ... likely up to $1+ million more a year.

More importantly ... it's not an albatross contract. Dallas has a comparatively small payroll to 75% of the teams in the league. A guy eating up a large chunk of cap space has to be an impact player. It's hard to argue that no one has made a bigger impact on Dallas in two years than Kari Lehtonen.
well I don't know that Chicago is your best argument there. Letting one mediocre goaltender go in Antti Niemi and replacing him with another hasn't done near as much to hurt their chances as losing all of that forward and defense depth and replacing it with nothing.

Much better goaltenders than Lehtonen have seen their careers just suddenly fall apart for no good reason. Goaltenders have a much wider range of performance from year to year than any other position, and it's hard for me to see Lehtonen performing well enough over that 5 year extension to earn those 30 million dollars. There are very few goaltenders in the league who have been consistently top 10 at their position from one year to the next. As you pointed out Dallas is a small payroll team, they can't afford to be paying players a premium or even what they are worth on the market. They need to be finding deals and getting value out of their contracts.

Alistar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-14-2012, 01:51 PM
  #17
Rune Forumwalker
Registered User
 
Rune Forumwalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,326
vCash: 500
Sounds like a good deal for both the player and team. The money is about on par, maybe a little less, than what he would be valued as on the open market, and the term is solid. 4-5 years is what I expected and hoped for. It helps to make sure Campbell won't have to be rushed to being a starter in the NHL.

Rune Forumwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-14-2012, 02:02 PM
  #18
MetalGodAOD
Moderator
Star Rangers
 
MetalGodAOD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: New York City
Country: United States
Posts: 10,852
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alistar View Post
Much better goaltenders than Lehtonen have seen their careers just suddenly fall apart for no good reason. Goaltenders have a much wider range of performance from year to year than any other position, and it's hard for me to see Lehtonen performing well enough over that 5 year extension to earn those 30 million dollars. There are very few goaltenders in the league who have been consistently top 10 at their position from one year to the next. As you pointed out Dallas is a small payroll team, they can't afford to be paying players a premium or even what they are worth on the market. They need to be finding deals and getting value out of their contracts.
I'd agree with you that goaltending is highly variable, and that we very well might see a subpar season or two from Lehtonen during these 5 years. But if the team D improves we could very well see a season above his past one as well. And to some extent I don't disagree with your philosophy. The problem is there aren't good FA options out there to bridge the gap till Campbell. Guys like Bobvrosky and Lindback were already signed and they're still unknowns. You have teams like CLB, TOR, and TBL who were all looking to roll the dice on cheap options in net, us walking away from Lehtonen to do the same would have been madness.

Not to mention the fact that the whole reason we'd be doing it - Campbell's emergence - isn't an 100% guarantee. There's a very good chance Campbell will not ever be better than Lehtonen. There's a very good chance he may not even make the NHL. It's too risky to walk away from a proven talent that works with your team, in his prime, just to roll the dice on unproven guys for cheap. Especially when your guy in the pipeline isn't a sure fire thing.


Last edited by MetalGodAOD: 09-14-2012 at 02:12 PM.
MetalGodAOD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-14-2012, 02:18 PM
  #19
MetalGodAOD
Moderator
Star Rangers
 
MetalGodAOD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: New York City
Country: United States
Posts: 10,852
vCash: 500
From Heika:

Quote:
The Stars were hoping to get Lehtonen for four years, but his camp wanted longer. They settled on five. They were hoping to get him for around $5 million, but the going rate for a goalie of his caliber is $6 million. So they decided to give him $5.9million.
Have a feeling the Lehtonen camp wanted 6 mil over 6 years, and the Stars paid him closer to what he wanted per year in order to settle down to 5 years.

Also this:

Quote:
Yes, young goalie Jack Campbell is a strong prospect, but he’s just a prospect. He probably won’t be ready to challenge Lehtonen for two or three more seasons. The Stars thought of that and gave Lehtonen a no-trade clause in the first two years of the deal, and a limited no-trade clause in the last three years.

MetalGodAOD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-14-2012, 02:21 PM
  #20
Stars99Lobo37
Moderator
Away Games Seen: 13
 
Stars99Lobo37's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sec 315 - Richardson
Country: United States
Posts: 42,916
vCash: 1495
It wouldn't be a Stars deal without a no trade clause.

Stars99Lobo37 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-14-2012, 02:43 PM
  #21
Frozen Failure
Best Threadkiller
 
Frozen Failure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,157
vCash: 2111
Send a message via AIM to Frozen Failure Send a message via Yahoo to Frozen Failure
Campbell wasn't going to turn heads in 2 years anyway. Which, while disappointing, is realistic. It's a "hey Kari we have offers on the table, do any of these pique your interest?" sort of contract after those two years.

Frozen Failure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-14-2012, 03:08 PM
  #22
piqued
Global Moderator
 
piqued's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 29,634
vCash: 20645
I'm alright with this, but I wouldn't say I'm a huge fan of the deal itself. More of a fan of just this meaning that Kari will be a Star well into the future.

Like Alistar, I have a hard time justifying big contracts for goalies. Anything over 5 million makes me nervous. That said, it's not too much over that mark, and the term is eminently reasonable.

I really couldn't care less how this effects Campbell. That mistake has already been made, you don't continue to make other mistakes in order to clear room for him. The only time you ever even start thinking about that is if he makes the NHL and starts dominating as the backup.

The bottom line is that we have one of the most talented goalies in the league under contract through the prime of his career -- and not beyond. Might be a slight overpayment (and I'm not talking about market value here but absolute theoretical value) but it's something you can live with. Definitely a case of a bird in the hand being worth 2 in the bush.

piqued is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-14-2012, 04:30 PM
  #23
LatvianTwist
Global Moderator
Milana <3
 
LatvianTwist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Houston
Country: Tibet
Posts: 17,598
vCash: 157
I like it. We should be able to afford it if he does have a bad year or two, not much of a problem IMO.

Sets us up perfectly with Campbell, too. If he busts, we still have Lehtonen. If he's only a back-up, we're set at goaltending for a while. And if you think LA and Vancouver have a goalie problem, then I'd love to have that problem if Campbell turns out like we think.

LatvianTwist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-14-2012, 04:36 PM
  #24
Primetimey
Registered User
 
Primetimey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,963
vCash: 50
One year longer than I like, but a good deal other than that.

Primetimey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-14-2012, 04:38 PM
  #25
Trillmike
Registered User
 
Trillmike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 3,347
vCash: 500
Don't know if you guys have watched it yet, but the Stars posted an interview with Joe. He talks about Kari and how his deal affects Campbell and Nihlstorp. He also talks about Benn. The ball is in Benn's court and he's waiting for a new CBA.

http://video.stars.nhl.com/videocent...86240&catid=-6

Trillmike 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 03:12 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.