HFBoards

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

Evander Kane.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-07-2012, 12:47 PM
  #76
Huffer
Registered User
 
Huffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,423
vCash: 1125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Tagli Eddy View Post
Thats worse case possible... plus Nashville has cap issues and Parise does't seem pumped about playing in NJ anymore. You might not be able to see it now but 4y/15M is a great deal if he turns out like i think he might...
It has nothing to do with the money you proposed. As Guerzy and others have so eloquently stated, signing a guy like Kane to a 4 year deal that takes him right to UFA status doesn't make a lot of sense.

Huffer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2012, 12:55 PM
  #77
WWoJeff
WWo Co-Founder
 
WWoJeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 48
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grind View Post
As for "not knowing" when he got his concussion, this is quite normal you'll find(hits compounded by other hits, multiple tumbles game after game, etc). You'll also find a lot of players had (until the last 2-3 years) the tendency to play through concussion symptoms and shrug them off. As stated, until 3-4 years ago, this was definitely the Rule NOT the exception.

As for Kane's public image, lets be clear on what Kane is getting paid to do: Play hockey. He's not paid to be the voice of our children or the Canadian Hockey Pope, he's paid to put the puck in the net. So far, he's done that admirably and I'd love to have him resigned.

Could he have a little more humility or stay out of the spotlight- sure he could, but he could also be a lot worse. I'm not going to fault a 20 year old for making one mistake (in the off chance there is any weight to aforementioned rumors).

Finally, not one of us is in the dressing room, which is where his "attitude" really counts. Claude Noel, Chevy, etc, are in the dressing room and they will make the correct decision regarding this players attitude and how it affects the locker room dynamic.

Anyone calling for a trade should due to questions about character should be given as much credibility as a blind man critiquing a painting. I won't believe a word of "distractions" or "attitude" until i hear it from the horse's mouth. The horse being anyone actually tied to the Jets organization.
Could not have said it any better myself. In fact I probably would have ruined it by rambling too much

I loved the Illegal Curve post and have to agree with the logic they had in it. Kane should fall in the range of the Phil Kessel salary as I suspect in a couple years that Evanders career arc will follow what Kessel has done.

Either way I'll be happy to see him locked up for 4-5 years under $5 million cap hit.

I think the next thread we need is what will Pavelec's new contract be

WWoJeff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2012, 12:55 PM
  #78
surixon
Registered User
 
surixon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,577
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guerzy View Post
Whatever the dollars and cents come down to, he's got 4 seasons beginning next year until he'll be a UFA, so it makes no sense to sign him to a term of 4 or 5 years. We'll lose out on all bargaining power if we do that.

If we want to get the most out of this young player, I think it would be wise to sign him to a 2-3 year deal, then if we feel he is a piece we want to lock up to a 5,6 or 7 year deal, and he is interested in that, then we do so while he's still a RFA and a year or two away from having UFA status. If we feel otherwise about him being a Jet long-term, or he does, we can deal him and he'll still be in a good position contractually for other teams to have some power with him as a RFA. There is absolutely no need or reason to go long-term right now. In my opinion you don't go long-term with a player until the final year or two of him being a RFA, that way you lock him up through his prime years as well as his UFA years. That's what you want, in my opinion.

The absolute last thing we want is to have a case of Zach Parise/New Jersey or Ryan Suter/Nashville on our hands. These guys have contracts that take them right up to being a UFA this summer... that is extremely risky. If we play our cards right, we could sign Kane this summer to a 2 year deal, which would then bring us to the summer of 2014 in which Kane would still have 2 more years of RFA status. At that time, we could lock him up to a 7-8 year deal, which would leave him playing the first 2 years of the contract in RFA status, and we would get the next 5-6 years of his UFA years. That is key, in my opinion. If we do that, we would have Kane locked up until he was at least 30 years of age.

I think we have to first and foremost play this with the term. We don't want to lose a young player like this at the young age of 24. And, believe it or not, he'll be just 24 (as his birth date is in August) on the first day of being UFA eligible on July 1st, 2016. Talk about young.
One thing that no one has brought up yet is that there is a possibility that RFA will drop again in the next round of CBA neogotiations. If the owners are bent on getting the revenue split closer to 50/50 they will have to give up some concessions.

surixon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2012, 01:44 PM
  #79
Guerzy
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Guerzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,497
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ps241 View Post
great post again and you are on a roll today Guerzy

If things continue to progress the way they have so far this year the bolded part above is what I would like to see the Jets do with Bogosian in the summer of 2013 when coincidentally Zach will have two years left as an RFA

normally I don't like the long term deals but there are a few exceptions (think Toews in Chicago) and I would love have Zack here through the prime of his career especially if his game continues to progress the next two seasons like I think it will.
Certainly agree. In todays day and age, it is indeed risky to sign a player to a long-term deal (7, 8, 10 years, etc), but truth be told with some franchise/cornerstone pieces, you just have to. If you don't, someone else gladly will.

Re; Bogosian, I was very happy to see the CBC guys break down video of Zach and give him glowing praise on the weekend. Great to see.

__________________
http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=43225&dateline=141082  3903
"The ‘now’ is very good in Chicago. The ‘now’ back in the days when they were drafting first, second and third? It wasn’t very good. But the core of fans that stuck with them, if you asked them now, I betcha they’d say it was worth it.” - Kevin Cheveldayoff
Guerzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2012, 02:00 PM
  #80
Anchor Town
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Sweden
Posts: 3,392
vCash: 500
He'd be getting at least $4M, would probably be smart to offer him more if you plan to keep him long term. And the best asset management would be to sign him for 3 years.

Anchor Town is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2012, 02:26 PM
  #81
wpgsilver
HFBoards Sponsor
 
wpgsilver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,323
vCash: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guerzy View Post
Whatever the dollars and cents come down to, he's got 4 seasons beginning next year until he'll be a UFA, so it makes no sense to sign him to a term of 4 or 5 years. We'll lose out on all bargaining power if we do that.

If we want to get the most out of this young player, I think it would be wise to sign him to a 2-3 year deal, then if we feel he is a piece we want to lock up to a 5,6 or 7 year deal, and he is interested in that, then we do so while he's still a RFA and a year or two away from having UFA status. If we feel otherwise about him being a Jet long-term, or he does, we can deal him and he'll still be in a good position contractually for other teams to have some power with him as a RFA. There is absolutely no need or reason to go long-term right now. In my opinion you don't go long-term with a player until the final year or two of him being a RFA, that way you lock him up through his prime years as well as his UFA years. That's what you want, in my opinion.

The absolute last thing we want is to have a case of Zach Parise/New Jersey or Ryan Suter/Nashville on our hands. These guys have contracts that take them right up to being a UFA this summer... that is extremely risky. If we play our cards right, we could sign Kane this summer to a 2 year deal, which would then bring us to the summer of 2014 in which Kane would still have 2 more years of RFA status. At that time, we could lock him up to a 7-8 year deal, which would leave him playing the first 2 years of the contract in RFA status, and we would get the next 5-6 years of his UFA years. That is key, in my opinion. If we do that, we would have Kane locked up until he was at least 30 years of age.

I think we have to first and foremost play this with the term. We don't want to lose a young player like this at the young age of 24. And, believe it or not, he'll be just 24 (as his birth date is in August) on the first day of being UFA eligible on July 1st, 2016. Talk about young.
Great Post!

wpgsilver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2012, 02:37 PM
  #82
veganhunter
Mexico City Coyotes!
 
veganhunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,820
vCash: 891
I was thinking around Luke Schenn money depending on the term of the contract am I off base with that?

veganhunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2012, 03:57 PM
  #83
jorbjorb
BROWN TOWN
 
jorbjorb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 489
vCash: 500
Jets should sign him 3 year 6 million contract. Yes only 2 million a year but they should also offer to pay for all his meals.


Jorb

jorbjorb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2012, 04:25 PM
  #84
Shrimper
Trick or ruddy treat
 
Shrimper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Essex
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 70,015
vCash: 500
Was it Kane or Byfuglien who had the boating incident last year?

Shrimper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2012, 04:27 PM
  #85
King Woodballs
MVP! MVP! MVP!
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Your Mind
Posts: 32,532
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrimper View Post
Was it Kane or Byfuglien who had the boating incident last year?
Buff

King Woodballs 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 06:48 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.