They're going to regret one of the Voracek, Hartnell, or Simmonds contracts. I think it's a bit odd to lock up 2nd liners for so long, but whatever floats their boat.
They're counting on young talent playing above their contracts. Given the players they have in the fold it's not a bad plan.
They're going to regret one of the Voracek, Hartnell, or Simmonds contracts. I think it's a bit odd to lock up 2nd liners for so long, but whatever floats their boat.
Well, considering Hartnell - Giroux - Voracek is their first line for the future, two of them make sense.
Hartnell will be Morrowesque in trade proposals when he's half way through this deal. No value, old, used up at 33 like everyone else. He's not a first line guy, Giroux will have his work cut out padding Hartnell's stats for the next half decade.
Am I the only one who thinks that Hall deal is terrible?
I just don't get the hype around him. Don't see him ever putting up more than 35 if he can stay healthy, regardless of what Edmonton fans will say.
If Hall spends most of the contract injured then yes it will be terrible, but that's a risk that you take with any long-term contract. The money isn't that terrible either. Yes, he is getting paid based on potential, but he's shown improvement each season. Most Dallas fans are willing to hand Benn $5.5 million a season. Why shouldn't Hall get $6 million. Compare each players first two seasons in the NHL. Hall scored more goals and had a better PPG ratio than Benn and did so at a younger age. Hall may not be Stamkos or Crosby, but it seems like he'll be a solid offensive player. As Piqued pointed out, Edmonton just locked up a talented young player for an additional seven years. That's a major benefit to Edmonton who has struggled to attract FAs.
It has the possibility to be a great value deal in 2-3 years. That deal is important to Edmonton for a number of reasons, one being that they are showing their young players a willingness to pay them. There's risk for both sides in this deal. Hall could blow up and become a 90 point player in which case that's a very good value. He could also end up a 50-65 point scorer either due to injuries or just not reaching his full potential in which case he'd be overpaid.
I also think what they're trying to do is set forth a reasonable annual salary that they could pay each of their young studs in the future - a sort of New Jersey Devils type of situation.
Exactly. It's sending notice to their own players and teams around the league that they intend on retaining their young talent this time and not serving as a farm system for the rest of the NHL.
I have a feeling the Benn camp will hold out until training camp and Joe will be forced to sign him to a comparable of Hall/Seguin/Kane.
Yep. Benn doesn't want to so much wait for a new CBA (Joe was very misleading here with that quote) as he wants to wait for the Stars to crack. Which they will. Benn holds most of the cards here. He knows the team is toast without him. None of that feel-good stuff from Gaglardi goes anywhere if the season resumes and Cody Eakin is the #1 center.
The smart thing would be to sign him to one of those similar contracts. Honestly, it seems like a blessing because the money isn't outrageous per year in any of those deals and all of these comparable players are signing similar contracts. Sign Benn to one and be done with it.
I've said all along that if they go the bridge contract route they will probably screw themselves by having to pay more for him in the long term because I fully expect him to continue to put up more points. As soon as he has an 80 point season he will price himself out of these 5.5-6 mil/yr contracts.
