HFBoards

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

Play the GM..

View Poll Results: How much money would you be willing to throw at Suter?
10 years at 7 million 11 23.40%
10 years at 7.5 million 20 42.55%
10 years at 8 million 11 23.40%
10 years at 8.5 million 5 10.64%
Voters: 47. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-26-2012, 10:57 PM
  #1
RedWinged
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Country: United States
Posts: 35
vCash: 500
Play the GM..

How much are you willing to spend on Suter?

I am assuming it will need to be a 10 year (life time deal) in order to get him to sign. Ergo, now the key would how big of a cap hit are you willing to accept?

RedWinged is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2012, 11:05 PM
  #2
The Zetterberg Era
Moderator
RIP Octopi
 
The Zetterberg Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ft. Myers, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 23,639
vCash: 500
I voted for the second one but I would be willing to give him 13 years and 100 million. So actually 7.69 cap hit, maybe we could get him down from that. But he said he wants a life contract, I would give it to him.

The real dream would be talking him into 13 years 85, keeps his cap hit around 6.5. But I really think they can't miss on Suter, I hope Mr. I front loads his contract to hurt a lot of the pursuers.

The Zetterberg Era is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2012, 11:50 PM
  #3
needzmoarcleary
I'm Back
 
needzmoarcleary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Detroit
Posts: 1,315
vCash: 500
I went with 10 years at 8. Just get the deal done, I'm sick of waiting and wondering. If he signs it'll be huge weight off of our shoulders..however a few other weights still remain.

needzmoarcleary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 12:14 AM
  #4
Xvash2
Registered User
 
Xvash2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,094
vCash: 500
I would not throw more than 5 years at a player.

Xvash2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 12:21 AM
  #5
Ricelund
We like our team.
 
Ricelund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New York, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xvash2 View Post
I would not throw more than 5 years at a player.
Good luck landing an elite UFA then.

Ricelund is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 12:24 AM
  #6
Bench
Moderator
Coffee. Pie. Owls.
 
Bench's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Twin Peaks
Posts: 9,366
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rice View Post
Good luck landing an elite UFA then.
Or even a not so elite UFA.



Only 5 more years left on that gem.

Bench is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 12:34 AM
  #7
Burmi
Registered User
 
Burmi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: 905
Posts: 720
vCash: 500
I picked first option. As much as I would like Suter to sign here, anything over 7 mil cap hit is too much.

Burmi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 12:41 AM
  #8
The Zetterberg Era
Moderator
RIP Octopi
 
The Zetterberg Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ft. Myers, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 23,639
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xvash2 View Post
I would not throw more than 5 years at a player.
Brian Burke is that you?

The Zetterberg Era is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 12:49 AM
  #9
Bench
Moderator
Coffee. Pie. Owls.
 
Bench's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Twin Peaks
Posts: 9,366
vCash: 500
Assuming the cap continues to rise slightly over the next 10 years, $8 million a year for a 37-year-old Suter wouldn't be that bad. For comparison, Pronger was due to make almost $5 million this year at age 37 (around 8% of the 2011 cap). And that contract went for another 5 years...

So yeah, Suter is the real deal as a #1 guy who can play PK, PP, and eat tons of minutes. $8 million is a ton now, but over 10 years it gets better and better. With a projected cap of $70 million in 2012, it's not hard to imagine we'd see an $80+ cap in 2022. That would put Suter at about a 10% hit, maybe less, on par with today's market.

That said, I'd work like hell to frontload and add trailing years, ala the Brad Richards contract (he made $12 million dollars this year with a cap hit of only $6.6... wow indeed!).

Bench is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 03:48 AM
  #10
InjuredChoker
Registered User
 
InjuredChoker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: LTIR or golf course
Posts: 25,364
vCash: 955
I would go as high as 8 mil, and maybe 8,5 if that would be what it takes to get him. Front loaded, I think the next CBA might disallow that but it won't hurt contracts already made.

InjuredChoker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 05:25 AM
  #11
SoupNazi
Global Moderator
No Soup for You!!!
 
SoupNazi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Kramerica Industries
Country: Argentina
Posts: 18,641
vCash: 526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xvash2 View Post
I would not throw more than 5 years at a player.
Then you'll be disappointed when we don't sign him.

SoupNazi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2012, 04:08 PM
  #12
Yemack
Registered User
 
Yemack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,857
vCash: 500
As much as it takes

what's the downside anyway?

Yemack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2012, 04:21 PM
  #13
His Beardliness*
#SireBabcock
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,302
vCash: 500
Not my money. Just get Suter.

His Beardliness* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2012, 04:32 PM
  #14
Xvash2
Registered User
 
Xvash2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,094
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedWings19405 View Post
Brian Burke is that you?
Don't believe in these absurdly-long contracts, I think they can stifle motivation and have in part led to the nightly on-off effort levels that have plagued the Red Wings these last couple of seasons. And after all, how did that work out for Wade Redden and the Rangers? What if we sign Ryan Suter to a 10 year, 9 mil contract and he busts his knee the first season, never to be the same player again?

Xvash2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2012, 04:35 PM
  #15
Ricelund
We like our team.
 
Ricelund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New York, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xvash2 View Post
Don't believe in these absurdly-long contracts, I think they can stifle motivation and have in part led to the nightly on-off effort levels that have plagued the Red Wings these last couple of seasons. And after all, how did that work out for Wade Redden and the Rangers? What if we sign Ryan Suter to a 10 year, 9 mil contract and he busts his knee the first season, never to be the same player again?
Then you put him on LTIR or waive him. I'd rather take a chance than never sign an elite free agent because of what might happen.

Ricelund is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2012, 04:50 PM
  #16
SirloinUB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,225
vCash: 500
I read one of the things owners are looking for is a 6 year maximum length in the new cba

SirloinUB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2012, 05:05 PM
  #17
The Zetterberg Era
Moderator
RIP Octopi
 
The Zetterberg Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ft. Myers, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 23,639
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirloinUB View Post
I read one of the things owners are looking for is a 6 year maximum length in the new cba
Mr I. generally is not in lock step with his fellow owners, it also won't matter unless Fehr and Bettman wow us all and have a deal done by Sunday the deal will already be done.

The Zetterberg Era is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2012, 05:09 PM
  #18
jaster
I pay off the mods.
 
jaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicago, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 6,446
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirloinUB View Post
I read one of the things owners are looking for is a 6 year maximum length in the new cba
A max length would be a good thing in the grand scheme of things, I think. I'd go as low as a 3-year max on contracts. PA would never let it happen though.

jaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2012, 05:10 PM
  #19
Ricelund
We like our team.
 
Ricelund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New York, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaster View Post
A max length would be a good thing in the grand scheme of things, I think. I'd go as low as a 3-year max on contracts. PA would never let it happen though.
Three years is way too low. I think a limit of six or seven makes sense.

Ricelund is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2012, 05:12 PM
  #20
The Zetterberg Era
Moderator
RIP Octopi
 
The Zetterberg Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ft. Myers, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 23,639
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaster View Post
A max length would be a good thing in the grand scheme of things, I think. I'd go as low as a 3-year max on contracts. PA would never let it happen though.
They could also have a clause where you are allowed a certain number of guys that exceed this. They could also do a kind hybrid of the Bird rules or 10-5 rights where if a player has been with a certain organization for a period of time he has the option to sign a longer term if both parties are willing.

The Zetterberg Era is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2012, 05:15 PM
  #21
Bench
Moderator
Coffee. Pie. Owls.
 
Bench's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Twin Peaks
Posts: 9,366
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rice View Post
Three years is way too low. I think a limit of six or seven makes sense.
A six year limit would be great. It would stop all the loops in the cap system that allow teams like the Rangers to pay Richards 12 million a year with a 6.6 cap hit.

Then do something to fix the ability to send players to the minors with no cap hit and you'll finally have a cap system that functions as it was meant to.

Bench is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2012, 05:15 PM
  #22
jaster
I pay off the mods.
 
jaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicago, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 6,446
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rice View Post
Three years is way too low. I think a limit of six or seven makes sense.
Way too low for what?

jaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2012, 05:17 PM
  #23
jaster
I pay off the mods.
 
jaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicago, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 6,446
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedWings19405 View Post
They could also have a clause where you are allowed a certain number of guys that exceed this. They could also do a kind hybrid of the Bird rules or 10-5 rights where if a player has been with a certain organization for a period of time he has the option to sign a longer term if both parties are willing.
I agree, there are a number of potential addendums that would make it a great system. But there should definitely be a limit, imo.

jaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2012, 05:18 PM
  #24
Heaton
Moderator
#hope
 
Heaton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Rochester, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 18,716
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Heaton
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaster View Post
Way too low for what?
I think a 3 year max would make UFA too important. Teams would end up losing players a lot more frequently.

Heaton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2012, 05:20 PM
  #25
The Zetterberg Era
Moderator
RIP Octopi
 
The Zetterberg Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ft. Myers, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 23,639
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaster View Post
Way too low for what?
The kind of turnover that would create would be brutal. Some exceptions would have to be made in terms of roster 5 guys, 8 guys I don't know what to make that system fan friendly in my opinion. Guys/Gals around here would love it because for the most part we have opinions on all players and follow hockey. Imagine explaining to your kid or a novice fan why their favorite players switch teams every three years.

The Zetterberg Era 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 03:43 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.