HFBoards

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

Dion Phaneuf's next contract?

View Poll Results: Phaneuf's next contract
3 years @ 6.5M 54 42.86%
5 years @ 4.5M 45 35.71%
3 years @ 4M 7 5.56%
There will be no contract as he will not return tot he Leafs. 20 15.87%
Voters: 126. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-29-2012, 07:29 PM
  #201
beauchamp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Laval, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,034
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALine View Post
I see, and ya that was a little sensitive there of me I apologize.

I just feel that, based off comparables, he will get something around what his current deal is.
The cap being 25% higher as of now (pending new CBA) than when he signed that contract, does that mean he should get $8.1M?

beauchamp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2012, 07:31 PM
  #202
The Mentalist
2016 Clayton Keller
 
The Mentalist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: North York
Country: Canada
Posts: 37,689
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALine View Post
To add, think of the recent Stanley Cup winning team, the Los Angeles Kings. Could anyone picture Gunnarsson on the top line, in the Stanley cup finals, playing the most minutes, against the other hottest team in the league, spcifically against their top, world-class players? I certainly couldn't. But, I could picture him as a responsible, minute eating defense-men. A Matt Greene type. Doesn't do anything exceptional well, but can do everything pretty well. We should hold on to Gunnarsson, but by no means should he be on the top pairing with Phaneuf as a long term fixture.
I like Gunnar, again I was one of the first posters here last year that defended him when our forum included him in almost every trade offer. But if we are to become a Championship team, the top pairing will not be Dion and Gunnar as much as I like and admire his efficient game. Gunnar would be a great 5 or 6 on a cup contender. Hopefully he will have that chance one day.

The Mentalist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2012, 07:37 PM
  #203
The Mentalist
2016 Clayton Keller
 
The Mentalist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: North York
Country: Canada
Posts: 37,689
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ULF_55 View Post
We are all entitled to our opinions, the main reason for this board, but my differs than yours on this matter. Surprise ... I usually don't care the nationality of a player just what they do on the ice.

IMO Phaneuf is a good defenseman, but the Wild Thing was much smarter.
Agree here, everyone here is entitled with their opinions. It would be boring if we all agreed. This is why discussion is a good thing.

Cheers.

The Mentalist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2012, 07:56 PM
  #204
ALine
Registered User
 
ALine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by diceman934 View Post
The Stanley Cup is the biggest and most Coveted prize in hockey, for some nations it maybe the Olympics. North Americans it is the Cup!

What does the Kings have to do with the Canadian Olympic team? .....nothing!
Everything actually. I was demonstrating that NHL Stanley Cup winning team is not the tournament where the absolute best teams possibly assembled compete against each other.

One tournament is a sanctioned event by an international body, inviting every country from around the world to compete. The other is a professional sports league, where the business aspect lessens the hockey product put on ice.

Yes, i think Olympic hockey is more exciting and fun to watch, ususally, than the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

ALine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2012, 08:01 PM
  #205
ALine
Registered User
 
ALine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by beauchamp View Post
The cap being 25% higher as of now (pending new CBA) than when he signed that contract, does that mean he should get $8.1M?
No... I said similar to his current deal. Meaning around 6.5 AAV

I didn't reference the cap rising at all.

ALine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2012, 08:21 PM
  #206
beauchamp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Laval, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,034
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALine View Post
No... I said similar to his current deal. Meaning around 6.5 AAV

I didn't reference the cap rising at all.
6.5 in 2008 was just under 11.5% of the salary pie.

6.5 today would be just over 9.25% of the salary pie.

What it will be 2 years from today we don't know yet.

So you're OK with him taking a 20% relative salary cut if he was to be signed today?

To stay at 11.5%, he would need to get just a bit less than 8.1.

beauchamp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2012, 08:30 PM
  #207
T M L
Registered User
 
T M L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,469
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by beauchamp View Post
The cap being 25% higher as of now (pending new CBA) than when he signed that contract, does that mean he should get $8.1M?
**** That! If Burke gives Phaneuf 8.1M he should be fired on the spot.

T M L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2012, 09:08 PM
  #208
ALine
Registered User
 
ALine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by beauchamp View Post
6.5 in 2008 was just under 11.5% of the salary pie.

6.5 today would be just over 9.25% of the salary pie.

What it will be 2 years from today we don't know yet.

So you're OK with him taking a 20% relative salary cut if he was to be signed today?

To stay at 11.5%, he would need to get just a bit less than 8.1.
I don't know why you keep trying to go there...

$39 million in 2008 will be the same as $39 million in 2014.

Yes, it is less of percentage of the overall cap. That is a good thing, more cap room to spend on more players.

ALine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2012, 09:15 PM
  #209
T M L
Registered User
 
T M L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,469
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by beauchamp View Post
The cap being 25% higher as of now (pending new CBA) than when he signed that contract, does that mean he should get $8.1M?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALine View Post
I don't know why you keep trying to go there...

$39 million in 2008 will be the same as $39 million in 2014.

Yes, it is less of percentage of the overall cap. That is a good thing, more cap room to spend on more players.
What is it for you that Dion deserves a $100M contract?

What has he done for you that he should be paid more than Pronger, Suter, Karlsson, Doughty... and so on?

T M L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2012, 09:21 PM
  #210
ALine
Registered User
 
ALine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by T M L View Post
What is it for you that Dion deserves a $100M contract?

What has he done for you that he should be paid more than Pronger, Suter, Karlsson, Doughty... and so on?
Can you read? It says clear as day, 39 million, not 100. You must have me confused with another poster. I have never said he deserves a $100 million dollar contract. I said I would be happy if he resigned for something around what he has now, $39 mill, 6.5 AAV

ALine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-29-2012, 10:26 PM
  #211
beauchamp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Laval, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,034
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALine View Post
I don't know why you keep trying to go there...

$39 million in 2008 will be the same as $39 million in 2014.

Yes, it is less of percentage of the overall cap. That is a good thing, more cap room to spend on more players.
$39M was in 2005.

In 2008, it was $56.7M.

PS: Sorry, I just realized that the $39M you were citing was the total amount of his contract, not the cap...

beauchamp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 06:06 AM
  #212
mikeo1
Registered User
 
mikeo1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,517
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALine View Post
Can you read? It says clear as day, 39 million, not 100. You must have me confused with another poster. I have never said he deserves a $100 million dollar contract. I said I would be happy if he resigned for something around what he has now, $39 mill, 6.5 AAV
No, he's just been harping on this 100 million contract that no-one proposed throughout the thread.

mikeo1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 06:16 AM
  #213
Sypher04
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,193
vCash: 500
If we're lucky, he'll leave.

Sypher04 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 06:24 AM
  #214
johnny_rudeboy
Registered User
 
johnny_rudeboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Karlstad
Country: Sweden
Posts: 14,151
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALine View Post
To add, think of the recent Stanley Cup winning team, the Los Angeles Kings. Could anyone picture Gunnarsson on the top line, in the Stanley cup finals, playing the most minutes, against the other hottest team in the league, spcifically against their top, world-class players? I certainly couldn't. But, I could picture him as a responsible, minute eating defense-men. A Matt Greene type. Doesn't do anything exceptional well, but can do everything pretty well. We should hold on to Gunnarsson, but by no means should he be on the top pairing with Phaneuf as a long term fixture.
Actually I can picture Gunnarsson as a first pairing or 2nd pairing d-man on a cup winning team. Not because he is a top pairing d-man on his own but because in similar fashion to Beauchemin he adapts very well to who ever he plays with. So if paired with a really good defender he plays his part allowing the other defender to get the best out of his game with out having to worry about his partner.

Phaneuf on the other hand I struggle to see as one of the top pairing d-man on a contender. He does not have the hockey IQ for it and not the humility to realize it and rather play a simpler game adapting to some one who know how to defend.

A lot of talk in this thread about how great Phaneuf is and him being a #1 d-man since he play PK, PP, against other teams top lines etc. Well, seeing the result of those minutes perhaps that is not something to brag about.

Best thing for the organization is to move him for some one less spectacular but more reliable. Burke him self have said he view his job more of that of a business man in the entertainment industry rather then one of a sports team. So he want his spectacular players like Phaneuf and Kessel despite their awesomeness never really contribute to the overall good of the team so that will not happen with him in charge.

Don't get me wrong, the two of them are our most talented players (offensively) but as long as they are the ones getting paid the big bucks with the natural conclusion that they are the leaders of the team we will never win anything. I would be fine with keeping both of them if we had a deeper team with natural leaders on it. But we don't and we never will as long as they are around seeing the kind of money they will demand means we will struggle to get quality players in.

johnny_rudeboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 06:27 AM
  #215
The Apologist
Where's JVR?
 
The Apologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Leaf Nation Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,935
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by T M L View Post
Your not too shabby on the insults yourself moose.

With all do respect, you always defend Burke no matter what.
Which means what exactly?

The Apologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 06:43 AM
  #216
Al14
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 11,684
vCash: 500
Inconsistent, can't hit the net with his shot to save his life, gets beaten on the outside far too often, does not clear the front of the net that well, and last but not least, he can't fight.

Why is Dion even considered a number one defenseman and our captain to boot?

Am I really that off base with my assessment?

Al14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 06:54 AM
  #217
The Apologist
Where's JVR?
 
The Apologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Leaf Nation Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,935
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al14 View Post
Inconsistent, can't hit the net with his shot to save his life, gets beaten on the outside far too often, does not clear the front of the net that well, and last but not least, he can't fight.

Why is Dion even considered a number one defenseman and our captain to boot?

Am I really that off base with my assessment?
Yeah, I'd say you're pretty far off. Very impressive ability to repeat baseless comments though.

The Apologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 07:17 AM
  #218
leaferbeliever
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Nova Scotia Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 221
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al14 View Post
Inconsistent, can't hit the net with his shot to save his life, gets beaten on the outside far too often, does not clear the front of the net that well, and last but not least, he can't fight.

Why is Dion even considered a number one defenseman and our captain to boot?

Am I really that off base with my assessment?
That's pretty much how I see him as well. Maybe he just needs a better stick so when he is on the pp, he'll hit the net as to oppose to his shot sailing 4ft wide.

leaferbeliever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 07:49 AM
  #219
Sypher04
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,193
vCash: 500
He would lose more puck battles than any other defense we had last year. Offensively, he did pretty well. Defensively, train wreck. Captaincy, I'd be silly to act like I know one way or another, but his media scrums don't exactly instill confidence.

Sypher04 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 07:52 AM
  #220
The Apologist
Where's JVR?
 
The Apologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Leaf Nation Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,935
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sypher04 View Post
He would lose more puck battles than any other defense we had last year. Offensively, he did pretty well. Defensively, train wreck. Captaincy, I'd be silly to act like I know one way or another, but his media scrums don't exactly instill confidence.
Can you prove he was a train wreck defensively?

The Apologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 07:53 AM
  #221
New Liskeard
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 9,422
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by diceman934;53086589[B
]If we look at his offensive numbers only he would be considered a number one D-man.[/B]....but there is two parts of the game.

If he wants to be considered a number one D-man then he should stop giving away the puck and battle hard when he does not have the puck....he most often looks lost......clueless are people who use part of the picture in their arguments to paint a picture that supports their claim.

He should not have been on our PK as he simply is not smart enough to play on the PK. His decision making is one of his major weaknesses as seen by his high giveaways and these individuals should not play on the PK. The PK stats bear this out....we were horrible!
Yes because having the 10th highest ATOI for defencemen in the entire NHL is not an indication of being a number 1 d? I see you slandering Phaneuf throughout this thread, and you certainlly don't like him. For the record, I thought Ron Wilson was wrong in naming him captain, but to suggest he is not a number 1 d is just hate and bias. He is number 1 d in the NHL no question about it.

New Liskeard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 07:57 AM
  #222
The Apologist
Where's JVR?
 
The Apologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Leaf Nation Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,935
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Liskeard View Post
Yes because having the 10th highest ATOI for defencemen in the entire NHL is not an indication of being a number 1 d? I see you slandering Phaneuf throughout this thread, and you certainlly don't like him. For the record, I thought Ron Wilson was wrong in naming him captain, but to suggest he is not a number 1 d is just hate and bias. He is number 1 d in the NHL no question about it.
But that's where you're wrong! There are only like five #1 d in the whole NHL, well plus Subban.

The Apologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 08:03 AM
  #223
hotpaws
Registered User
 
hotpaws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 9,530
vCash: 5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Liskeard View Post
Yes because having the 10th highest ATOI for defencemen in the entire NHL is not an indication of being a number 1 d? I see you slandering Phaneuf throughout this thread, and you certainlly don't like him. For the record, I thought Ron Wilson was wrong in naming him captain, but to suggest he is not a number 1 d is just hate and bias. He is number 1 d in the NHL no question about it.
This stat only proves that the coaching staff of the Leafs considered him the num 1 D on our team . Every team in the league had a D that led them in ice time . This doesn't mean there are 30 legit num 1 D's in the league .

hotpaws is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 08:08 AM
  #224
New Liskeard
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 9,422
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotpaws View Post
This stat only proves that the coaching staff of the Leafs considered him the num 1 D on our team . Every team in the league had a D that led them in ice time . This doesn't mean there are 30 legit num 1 D's in the league .
So the team and coaching staff consider him a number one d, yet according to you he is not? I guess being voted for the Norris, being a part of some all star games, putting up alot of points and playing several minutes do not mean he is a number 1 d in the NHL? You often reach to slander Burke or the players, and try quite hard to elude that things with the Leafs and dire and poor. This is a perfect example of this again, and you're looking foolish doing so. Youre not a fan of Burke, Phaneuf or even the Leafs, but Phaneuf is a number one D no matter how hard you suggest otherwise.

New Liskeard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-30-2012, 08:10 AM
  #225
Sypher04
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazeeEddie View Post
Can you prove he was a train wreck defensively?
Other than watching, I'm not sure what can be used to PROVE defensive play. He played against tough competition and failed miserably as far as I'm concerned. If he was a 2nd pairing defenseman (as he should be) odds are his shortcomings would be exposed far less often.

Sypher04 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 06:32 AM.

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.