HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Hawks and Havlat talking 8-10 year extension

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-04-2009, 12:17 PM
  #51
Macke*
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, B.C
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,752
vCash: 500
I don't mind it, he gets a serious injury goes on LTI and his salary doesn't count against the cap.

I have a much larger problem with the Campbell deal, anyone want him? Maybe Ottawa will still take him.

Macke* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2009, 12:31 PM
  #52
8BostonRocker24
Registered User
 
8BostonRocker24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Los Gatos via Boston
Country: China
Posts: 9,223
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macke View Post
I don't mind it, he gets a serious injury goes on LTI and his salary doesn't count against the cap.

I have a much larger problem with the Campbell deal, anyone want him? Maybe Ottawa will still take him.
Yes, but at the start of every season Havlat would (in theory) be healthy, meaning the Blackhawks would need to conform to the CBA on day 1 of the season each year.

8BostonRocker24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2009, 12:33 PM
  #53
HSF
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 14,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertine View Post
These long term deals are ridiculous. Am I the only one who doesn't like the idea of mortgaging your future for a favorable cap hit today?
usually these long term deals GO to the players of your future


- If the contract is signed before he is 35 then if he chooses to retire midway through his contract then his cap hit doesnt count against the cap

- usually these contracts have extra 1-4 million$ years added to them, so your cap hit is only 1-4mill which wont really effect other players signings during the backhalf of the contract

- low cap hit


there are a lot of pros for doing these longterm deals

HSF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2009, 12:45 PM
  #54
Blackhawkswincup
Tornado Warning
 
Blackhawkswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicagoland
Country: United States
Posts: 117,199
vCash: 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by elias026 View Post

and they will make weird noises every interview
WTH is wrong with people from Europe?

Blackhawkswincup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2009, 01:09 PM
  #55
FutureConsiderations
Registered User
 
FutureConsiderations's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Brookline, MA
Country: Ireland
Posts: 20,449
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8BostonRocker24 View Post
For every bone head move there are equally good ones too, just look at Denis Wideman's RFA contract signed last year. IMO, Wideman could of gotten a lot more.
Right, but teams like Chicago make those moves much more difficult.

FutureConsiderations is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2009, 01:52 PM
  #56
Captain Ron
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Gardnerville, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 17,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macke View Post
I don't mind it, he gets a serious injury goes on LTI and his salary doesn't count against the cap.

I have a much larger problem with the Campbell deal, anyone want him? Maybe Ottawa will still take him.
Not true......it would be his replacement that would not count.....and that would only be the amount that would put the team over the cap.

Captain Ron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2009, 01:55 PM
  #57
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Beukeboom Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 12,137
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FutureConsiderations View Post
Right, but teams like Chicago make those moves much more difficult.
I find it ironic in the extreme that a poster of the team that signed Chara ($7.5M), Savard ($5M), and Ryder ($4M) which puts the future of home grown talent like Kessel & Krejci at risk is ripping on the Hawks for Campbell & Huet. Especially when Huet will be the #1 next year when Khabibuilin moves on.

Beukeboom Fan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2009, 02:21 PM
  #58
Hanta Yo
Bag it up
 
Hanta Yo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,429
vCash: 500
This better be with a cap hit under id say around 3.5 mill for that long. Havlat is a great player and worth alot of money but like gaborik, his injury history is too big to ignore. Just when my faith in the hawks organization was restored, this story has to come out. They should be worrying of trying to sign Keith, Toews and Kane.

Hanta Yo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2009, 02:31 PM
  #59
8BostonRocker24
Registered User
 
8BostonRocker24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Los Gatos via Boston
Country: China
Posts: 9,223
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beukeboom Fan View Post
I find it ironic in the extreme that a poster of the team that signed Chara ($7.5M), Savard ($5M), and Ryder ($4M) which puts the future of home grown talent like Kessel & Krejci at risk is ripping on the Hawks for Campbell & Huet. Especially when Huet will be the #1 next year when Khabibuilin moves on.
Chara is the number 1 defenseman on the best team in the east. He is a back-to-back Norris finalist... Did you just compare him to Campbell? Boston, unlike Chicago, does not have 3 stud defensemen. There was no need for Chicago to bring in a UFA at $7.1+ million and play #4 minutes. That's just stupid.

Marc Savard's contract is one of the best in the NHL.

Michael Ryder would of been 3rd in goal scoring if he played on Chicago, 4th in points while playing in 74 games and averaging 3rd line minutes. He was one of the best UFA signings this offseason.

8BostonRocker24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2009, 02:54 PM
  #60
Mr Bojanglez
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Mr Bojanglez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: From Jersey w/ Love
Country: United States
Posts: 10,922
vCash: 500
he needs to sign in New Jersey... noooooooooooo.

Interesting signing (possibly). But signing Havlat to a long-term deal is like... an example given in SAT.... walking barefoot on broken glass.

Mr Bojanglez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-05-2009, 02:57 PM
  #61
Hal Incandenza
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 256
vCash: 500
Wow, I can't believe so many people think this would be a bad deal for the Hawks. I think many people are letting last years admittedly bad signings of Campbell and Huet cloud their vision. The Hawks have made the playoffs now, it's not like trying to get somebody to play in Toronto (couldn't help it). Lets look at a few of the arguments that caught my eye:
1. He will get hurt. While this is always a possibility, I don't see why this makes a re-signing particularly bad. The injury risk is priced into the contract, unless everyone suddenly forgets during negotiations. Havlat looks like the problem really was just that his shoulder needed surgery all along, and trying to rehab it made him extend the injury over another season. I'm not particularly worried. While an injury would hurt the Hawks, as long as it is serious enough for LTIR they are in the same position they'd be in without Marty (note that this year on day 1 of this season, Barker was in the minors due to cap trouble...so conforming to the cap on day 1 of the season could be done several ways in an emergency, although hopefully we learned that lesson...) . I am aware of no better forward the Hawks could sign as cheaply as Marty, normal "when healthy" caveats applied and all.
2. hahaha contract year! This is a complete fallacy. In his last contract year, he played 18 games. While I'm sure he knew this season would impact the value of his next contract, there is no reason to think Havlat is any different than every other player in this regard.
3. The Hawks need to re-sign Toews, Kane and Keith. As the almighty MEAT LOAF once sang..."Two out of three ain't bad." Kane is a really good offensive player, and obviously is a major weapon for the Hawks already at a young age. But as we all know, defense matters. A lot. Kane is currently somewhere between horrible and bad on the defensive scale. In no universe do I ever see him becoming a good defensive player. Maybe he can pull it out of nowhere, but right now he's going to have to work hard and backcheck with a lot more effort just to become decent.

I don't see a $6M offense-only guy being that good of a deal, especially if a guy with the same ability on the offensive side but who is also great on D (Appearance of Havlat's D may have been new this year, don't know if Havlat was ever much on D for Ottawa) can be had for $4-5M per year. Also...Kane is an RFA!! You don't even have to pay him as much due to this...if it comes down to it and teams submit offer sheets, then you can decide. But make him earn those raises, something which Duncan Keith definitely did. Trading Kane would, marketing aside, be a great idea for the Hawks. You know some team would love to add the well-known offensive force, and probably overpay. If someone signed him in RFA, it would at least be worth 2 first rounders, a second, and a third, with an outside chance of reaching the highest RFA comp level which is worth FOUR first rounders. For 4 firsts, I sign every place there is a dotted line and you're in good shape pick-wise for years, which is necessary with how many young players the Hawks will have to give raises to (and lose some to the cap, invariably). I wouldn't be terribly sad at the thought of losing Kane for 2 firsts, 2nd, 3rd, if it came down to it. Could maybe do better than that on the open market at some point.

The Hawks will probably not trade Kane. He brings the 12 year old girls out to the UC, and also makes for good publicity, and ads with him being made fun of for looking young. He will be a good player for a long time, but with his lack of size and only decent speed, I don't see him being a true franchise cornerstone like Toews and Keith are. Sign him if you can, but not at the expense of anyone else.

Back to Havlat....if the Hawks don't re-sign him, they will regret it next year. Bolland and Ladd are perfect counterparts, and I see those guys (esp. Bolland) being significantly worse without Marty- Bolland is still developing offense but having Havlat who can carry it in and then create space for the play to develop seems to help him a ton. Versteeg is good, but he would be a big drop-off to slot into Marty's spot (also...$4M for him? I hope that doesn't happen very soon...he's good but that would make me think twice about him). Versteeg needs to learn how to be patient after carrying it in with his fancy moves, he's sick 1on1 but can't carry a line like Havlat. Versteeg-Bolland-Ladd isn't a good 2nd line really.

SIGN MARTY
ready to rock my #24 jersey to the UC tonight

Also I know I wrote a lot, sorry if you're dragging through the epic length- but would love to hear thoughts on any of my opinions, thanks. Ready for the Hawks to join the Wings in signing all these long contracts to save cap room...we could start here and then hell, might as well give Toews and Keith lifetime contracts before the league closes that loophole. Actually if that happened...it might cause them to close it, haha "toews signs 20 year $100 million contract" HA that would be a sick headline. DO IT DALE

Hal Incandenza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-05-2009, 03:02 PM
  #62
Hal Incandenza
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 256
vCash: 500
Oh and I am overjoyed to hear Campbell could possibly be moved. He's good at what he does, but if he gets traded without the Hawks sending along much of value then you've gotta think the Hawks are looking good for a while. Take him, NJ or Florida or whomever. That extra $7M will come in handy.

Hal Incandenza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-05-2009, 03:08 PM
  #63
detredWINgs
Registered User
 
detredWINgs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 17,133
vCash: 500
This would be a great idea if he wasnt injury prone. But he is.

detredWINgs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-05-2009, 03:12 PM
  #64
IslesBeBack*
NHL Free Agent
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,151
vCash: 500
It amazes me that teams aren't learning from the New York Islanders.. the first team to dish out a stupid, long term contract.

IMO, what the hell is the difference between 8-10 years or 15 years?

The contract is still long term.. and it's still dubious considering the guy has not shown he can stay healthy.

If I'm a C student.. but I happen to get all A's and one B a semester.. do you still accept me into Yale? NO. It takes more than that.

It amazes me that GM's in this league don't work together to keep the ridiculous contracts and what not out of this league.

IDK.. very restrictive to see such a deal. These 10 year deals are starting to become commonplace.. scary.

IslesBeBack* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-05-2009, 03:51 PM
  #65
Hal Incandenza
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 256
vCash: 500
The Islanders would suck whether or not DiPietro was injured, signed, or whatever. His contract is the least of their worries. Why should teams learn from that? I'm guessing they already knew guys could sustain injuries and give you no production for their contract, the contract length is nearly irrelevant.

Hal Incandenza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-05-2009, 03:56 PM
  #66
Hal Incandenza
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 256
vCash: 500
These types of deals becoming commonplace are only scary for the teams that fail to sign a superstar long-term to such a deal. I'm guessing the policy will see some changes in the future, which could go in any direction, but under the current rules- these contracts are a good idea. You always have a risk when signing a player, the key is to price that risk properly. I don't know if Tallon will, but hopefully he can sign everybody to reasonable deals and not continue to hand out inflated contracts like those gifted to Campbell and Huet.

Hal Incandenza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-05-2009, 06:15 PM
  #67
None Shall Pass
Cory Stops All
 
None Shall Pass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 6,029
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8BostonRocker24 View Post
What I'm hearing / reading is Campbell will be shipped out to New Jersey. It sounds like Jersey fans want him too... I guess they have not watched him play in San Jose or Chicago.
1. Where did you hear this?
2. I hope Chicago likes a big helping of Zubrus.

None Shall Pass is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-05-2009, 06:47 PM
  #68
slimkay
Registered User
 
slimkay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Montreal
Country: Algeria
Posts: 490
vCash: 500
Great. If they sign Havlat, they won't have enough money for Toews/Kane/Keith/Seabrook.

I'd like the Habs to pick up Kane.

slimkay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-05-2009, 06:48 PM
  #69
Zubrus Coffee Maker
Blinded by my Zubrus
 
Zubrus Coffee Maker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Cobourg, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,388
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cortez View Post
HUGE risk. Get Kane and Toews signed 8-10 years first.
this, i would have xpected a short term deal so they can see if his health has improved long term, but keep the franchisers first

Zubrus Coffee Maker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-05-2009, 06:49 PM
  #70
Zubrus Coffee Maker
Blinded by my Zubrus
 
Zubrus Coffee Maker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Cobourg, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,388
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by slimkay View Post
Great. If they sign Havlat, they won't have enough money for Toews/Kane/Keith/Seabrook.

I'd like the Habs to pick up Kane.
who would't want kane?

Zubrus Coffee Maker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-05-2009, 06:56 PM
  #71
slimkay
Registered User
 
slimkay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Montreal
Country: Algeria
Posts: 490
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Jersey Devils View Post
who would't want kane?
The Hawks, since they want Toews/Seabrook/Keith more than him. He may get the boot next year because of cap issues... things will get interesting.

slimkay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 10:12 AM
  #72
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Beukeboom Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 12,137
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8BostonRocker24 View Post
Chara is the number 1 defenseman on the best team in the east. He is a back-to-back Norris finalist... Did you just compare him to Campbell? Boston, unlike Chicago, does not have 3 stud defensemen. There was no need for Chicago to bring in a UFA at $7.1+ million and play #4 minutes. That's just stupid.

Marc Savard's contract is one of the best in the NHL.

Michael Ryder would of been 3rd in goal scoring if he played on Chicago, 4th in points while playing in 74 games and averaging 3rd line minutes. He was one of the best UFA signings this offseason.
I wasn't comparing the individual's talents or contributions - just that both teams made significant UFA signings to help get the teams turned around that will impact their ability to keep all the young talent that is coming up through both organizations.

Also, who is Chicago's 3rd "stud" defenseman? It's easy to look back with 20/20 hindsight, but going into the year no one could realistically expect the significant progression in both Seabrook and Keith's game.

Beukeboom Fan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 11:51 AM
  #73
suprvilce
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Slovenia
Posts: 1,382
vCash: 500
I wish teams would realize that paying UFAs and impending UFAs a lot of money on long term doesn't go well with the cap. What, next year there will be reports and rumors that they would like to move him (Havlat) like Campbell this year. How many times have we seen that teams want to mvoe players they just signed to long term contracts (Drury, Redden, Khabibulin, Campbell, Briere, Smyth, Brad Richards, Andy McDonald, Penner, Gilbert or Visnovsky, Lecavalier,... Why can't GMs just think before they put pen to paper drolling about big names.

suprvilce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 02:22 PM
  #74
massivegoonery
Registered User
 
massivegoonery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 11,517
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beukeboom Fan View Post
It's easy to look back with 20/20 hindsight, but going into the year no one could realistically expect the significant progression in both Seabrook and Keith's game.
Are you joking? Did you watch the team at all last year?

I'm not even going to respond to all the idiocy regarding Kane, you guys should know better than that by now.

massivegoonery is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2009, 02:30 PM
  #75
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Beukeboom Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 12,137
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by massivegoonery View Post
Are you joking? Did you watch the team at all last year?

I'm not even going to respond to all the idiocy regarding Kane, you guys should know better than that by now.
I though both guys were legit top pairing d-men, but didn't think either one should be on the top PP unit. I didn't think that Seabrook would look as good as he has, or that Keith would look like a Norris candidate the first 50-60 games of the season.
Add in Barker turning it around and making huge strides from last year (although he'll still have significant brain cramps), and going into this year, I think that you can make a case for Campbell being at least as valuable as DK or BS.

That obviously is no longer the case, but people acting like they expected Barker to be one of the best power point producer per minuted played are crazy.

Beukeboom Fan is online now   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 01:20 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.