HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
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.

Sedins reportedly want 63M-12 year deal... similar to Zetterberg's deal

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-19-2009, 04:35 PM
  #276
Burnaby_Joe*
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,271
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CloutierForVezina View Post
Name 6 other teams with a better top 6 than

Edler-Bieksa
Salo-Mitchell
Ohlund-O'Brien
You think their D is top 6 in the league without Ohlund?

Burnaby_Joe* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2009, 05:28 PM
  #277
Diamonddog01
Registered User
 
Diamonddog01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,140
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnar View Post
Seriously? That's your argument? That Staal really is almost as good as Crosby and Malkin? Have you ever watched any of these players play? Eric Staal is without a doubt a great player, but to compare him to Crosby and Malkin is just silly. Are you really going to say that Staal is the fourth-best player in the league because he's paid the fourth-most? Do you think he's better than Datsyuk, who's paid much less?

Give it up. A player's salary is not exactly a solid indicator of how good he is in comparison to other players, nor how good he thinks he is.
It's not a solid indicator, but it is an indicator. Or a correlation. Staal to Croby/Malkin is a much, much better comparison than the Sedins to Datysuk and Zetterberg. If you can't see that you need to take those homer glasses off.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnar View Post
By the way, Malkin had more than 50% more points than Staal last year. The Sedins both outscored Zetterberg. Yes, there are obviously other factors, but are you really going to tell me that Staal's and Zetterberg's "intangibles" makes Staal closer to Malkin than the Sedins are to Zetterberg? And please, try to resort to something other than playoff success (unless you also think Henri Richard is the greatest player of all time).
Yes, I am. Antropov had the same amount of points as Kesler this year, does this make him equivalent in terms of value? Why would we discount playoff success when playoff success is a huge factor? Isn't the point to win the Stanley Cup? Other intangibles would include leadership (neither of the Sedins are even an assistant captain), speed, the ability to play with other linemates as opposed to a twin brother, aggression.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnar View Post
The proposed contract is certainly similar in length to Zetterberg's, but not to Datsyuk's. There are many players with contracts just as long or longer than Datsyuk's. And there are many, many players with more comparable cap hits. Why not compare the Sedins to Jason Pominville, or Shawn Horcoff, or Patrik Elias, or Simon Gagne, or Corey Perry, or Mike Richards? You can make your own judgments about how the Sedins stack up against those players, but the fact is that all of them have contracts closer in cap hit than Zetterberg and certainly than Datsyuk.
Because Pominville, Horcoff, Elias, Gagne, Perry don't have 10 year contracts. It's not only the amount, it's also the duration. Many players have contracts longer than Datysuk's? Not quite. Maybe 10 if that.

The Detroit contracts were given to franchise players who have won cups and Conn Smythe trophies. The Sedins, while being good PPG players, are not franchise players, nor have they led this team past the 2nd round

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnar View Post
No, but making silly, nonsensical arguments to justify your predetermined opinions certainly makes it look that way.

Like I said, I don't know whether or not these proposed contracts would be good for the Canucks. You could certainly make a reasonable argument that they aren't, and I would listen. But you're not making a reasonable argument, and that's what I'm bothered by.

Anyway, you certainly do have a right to share your opinion, however ridiculous it might be. Just as I have a right to tell you that I think you should try to have some idea what you're talking about before you start talking about it. But hey, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one.
Simply because you disagree with something does not make it "silly and nonsensical". Understanding that sometimes people have a different opinion than yourself and are entitled to that opinion is part of debating in a mature and reasonable manner. Hurling insults and claiming other posters have no idea what they're talking about is extremely childish.

I guess Canucks management also has a ridiculous opinion and "no idea what they're talking about" as they've rejected this contract proposal. Why aren't you the GM again?

Diamonddog01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2009, 07:32 PM
  #278
AgentNaslund*
 
AgentNaslund*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Shogun_ View Post
You think their D is top 6 in the league without Ohlund?
This is the best defence in the universe.

AgentNaslund* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2009, 07:47 PM
  #279
PeterTheGreat
Registered User
 
PeterTheGreat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 7,026
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AgentNaslund View Post
This is the best defence in the universe.
The Canucks defence was severely exposed for the lack of speed and puck moving ability in the Chicago series.

Bieksa is terribly overrated. He makes so many mental mistakes out there. His skating is average to below average.

Mitchell has ZERO offensive/puck moving ability. His speed is well below average.

Salo has a good first pass, and great shot. He is also pretty slow however.

OBrien has almost zero offense, below average passing, and not very fast either.

Edler has a good first pass, good hard shot, and has decent speed.


They lack a ton of speed and puck moving ability. They were really exploited in the Chicago series with their fast forwards.

PeterTheGreat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2009, 08:03 PM
  #280
dredeye
BJ Elitist/Hipster
 
dredeye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,499
vCash: 500
that's great it means their not coming to Toronto

dredeye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2009, 08:08 PM
  #281
quat
intheDanRusseljungle
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Victoria BC
Posts: 8,919
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to quat
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterTheGreat View Post
The Canucks defence was severely exposed for the lack of speed and puck moving ability in the Chicago series.

Bieksa is terribly overrated. He makes so many mental mistakes out there. His skating is average to below average.

Actually his skating is decent, but as you said, he makes a ton of mental mistakes when he's not on his game, and that's the difference.


Mitchell has ZERO offensive/puck moving ability. His speed is well below average.

Disagree. Mitchell's skating speed is fine for the kind of player he is. He's just not 100% consistent, and for your top shut down guy, that kind of thing is important.


Salo has a good first pass, and great shot. He is also pretty slow however.

Again I can't agree. Salo get's around the ice very quickly, and rarely if ever get's beat by speed. He's by far the Canucks best defenseman, but is often injured... to say the least.


OBrien has almost zero offense, below average passing, and not very fast either.

Agree with most of this except SOB actually moves the puck very well, but he certainly lacks as you say, any offense, and he wilts with more minutes.

Edler has a good first pass, good hard shot, and has decent speed.

But he's also very young and prone to making mistakes. Hopefully we will see less of them in the future.


They lack a ton of speed and puck moving ability. They were really exploited in the Chicago series with their fast forwards.
I disagree. They were exploited by three things: The Black Hawks tenacity, the pressure from the defense and the inconsistency of play from the back end.

As we saw with the Canucks earlier in the season, when guys like Bieksa, Mitchel and SOB all lose their games, the team simply can't perform. When it's just one or two of those guys, they still manage to win, particularly if Luongo is playing lights out. But when they are throwing the puck away shift after shift, they resort to taking penalties and the whole thing crumbles.

It's the inconsistent play from too many of those guys that screwed the team, and other than Salo, pretty much every guy on the blue line is prone to those kinds of errors. There was a time when Ohlund rarely if ever made errors, but that day is done, and while he's not as bad as say Bieksa, he's likely comparable to Mitchell.

When this blue line is playing well, I'd put them up around the top six, but when they're off, they easily drop down to the mid teens.

Oddly enough, their play really mirrored that of Luongo's this season as well... with Luongo's highs being among the top three goalies in the league... but we certainly didn't see that from him in most of the games against Chicago.

Can't say I've watched such a bi-polar defense and goaltender for some time.

As a Canuck fan, I think this blue line is overrated.

quat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2009, 08:14 PM
  #282
PeterTheGreat
Registered User
 
PeterTheGreat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 7,026
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quat View Post
I disagree. They were exploited by three things: The Black Hawks tenacity, the pressure from the defense and the inconsistency of play from the back end.

As we saw with the Canucks earlier in the season, when guys like Bieksa, Mitchel and SOB all lose their games, the team simply can't perform. When it's just one or two of those guys, they still manage to win, particularly if Luongo is playing lights out. But when they are throwing the puck away shift after shift, they resort to taking penalties and the whole thing crumbles.

It's the inconsistent play from too many of those guys that screwed the team, and other than Salo, pretty much every guy on the blue line is prone to those kinds of errors. There was a time when Ohlund rarely if ever made errors, but that day is done, and while he's not as bad as say Bieksa, he's likely comparable to Mitchell.

When this blue line is playing well, I'd put them up around the top six, but when they're off, they easily drop down to the mid teens.

Oddly enough, their play really mirrored that of Luongo's this season as well... with Luongo's highs being among the top three goalies in the league... but we certainly didn't see that from him in most of the games against Chicago.

Can't say I've watched such a bi-polar defense and goaltender for some time.

As a Canuck fan, I think this blue line is overrated.
If you think Salo gets around the ice "very quickly" than I don't know what to tell you. Also Mitchell's speed isn't "fine". He is below average in the category. Bieksa is a decent skater in straight lines, but his backwards and lateral skating are sub par.

PeterTheGreat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2009, 08:24 PM
  #283
Cocoham
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 131
vCash: 500
Since when is speed the most important, be all end all requirement for being a good defenseman? The only team that was able to shut down the 'Hawks offense was Detroit, and I wouldn't exactly call their blue line fast.

Cocoham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2009, 08:40 PM
  #284
AgentNaslund*
 
AgentNaslund*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterTheGreat View Post
The Canucks defence was severely exposed for the lack of speed and puck moving ability in the Chicago series.

Bieksa is terribly overrated. He makes so many mental mistakes out there. His skating is average to below average.

Mitchell has ZERO offensive/puck moving ability. His speed is well below average.

Salo has a good first pass, and great shot. He is also pretty slow however.

OBrien has almost zero offense, below average passing, and not very fast either.

Edler has a good first pass, good hard shot, and has decent speed.


They lack a ton of speed and puck moving ability. They were really exploited in the Chicago series with their fast forwards.
I was being sarcastic.....

AgentNaslund* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2009, 08:43 PM
  #285
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cocoham View Post
Since when is speed the most important, be all end all requirement for being a good defenseman?
When none of your defensemen can hit the legal limit.

Canuck D has just enough speed for the regular season. Virtually none of them have enough speed for the playoffs.

And I'd sure like to know which evil scientist removed Bieksa's brain between the first and second rounds....

  Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2009, 10:55 PM
  #286
Ragnar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 60
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
It's not a solid indicator, but it is an indicator. Or a correlation. Staal to Croby/Malkin is a much, much better comparison than the Sedins to Datysuk and Zetterberg.
I never compared the Sedins to Datsyuk, only to Zetterberg. There is a big difference.

Anyway, I don't think this argument is going to go anywhere. If you don't realise what a huge gap there is between Malkin and Staal, I'm not sure what I can say to convince you otherwise, except perhaps that you actually watch some of these players play when you have time.

Just to clarify one more time, you think their respective intagibles are such that Eric Staal is almost as good as Evgeni Malkin, despite being significantly worse offensively, while the Sedins are far worse than Zetterberg, despite actually being better offensively? Well, I guess I'll just have to address these "intangibles" in a minute.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
If you can't see that you need to take those homer glasses off.
Um, do you even know which team I cheer for? Why are you assuming I'm a Canucks fan?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
Yes, I am. Antropov had the same amount of points as Kesler this year, does this make him equivalent in terms of value? Why would we discount playoff success when playoff success is a huge factor? Isn't the point to win the Stanley Cup? Other intangibles would include leadership (neither of the Sedins are even an assistant captain), speed, the ability to play with other linemates as opposed to a twin brother, aggression.
Okay, well, disregarding the obvious strawman (I never said points where the defining indicator and even said myself that many other things are important, so your comparison between Antropov and Kesler is pretty much totally unrelated to what I'm saying), I'll address all of these things.

First of all, playoff success obviously is a factor. However, it has to be taken in context. Teams win Stanley Cups. Simply winning something doesn't make you better, just as failing to win anything doesn't necessarily make you worse. However, it's certainly important how you perform in those situations. This is certainly one argument for a playoff performer like Zetterberg over a playoff no-show like Thornton.

However, I'm not really convinced that the Sedins are playoff no-shows. They were certainly good for the most part in the most recent playoffs. I don't think the Canucks' failure can be ascribed totally to them, and I certainly don't see any reason to believe that they aren't capable of being part of a championship-calibre team.

Leadership is obviously a highly-sought-after attribute, but not everbody is going to be a leader. The Sedins are not captains or alternates, but neither do they, to my knowledge, have a negative effect on team chemistry or whatever you want to call it. Do you have some inside information on what goes on in the Canucks dressing room? In any case, I return to my original point: not everybody has to be or even can be a leader, even if it's a desireable quality to have.

Speed is not an intangible. Even if the Sedins are not particularly fast, they don't appear to need to be, given that they still score and play at very least decent defence. Why should their speed be given any extra importance when it's already a part of the results?

Why does it matter if they can only play with each other? Seriously, I'm curious. Besides the scenario of one of them going down to a long-term injury, something they've been able to avoid for quite some time, it seems about as important as their ability to play as defencemen. They're always going to be on the same team, and they're always going to be playing with each other. So what's the issue?

Aggression can certainly be beneficial to a hockey player when used correctly. But most hockey players do not need it to be successful. I'm not convinced that the Sedins not being particularly aggressive makes them worse players.

So yeah, list as many things as you want. The fact is that they do their job, which is scoring goals, and they do it pretty well. In no other area do they really appear to be deficient in any way that actually negatively impacts their value significantly. Again, intangibles are great, but they're not the end-all be-all of a player any more than points are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
Because Pominville, Horcoff, Elias, Gagne, Perry don't have 10 year contracts. It's not only the amount, it's also the duration. Many players have contracts longer than Datysuk's? Not quite. Maybe 10 if that.
Datsyuk's contract expires in 2014. The following players have deals as long or longer (which is what I said): Ovechkin, Malkin, Staal, Lecavalier, Heatley, Gomez, Vanek, Campbell, Spezza, Lundqvist, Kopitar, Boyle, Stastny, Briere, Redden, Phaneuf, Miller, Zetterberg, Kipprusoff, Richards, Horcoff, Pominville, Fleury, Malone, Erat, Legwand, DiPietro, Michalek, Gilbert, Meszaros, Franzen, Orpik, Schultz, Brown, Olesz, Greene, and Ballard.

Hey, look, both Horcoff and Pominville are there! I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were just confused about the length of Datsyuk's contract: it's certainly not 10 years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
The Detroit contracts were given to franchise players who have won cups and Conn Smythe trophies. The Sedins, while being good PPG players, are not franchise players, nor have they led this team past the 2nd round
Johan Franzen is a franchise player? I don't know who would agree with you on that one. He's only won one Cup and no Conn Smythes. For that matter, Zetterberg also only has one Cup. All but two players on the Red Wings have at least as many, and yet none of the rest have contracts that long. Could it be that such contracts might be given out based on things like player skill, as well as the salary cap considerations others have repeatedly mentioned? Is it possible that Ken Holland and other GMs don't think whether or not you've won a Stanley Cup defines whether or not you should receive such a deal? Maybe that's why Richards got such a long deal, despite never having played in the Stanley Cup Final.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
Simply because you disagree with something does not make it "silly and nonsensical". Understanding that sometimes people have a different opinion than yourself and are entitled to that opinion is part of debating in a mature and reasonable manner. Hurling insults and claiming other posters have no idea what they're talking about is extremely childish.
I agree. Your ideas are not silly and nonsensical because I disagree with them. In fact, there are a great many people I disagree with on a great many issues without considering their ideas silly and nonsensical. Your arguments, however, are silly and nonsensical, because, well, they fit the definitions of those words. They don't make sense. I've explained why.

And I'm sorry if you've felt insulted by my criticism of your arguments and assertions. I feel that I've been entirely reasonable, however.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
I guess Canucks management also has a ridiculous opinion and "no idea what they're talking about" as they've rejected this contract proposal. Why aren't you the GM again?
When did I say that the Canucks should accept the proposal? I understand if you're confused, because I'm sure you're arguing against other people who are saying that this would be a good idea for the Canucks (I have skipped over most of the last few pages of this thread). However, that was never what I was arguing. Go back and read my previous posts if you need to refresh your memory, but I specifically stated that I wasn't sure if this would be a good deal for the Canucks.

I disagreed not with your conclusion but rather with your arguments and assertions, specifically your idea that the Sedins considered themselves as good as Zetterberg because they asked for money only about $750,000 per year less than he is getting. I subsequently disagreed with some of what you said in your response, such as that Staal is closer in ability to Malkin than the Sedins are to Zetterberg.

But I never said that this would be a good idea for the Canucks, so don't put words in my mouth (not that this is the first time you've done that). Hopefully we can re-centre this discussion on what it's actually supposed to be about.

Ragnar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2009, 10:38 AM
  #287
middletoe
Why am I me?
 
middletoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Northern Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,789
vCash: 500
A question. When the Sedin's are near the end of their contract, could you send them to the minors to get rid of their cap hit and only have to pay them $1 mil each (or whatever small amount was agreed to)?

If you could, that would make a huge difference I think. You could have maybe 8 good years from them (still kinda long) at 5.25 and then get them off the cap for an extra 8 mil or so.

middletoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2009, 10:45 AM
  #288
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,854
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by middletoe View Post
A question. When the Sedin's are near the end of their contract, could you send them to the minors to get rid of their cap hit and only have to pay them $1 mil each (or whatever small amount was agreed to)?

If you could, that would make a huge difference I think. You could have maybe 8 good years from them (still kinda long) at 5.25 and then get them off the cap for an extra 8 mil or so.
that would depend on if they have NMC or a NTC in their contract... if they have a NMC, then you couldn't waive them.

The most likely scenario however is that they simply retire at that stage anyways, instead of playing for $1mill/yr. That's basically the idea behind all these longterm deals... I don't see Franzen or Zetterberg playing when they are 40 either... they will likely retire at 37 or 38... both their contracts are structured so there is a big drop in salary at 37, and then again at 38, and they will get the majority of their pay in years before that, making it worthwhile for them to retire at that age, than play for a $1mill/yr till they're 40.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2009, 10:47 AM
  #289
Jag68Sid87
Registered User
 
Jag68Sid87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 28,041
vCash: 500
What am I missing here? Didn't Zetterberg sign for 12 years, roughly $72 million? So how is 12 years, $63 million similar? The term is similar, the numbers are not.

I don't understand.

Jag68Sid87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2009, 10:50 AM
  #290
It Kills Me
Registered User
 
It Kills Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,792
vCash: 500
I was eating breakfast and Damien Cox was on TV and he said Daniel was clearly better than Henrik, so my question is.. Why don't they pay one less?

It Kills Me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2009, 10:53 AM
  #291
Peter Griffin
Registered User
 
Peter Griffin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,696
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by It Kills Me View Post
I was eating breakfast and Damien Cox was on TV and he said Daniel was clearly better than Henrik, so my question is.. Why don't they pay one less?
If Damien Cox thinks Daniel is "clearly better than Henrik", then Damien Cox doesn't know what he's talking about. Then again, that was a given before this...

Peter Griffin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2009, 10:54 AM
  #292
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,854
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by It Kills Me View Post
I was eating breakfast and Damien Cox was on TV and he said Daniel was clearly better than Henrik, so my question is.. Why don't they pay one less?
That's a subjective remark... Daniel isn't clearly better than Henrik... having followed both of them through their entire careers, IMO Henrik is the better overall player.. but the difference isn't all that significant.

But they want the same deals, and that's all that really matters... and when you break down their numbers - which is what contracts are based on for the most part - they are almost identical throughout their careers, making them equal value players.

IMO Henrik is the better player... being a center, he has more responsibilities, and is better defensively than Daniel... his value in the faceoff circle also helps... but his play impacts his other linemate, and he uses his defense better in plays, than Daniel does.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2009, 10:59 AM
  #293
Lunatik*
 
Lunatik*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Lethbridge
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,918
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO View Post
That's a subjective remark... Daniel isn't clearly better than Henrik... having followed both of them through their entire careers, IMO Henrik is the better overall player.. but the difference isn't all that significant.

But they want the same deals, and that's all that really matters... and when you break down their numbers - which is what contracts are based on for the most part - they are almost identical throughout their careers, making them equal value players.

IMO Henrik is the better player... being a center, he has more responsibilities, and is better defensively than Daniel... his value in the faceoff circle also helps... but his play impacts his other linemate, and he uses his defense better in plays, than Daniel does.
that is apretty good assesment IMO... the only thing I would add is the only reason why Henrik won't get more money is because Daniel score more goals and goal scorers always get paid just a little more... so the difference in defense is offset by the goals in terms of how it makes a difference to a contract

Lunatik* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2009, 11:03 AM
  #294
Kaktus*
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Posts: 22,389
vCash: 500
So what wil Van do? Will they re-sign them or will they walk?

Any new reports?

Kaktus* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2009, 11:05 AM
  #295
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,854
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaktus View Post
So what wil Van do? Will they re-sign them or will they walk?

Any new reports?
It's Vancouver, so there will probably be new reports every other day on this!

But I wouldn't take any of them seriously right now... we're still a week to the draft, and that's when it comes to crunch time to get them signed... with there being only a limited amount of room to negotiate with, I doubt that either side puts close to their final offer on the table before the draft.

But if you consider what Gillis has said to date, then it seems like only a matter of time before they're both re-signed.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2009, 11:08 AM
  #296
jumptheshark
Give the dog a bone
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: hf retirement home
Country: United Nations
Posts: 52,292
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by It Kills Me View Post
I was eating breakfast and Damien Cox was on TV and he said Daniel was clearly better than Henrik, so my question is.. Why don't they pay one less?
they have made it clear that they are a package and when you get one you get the other--so you look at the final bill and not the individual bill

__________________
trying to fend off exwife number 2
45000/010113
GO SHARKS GO
jumptheshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2009, 11:52 AM
  #297
reddog737
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 376
vCash: 500
i would not want to be paying these guys 5.25 million a season when they hit their mid thirties,the canucks should offer 5.25/year for six years and if they dont like it, let some other team sewer their team with that 12 year deal, maybe wang on long island might sign them

reddog737 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2009, 12:49 PM
  #298
Diamonddog01
Registered User
 
Diamonddog01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,140
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnar View Post
I never compared the Sedins to Datsyuk, only to Zetterberg. There is a big difference.

Anyway, I don't think this argument is going to go anywhere. If you don't realise what a huge gap there is between Malkin and Staal, I'm not sure what I can say to convince you otherwise, except perhaps that you actually watch some of these players play when you have time.

Just to clarify one more time, you think their respective intagibles are such that Eric Staal is almost as good as Evgeni Malkin, despite being significantly worse offensively, while the Sedins are far worse than Zetterberg, despite actually being better offensively? Well, I guess I'll just have to address these "intangibles" in a minute.
Speaking of strawmen - when I did say that Eric Staal is almost as good as Evgeni Malkin? I said the comparison between Staal and Pittsburgh's superstars is a better one, and it is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnar View Post
So yeah, list as many things as you want. The fact is that they do their job, which is scoring goals, and they do it pretty well. In no other area do they really appear to be deficient in any way that actually negatively impacts their value significantly. Again, intangibles are great, but they're not the end-all be-all of a player any more than points are.
That's an interesting way of dealing with the non-scoring related aspects of hockey - "list as many as you want, they don't really matter". Again I'm forced to bring up the Kesler/Antropov comparison. While intangibles may be easily dismissed in the all important quest for pointzz and goalzz most fans and hockey personnel view things differently. Of course intangibles aren't the end-all be-all, but they are certainly a factor. And while you think that a lack of footspeed or leadership presence isn't a negative, that's different from them actually having footspeed or leadership ability (which would be a positive). It's like stating that a lack of cancer is equivalent health wise to being fit enough to compete in a triathlon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnar View Post
Datsyuk's contract expires in 2014. The following players have deals as long or longer (which is what I said): Ovechkin, Malkin, Staal, Lecavalier, Heatley, Gomez, Vanek, Campbell, Spezza, Lundqvist, Kopitar, Boyle, Stastny, Briere, Redden, Phaneuf, Miller, Zetterberg, Kipprusoff, Richards, Horcoff, Pominville, Fleury, Malone, Erat, Legwand, DiPietro, Michalek, Gilbert, Meszaros, Franzen, Orpik, Schultz, Brown, Olesz, Greene, and Ballard.
Huh? As long or longer? I said longer, and as you're quoting and responding to my post you may want to get it right. Here's the exact quote for your clarification,

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
Because Pominville, Horcoff, Elias, Gagne, Perry don't have 10 year contracts. It's not only the amount, it's also the duration. Many players have contracts longer than Datysuk's? Not quite. Maybe 10 if that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnar View Post
Hey, look, both Horcoff and Pominville are there! I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were just confused about the length of Datsyuk's contract: it's certainly not 10 years.
If you had actually read what I wrote you could've saved yourself quite a bit of time and effort. Instead of "giving me the benefit of the doubt" you may want to read other posters' posts a bit less hastily

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnar View Post
Johan Franzen is a franchise player? I don't know who would agree with you on that one. He's only won one Cup and no Conn Smythes. For that matter, Zetterberg also only has one Cup. All but two players on the Red Wings have at least as many, and yet none of the rest have contracts that long. Could it be that such contracts might be given out based on things like player skill, as well as the salary cap considerations others have repeatedly mentioned? Is it possible that Ken Holland and other GMs don't think whether or not you've won a Stanley Cup defines whether or not you should receive such a deal? Maybe that's why Richards got such a long deal, despite never having played in the Stanley Cup Final.
1st of all Zetterberg has a Conn Smythe and it wasn't that long ago people thought he was one of the top 5 centres in the game (along with - you guessed it, Datysuk, Malkin and Crosby). He's had an off year. Here's an actual list of the players who have absurd contract lengths,

Ovechkin
Richards
Zetterberg
Di Pietro
Franzen
Lecavalier

Franzen is the only player that wouldn't be considered a "franchise player", and as Di Pietro is an Islander and was the first to be given a contract like this I won't go too much into depth on that one (I think it speaks for itself). The other 5 represent a large majority, and two of them have won cups.

Franzen, btw, has been on a torrid scoring pace in the playoffs and while he never won a Conn Smythe he's certainly proven himself capable of elevating his game. As such he was rewarded.

The only players who weren't rewarded for what they've accomplished were Di Pietro (again it's the Islanders we're dealing with here) and Richards. Ok - so we have Richards, a proven winner at every level, the Captain of the Flyers and one of the best two-way forwards in the game being given a franchise contract proactively. While you may like to include the Sedins on that list I don't think they belong there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnar View Post
I agree. Your ideas are not silly and nonsensical because I disagree with them. In fact, there are a great many people I disagree with on a great many issues without considering their ideas silly and nonsensical. Your arguments, however, are silly and nonsensical, because, well, they fit the definitions of those words. They don't make sense. I've explained why.

And I'm sorry if you've felt insulted by my criticism of your arguments and assertions. I feel that I've been entirely reasonable, however.
No - you haven't actually. Apart from "building strawmen" (you may want to look into logical/rhetorical fallacies as there are many others than HF Boards' perennial favourite) and insisting that intangibles aren't really relevant at the end of the day you simply resorted to insults and comments like "I'm not sure what I can say to convince you otherwise, except perhaps that you actually watch some of these players play when you have time."

Perhaps you're just one of the those people who insults others at parties and doesn't understand why people stop talking to you. There's a book called Social Intelligence by Daniel Goleman I would recommend to you, you may find it very enlightening.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnar View Post
I disagreed not with your conclusion but rather with your arguments and assertions, specifically your idea that the Sedins considered themselves as good as Zetterberg because they asked for money only about $750,000 per year less than he is getting. I subsequently disagreed with some of what you said in your response, such as that Staal is closer in ability to Malkin than the Sedins are to Zetterberg.
They clearly do consider themselves as good (or close) if they are asking for a similar paycheque. It's pretty simple. Here's an analogy: I get promoted to district manager, and when it comes down to pay negotiations I cite another district manager as to what I'd like to be paid. In effect I'm saying I'm as valuable to this district as that manager is to their respective district. This is what players and agents do all the time, often by focusing on their point totals, just as you have.

I guess we'll have to disagree over the Staal/Zetterberg thing, but as you're quick to dismiss intangibles and are more points focused I suppose it's understandable. Maybe I'll make a poll to see what the rest of the HF Boards thinks.


Last edited by Diamonddog01: 06-21-2009 at 01:34 PM.
Diamonddog01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2009, 12:53 PM
  #299
AgentNaslund*
 
AgentNaslund*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jag68Sid87 View Post
What am I missing here? Didn't Zetterberg sign for 12 years, roughly $72 million? So how is 12 years, $63 million similar? The term is similar, the numbers are not.

I don't understand.
There not.

Stupid trolls, just want to take this oppurtunity to smash the Sedins for it.

"who do they think they are? asking for Zetterberg money? get real, they don't even play defence."

They are just using this to attack the Sedins. BTW totally false too, Henrik is a fine defensive player.

AgentNaslund* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-21-2009, 12:57 PM
  #300
Diamonddog01
Registered User
 
Diamonddog01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,140
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AgentNaslund View Post
There not.

Stupid trolls, just want to take this oppurtunity to smash the Sedins for it.

"who do they think they are? asking for Zetterberg money? get real, they don't even play defence."

They are just using this to attack the Sedins. BTW totally false too, Henrik is a fine defensive player.
Um the cap hit differential is 750k (which is the only thing really relevant in this discussion).

Diamonddog01 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 11:07 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.