HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Conklin Signed - Long Term

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-09-2004, 11:58 AM
  #101
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by igor
I think it is an overpay of at least $500k on a one year deal. And as a percentage it is a significant overpay. They're high-fiving in the NHLPA offices though ... because every goalie on that long list of mediocre NHL goalies above will be using Ty Conklin as an arbs comp. Or using the threat of said strategy to negotiate a higher contract prior to arbs.
Igor... it wasn't a 1 year deal though. Conks made $860k, and are you telling me the raise he should get based on that season was only $140k? I thought 1.2 or 1.3 was going to be the number.

Isn't anyone else sick of having other teams set the market for our players?

Remember Roenick and Weight? Wouldn't it have been nice to set the market there, instead of having the Flyers do it and essentially price Weight completely out of Edmonton?

You have 2 choices... wait for the market to be set, or set it yourself.

The Oilers set the market at one they can afford, and it's better than Ty getting a chance to compare himself to Osgood, or Vokoun (which compounds itself if he is eligible for arbitration, but that needs to be settled with the new CBA)... and asking for a higher contract.

In the end, Ty will probably be in the bottom half of goaltenders in terms of what he makes per season. But I guess we'll see.

__________________
TheSpecialist - MacT thinks he was that good of a hockey player when in actuality he was no better then a Louie Debrusk.
dawgbone is offline  
Old
07-09-2004, 12:06 PM
  #102
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26
that is a good point.... how can Biron not justly ask for 2.5ish if Ty gets 1.5?
And what if Martin Gerber signed for $2mil?

or if Toskela makes $1.5 mil?

Both of these guys are just as unproven, or in some cases moreso, than Conklin. If these guys signed for that kind of money, where does that leave Ty?

Probably in between Gerber and Toskela, maybe even arguably above Gerber...

The Oilers have never faired well when the market gets set for them.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
07-09-2004, 12:16 PM
  #103
igor*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,276
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
...
In the end, Ty will probably be in the bottom half of goaltenders in terms of what he makes per season. But I guess we'll see.
I don't dispute this. And the reason is that there are many unsigned goalies, and most have stronger cases than Conklin AND have arbitration rights ... they will use Conklin as lesser comparable and be awarded more than him.

I also think that you are correct that the Oilers didn't wait for the market to be set, they set it themselves. And I would think that Lowe is back on Goodenow's Christmas card list because of it.

Personally, I don't think that Lowe is a dumbarse, but I do think that there are good reasons to believe that, on the whole, in NHL hockey ops management:
Ex-lawyers, ex-agents and ex-hockey players are necessarily the shrewdest of businessmen. They just play one on TV.

igor* is offline  
Old
07-09-2004, 12:34 PM
  #104
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by igor
I don't dispute this. And the reason is that there are many unsigned goalies, and most have stronger cases than Conklin AND have arbitration rights ... they will use Conklin as lesser comparable and be awarded more than him.
With guys like Nurminen, Irbe, Dunham, and Turek all making the same amount or more, I don't think Conklin is the benchmark.

In fact, I think Nurminen, who already makes $1.49 mil, was the mark that Lowe and Ty's agent agreed on. They are both very similar in age, and had similar careers leading up to the NHL.

Quote:
I also think that you are correct that the Oilers didn't wait for the market to be set, they set it themselves. And I would think that Lowe is back on Goodenow's Christmas card list because of it.
Once again, I think Nurminen is a good point for both of them, because if any one of Vokoun, Toskela, Prusek, Noronen makes a big splash, that changes it. As it stands, Conklin makes $10k more per season than a goaltender that he is better than, and that is Nurminen.

I mean, where does Ty fall?

Garon is a backup that makes $1.1 mil, Hurme is a backup that makes $1.2 mil, Legace makes $1.33 mil, and that number there is about the lowest you can start... But then you have Nurminen who makes $1.49 mil, and that sort of changes the perspective. If Nurminen wasn't up there (who represents the most average of NHL goaltenders), It might have been tough for Ty to get more than Legace.... but factoring in that it is a 2 year deal plus an option (which takes Ty past his arbitration rights if he has a good season next year), 1.5 looks about right for the new contracts.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
07-09-2004, 01:01 PM
  #105
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by igor
I don't dispute this. And the reason is that there are many unsigned goalies, and most have stronger cases than Conklin AND have arbitration rights ... they will use Conklin as lesser comparable and be awarded more than him.
With all due respect, I think Conkin's contract does not support an arbitration case for the other RFA's at all.

Here are the guys that I figure have good arbitration cases this year (in no specific order);

Aebischer - 2.09 GAA - .924 Sv % - 32 wins
Biron - 2.52 GAA - .913 SV% - 26 wins
Cloutier - 2.27 GAA - .914 SV% - 33 wins
Kipprusoff - 1.69 GAA - .933 sv% - 24 wins
Vocoun - 2.53 GAA - .909 sv% - 31 wins
Nabokov - 2.20 GAA - .921 sv% - 31 wins

Benchmark contracts;

Theodore - 2.27 GAA - .924 sv% - 33 wins 6.0 million
Giguere - 2.62 GAA - .914 sv% - 17 wins 4.5 million
Conklin - 2.42 GAA - .912 sv% - 17 wins 1.5 million

In arbitration, where statistics count, who do you go in and compare yourself to? Theodore, Giguere or Conklin?

If Conklin is healthy all year next year and plays the same you can add another 5(?) wins to his year end statistics. If Lowe gave him a 1 year low ball offer and Conklin took it, then next year Conklin would not only be comparing himself to these guys (specifically Giguere) but potentially would also be comparing himself to guys like Aebischer, Kipprusoff and Nabokov (the guys I would expect to recieve the biggest raises this year and also come back down to earth in play next season).

To be clear, I am not arguing that this was a fantastic contract, but it is not a bad one by any stretch.

copperandblue is offline  
Old
07-09-2004, 01:16 PM
  #106
igor*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,276
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
With guys like Nurminen, Irbe, Dunham, and Turek all making the same amount or more, I don't think Conklin is the benchmark.

In fact, I think Nurminen, who already makes $1.49 mil, was the mark that Lowe and Ty's agent agreed on. They are both very similar in age, and had similar careers leading up to the NHL.
Nurminen would be the best comparable used by Conklin's agent, because that was a terrible contract. (Conklin did have arbs rights this year BTW, the poster further up is correct).

The Oilers would of course NOT use him as a comparable in their case. Personally, I would have like to have seen Lowe take this to arbitration and opt for a 2-year contract decision.
Quote:
Garon is a backup that makes $1.1 mil, Hurme is a backup that makes $1.2 mil, Legace makes $1.33 mil, and that number there is about the lowest you can start.
Garon was traded for what amounted to next-to-nothing. (Huet).

Hurme cleared waivers last autumn.

This shows that their salary is so high relative to their value that they have virtually no trade value.

Legace is one of the players that the Oilers would surely have used as a higher-end comparabe, showing that Legace had better numbers and experience at his last contract signing ... and that Conklin should expect to earn considerably less.

.
.
.

But what's done is done. This is another contract in the style of the last Brewer deal. The thinking ... "we better pay whatever it takes to get him signed multi-year, cuz this kids gonna be great!" We won't know how this gamble works out for a while.

igor* is offline  
Old
07-09-2004, 01:20 PM
  #107
Mizral
Registered User
 
Mizral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Earth, MW
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,150
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
Ty's a better starting goalie than Pittsburgh has, the Rangers have, Phoenix has, Atlanta has... and it's arguable whether teams like Carolina, St. Louis and Vancouver have better starting goaltenders.
You think so?

I'd take Sebastion Caron, Mike Dunham, or Pasi Nurminen over Ty Conklin (Lehtonen too).

Gerber, Lalime, and Cloutier too over Conks.

Mizral is offline  
Old
07-09-2004, 01:24 PM
  #108
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Thompson
You think so?

I'd take Sebastion Caron, Mike Dunham, or Pasi Nurminen over Ty Conklin (Lehtonen too).

Gerber, Lalime, and Cloutier too over Conks.
Wow, really?

Building your team around offence I take it?

copperandblue is offline  
Old
07-09-2004, 01:31 PM
  #109
igor*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,276
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue
With all due respect, I think Conkin's contract does not support an arbitration case for the other RFA's at all.

Here are the guys that I figure have good arbitration cases this year (in no specific order);

Aebischer - 2.09 GAA - .924 Sv % - 32 wins
Biron - 2.52 GAA - .913 SV% - 26 wins
Cloutier - 2.27 GAA - .914 SV% - 33 wins
Kipprusoff - 1.69 GAA - .933 sv% - 24 wins
Vocoun - 2.53 GAA - .909 sv% - 31 wins
Nabokov - 2.20 GAA - .921 sv% - 31 wins

Benchmark contracts;

Theodore - 2.27 GAA - .924 sv% - 33 wins 6.0 million
Giguere - 2.62 GAA - .914 sv% - 17 wins 4.5 million
Conklin - 2.42 GAA - .912 sv% - 17 wins 1.5 million

In arbitration, where statistics count, who do you go in and compare yourself to? Theodore, Giguere or Conklin?
Surely you're just kidding? You pick players with similar career profiles as comparables ... so I just can't follow your reasoning whatsoever.

Nabakov has a terrific arbitration case. But how in heck is he even remotely comparable to Conklin.

Conklin is extremely comparable to Aebischer ... two years removed. COL did a decent job with that contract IMO. Lowe's award to Conklin appears to indicate that he feels goalie salaries have inflated by 50% in two years.

Quote:
If Conklin is healthy all year next year and plays the same you can add another 5(?) wins to his year end statistics. If Lowe gave him a 1 year low ball offer and Conklin took it, then next year Conklin would not only be comparing himself to these guys (specifically Giguere) but potentially would also be comparing himself to guys like Aebischer, Kipprusoff and Nabokov (the guys I would expect to recieve the biggest raises this year and also come back down to earth in play next season).

To be clear, I am not arguing that this was a fantastic contract, but it is not a bad one by any stretch.
You seem to feel that Conklin, over the next two years, will put up numbers similar to Giguere and Nabakov ... then you're right. And Lowe agrees with you.

In a nutshell, this is the point of difference ... because as much as I like Conklin, I wouldn't bet my own money on this happening.

igor* is offline  
Old
07-09-2004, 01:34 PM
  #110
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by igor
Nurminen would be the best comparable used by Conklin's agent, because that was a terrible contract.
Most of the contracts in the NHL are terrible contracts... that doesn't really change anything.

Quote:
(Conklin did have arbs rights this year BTW, the poster further up is correct).

The Oilers would of course NOT use him as a comparable in their case. Personally, I would have like to have seen Lowe take this to arbitration and opt for a 2-year contract decision.
Good point... I thought it was 2 years in the NHL, but it is only 1 year. The other problem we have is we don't know what a lot of these goaltenders made last year, so there may be even more comparables that we don't know of. We've all seen the problem with arbitration... Conks may have very well gotten more than the $1.5 or he might have gotten less... the problem is the Club doesn't have the option of filing, only the player does.

Quote:
Garon was traded for what amounted to next-to-nothing. (Huet).

Hurme cleared waivers last autumn.

This shows that their salary is so high relative to their value that they have virtually no trade value.
Regardless... I don't think you can really use that as an argument... especially in an arbitration case.

Quote:
Legace is one of the players that the Oilers would surely have used as a higher-end comparabe, showing that Legace had better numbers and experience at his last contract signing ... and that Conklin should expect to earn considerably less.
Unless you focus on the roles that they were to play. Legace was signed as a backup goaltender, and his contract reflected that. Conklin was going in as a 1-1A starter. Unfortunately, Legace's good example for the Oilers is far-outweighed by some of the other contracts other goaltenders received that Conklin could use in comparison.

Quote:
But what's done is done. This is another contract in the style of the last Brewer deal. The thinking ... "we better pay whatever it takes to get him signed multi-year, cuz this kids gonna be great!" We won't know how this gamble works out for a while.
I don't think this is at all comparable to the Brewer deal. Conklin is making below the league average, and below what an average goaltender makes. At worst, it's an overpay of about $200k... but at best it's an underpayment based on what other goaltenders have signed for, or will sign for.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
07-09-2004, 01:42 PM
  #111
sorgs20
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 136
vCash: 500
I think this is a great deal for the Oilers. Sure it looks high the 1st yr, but if he plays the way he did a majority of last season and Lowe can get a goal scorer then he could be in for a monster yr. And if he does indeed have that monster yr next yr at $1.5 will be a steal. If they signed him for 1 yr in my mind they would be counting on him to fail. By committing to 2yrs they are saying that they beleive in him, and he will be a bargain next season.

It is fine for us to suggest that he should have signed for $1.1 1st yr and $1.3 2nd. But there would be no way that he takes that deal and who would blame him??? People are talking like the Oilers are doing Conklin a favour letting him play in the NHL, and he has no leverage. What would be the option other then Conklin???

sorgs20 is offline  
Old
07-09-2004, 01:48 PM
  #112
igor*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,276
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
... I thought it was 2 years in the NHL, but it is only 1 year.
I'm not sure what you mean here. I was saying that I thought that the Oilers should opt for a two-year contract decision from the arbitrator.

After a player files for arbitration, the team has the option of whether or not to have the arbitrator decide on a one-year or a two-year contract.


Quote:
We've all seen the problem with arbitration... Conks may have very well gotten more than the $1.5 or he might have gotten less... the problem is the Club doesn't have the option of filing, only the player does.
I don't have a problem with arbitration at all. IMHO people who have a problem with arbitration decisions either haven't read or understood the relevant section of the CBA.

If Conklin turns out to be the next Nabakov or Giguere ... then ya, paying a higher rate for two years to have the option to sign him for $2.5M in the third year is great.

If Brewer had strated evolving into the next McCrimmon or Langway ... then that contract would have been terrific too.

We'll see.

igor* is offline  
Old
07-09-2004, 01:48 PM
  #113
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Thompson
You think so?
Yeah, I do.

Quote:
I'd take Sebastion Caron, Mike Dunham, or Pasi Nurminen over Ty Conklin
Based on what? Ignoring age, which is what I did, Caron isn't a better goaltender. Dunham certainly isn't, and Nurminen's numbers don't compare to Ty's at all. I wouldn't want to go into this season with either of those 3.

I can't honestly beleive that you said these three... that's just a terrible joke.

Quote:
(Lehtonen too).
Stay on track Miz... I'd love to have Fleury or Lehtonen, but as of right now, Conklin is a better goaltender than either of them. That is certainly going to change as the other 2 get experience, but that isn't the point I was making. Current abilities have Conklin ahead of either of those 2, which is why neither of them are in the NHL.

Quote:
Gerber, Lalime, and Cloutier too over Conks.
It's still arguable... Cloutier and Lalime have been nothing but crap in the playoffs, and have had rather average seasons (number wise) despite playing behind rather good teams). And Gerber hasn't shown he can be a starting goaltender yet either... and when you look at the fact that his numbers have gotten significanltly worse as he has played more, it's still an argument you can make.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
07-09-2004, 01:58 PM
  #114
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by igor
Surely you're just kidding? You pick players with similar career profiles as comparables ... so I just can't follow your reasoning whatsoever.

Nabakov has a terrific arbitration case. But how in heck is he even remotely comparable to Conklin.
Well you gotta help me out here then.

The way I followed your post that I quoted;

I don't dispute this. And the reason is that there are many unsigned goalies, and most have stronger cases than Conklin AND have arbitration rights ... they will use Conklin as lesser comparable and be awarded more than him.

I understood it to mean that Conklin will be used as an example of an inferior goalie and therefore they (goalies going for arbitration) should be making significantly more. Am I wrong?

If that is what you were suggesting, then I am countering it by saying that based on last years statistics these guys who are potentially filing for arb. are not going to look in the rear view mirror and say "look at Ty Conklin he is making 1.5 therefore I should be making 4 mil a year because I am better".

What I would expect them to do is specifically target the big white elephant in Anaheim and say "look at JF Giguere he is making 4.5 mil and I proved this year that I was the same or better therefore I should be making 5 mil".

Why would you argue based on a smaller contract when there are very good examples of very very big contracts that statistically can be compared. I know I wouldn't want an arbitrator thinking of a contract amount relative to a lesser amount. It only makes sense that you want that person thinking numbers relative to a much higher number.

Quote:
Originally Posted by igor
Conklin is extremely comparable to Aebischer ... two years removed. COL did a decent job with that contract IMO. Lowe's award to Conklin appears to indicate that he feels goalie salaries have inflated by 50% in two years.
That two years removed places Aebischer behind Patrick Roy. There is NO WAY any younger goalie is going to a) play a planned significant role b) expect to be paid as such

Instead of comparing Conklin's contract to Aebischer from 2 years ago let's wait and see what he signs for this year. Suddenly Patrick Roy is out of the picture and he has much more leverage. Not unlike Edmonton's situation with the departure of Salo.

Quote:
Originally Posted by igor
You seem to feel that Conklin, over the next two years, will put up numbers similar to Giguere and Nabakov ... then you're right. And Lowe agrees with you.

In a nutshell, this is the point of difference ... because as much as I like Conklin, I wouldn't bet my own money on this happening.
I think that Conklin is more than capable of putting up the numbers tha Giguere put up last year and I expect to see him (Giguere) level off at those statistics.

Hell Conklin already had his numbers last year, he simply has to repeat.

Giguere's contract is set, it doesn't matter what numbers got him the contract if what was seen this year is the level he continues to play at, then the market basically says;

20 wins+/- + 2.55 GAA + 9.15 sv% = 4.5 mil (obviously without and possible market correction caused by the CBA)

copperandblue is offline  
Old
07-09-2004, 01:59 PM
  #115
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by igor
I'm not sure what you mean here. I was saying that I thought that the Oilers should opt for a two-year contract decision from the arbitrator.
I was referring to being eligible for arbitration. I thought the minimum was playing 2 years in the NHL, but it turns out that is only 1 year if you are over 25.

Quote:
After a player files for arbitration, the team has the option of whether or not to have the arbitrator decide on a one-year or a two-year contract.
I am aware of that part... but don't you think that there might be a reason why most teams don't opt for 2 year rulings? It may have something to do with it swaying the arbitrators decision in the players favour a little more.

Quote:
I don't have a problem with arbitration at all. IMHO people who have a problem with arbitration decisions either haven't read or understood the relevant section of the CBA.
I have... my problem with arbitration is that you put your numbers forward, and you compare it with other players who have had similar numbers. Many times, it's based on that last season. I remember when Poti won his arbitration case that boosted him up to $1.8 mil (which was summer following the season he held out and got traded to the rangers). I also remember guys like Jason Smith and Anson Carter getting very hefty raises after their arbitration cases. I can't think of many teams who have come out of arbitration happy with the results...

Quote:
If Conklin turns out to be the next Nabakov or Giguere ... then ya, paying a higher rate for two years to have the option to sign him for $2.5M in the third year is great.
We don't know of yet if Conklin is getting paid a higher rate... we won't know until the other goaltenders start signing their deals. If Conklin ends up being in the bottom 25 in goaltenders in terms of Salary, it might prove to be a very good decision on the Oilers part, as opposed to trying to low-ball a guy because you can and risk having him wait it out, or go to arbitration.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
07-09-2004, 02:09 PM
  #116
Mizral
Registered User
 
Mizral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Earth, MW
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,150
vCash: 500
I don't see much of a question with Lalime. He's A) more experienced, B) been a starter before, C) has proven more at the NHL level in both the regular season and the playoffs than Conklin, D) Aint that much older I don't think.

In all seriousness, how exactly is Conklin different from, say, Cristobal Huet?

Both are about the same age, similar size, similar stats.

Conklin: http://tsn.ca/nhl/teams/player_bio.a...in&hubName=EDM

Huet: http://tsn.ca/nhl/teams/player_bio.a...et&hubName=MTL

Mizral is offline  
Old
07-09-2004, 02:25 PM
  #117
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Thompson
I don't see much of a question with Lalime. He's A) more experienced, B) been a starter before, C) has proven more at the NHL level in both the regular season and the playoffs than Conklin, D) Aint that much older I don't think.
But are his numbers that much different? Does Lalime fit those categories because he is a better goaltender, or was it because he was a good goaltender on an very good team.

I mean, you were the one clamouring for Salo to be gone and a guy like Gerber to be brought in, and Salo had the edge over Gerber in all those categories to.

I mean, make up your mind Miz... you are the one who always talks about the Oilers being a lower team, with a shoddy defence, and everything else. Well Conklin put up comparable numbers to Cloutier and Lalime despite that...

Quote:
In all seriousness, how exactly is Conklin different from, say, Cristobal Huet?

Both are about the same age, similar size, similar stats.

Conklin: http://tsn.ca/nhl/teams/player_bio.a...in&hubName=EDM

Huet: http://tsn.ca/nhl/teams/player_bio.a...et&hubName=MTL
The fact that, according to you, the Oilers have one of the worst defensive groups in the league, and added to that Conklin's sv% is better. Added to that Huet doesn't have a contract yet (which is where I assume this is going).


Last edited by dawgbone: 07-09-2004 at 03:33 PM.
dawgbone is offline  
Old
07-09-2004, 03:26 PM
  #118
hockeyaddict101
Registered User
 
hockeyaddict101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 19,905
vCash: 500
Some points to consider

Conklin made less than the NHL average so automatically his qualifying offer was 10% higher.

So basically the poster that wanted him to get only a 100,000 raise was basically saying he should have accepted his qualifying offer, since he had arbitration rights why would he do so?

You are basically banking on that the arbitrator wouldn't have given him any raise it all, we all know that arbitration cases always go to the player so he was going to get a raise on that qualifying offer. His salary was 847,000 I believe so his offer wa automatically 931,000.

So lets say he asked for 2 million, he is going to shoot higher that only makes sense. Lets pretend that Lowe contends that he should get the qualifying offer. The arbitrator can not award less than the qualfying offer.


Lets split the difference as most arbitrators do, and what do you get 1.5 million almost on the nose.

Seems like this one is a no brainer. Lowe signed him for what he thought he would win in arbitration.

hockeyaddict101 is offline  
Old
07-09-2004, 03:31 PM
  #119
speeds
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St.Albert
Posts: 6,823
vCash: 500
Personally, I would say this contract is AT least 250K high per season, and the option is at least 500K too high. There was just no reason at all for Lowe to capitulate here, all he had to do was tell Conklin's agent that they are planning on alternating goalies because they see Conklin and Markkanen as similar goalies, whether that is true or not. What could Conklin's agent possibly say in response? "You're lying!" ????

If worse came to worse, and Conklin ends up holding out (assuming of course that the season starts on time) EDM still has Jussi kicking around to start the year, who hasn't shown himself to be a markably worse goalie than Conklin anyways (and I'm not even getting into the issue of why they are committing so obviously to Conklin when they could well have taken their time here, and saved themselves some money in the process, and seen how it played out over a year or two)

IMO, Lowe panicked at a time when there is no reason in the world to do so. Not only did Conklin have no leverage, there was also no time pressure.

speeds is offline  
Old
07-09-2004, 03:44 PM
  #120
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by speeds
If worse came to worse, and Conklin ends up holding out (assuming of course that the season starts on time) EDM still has Jussi kicking around to start the year, who hasn't shown himself to be a markably worse goalie than Conklin anyways
If we were looking at a hold out situation my money would be on Conklin ultimately winning out.

I like Jussi but I can't say I would want the first 10, 15, 20 games of the season simply handed over to him.

Not to mention that any struggles can't be over come with depth at this point.

Also not too mention what fall out may occur in terms of relationship between player and org.

There are just too many variables to gamble on once that situation occurs.

Now if this was 2 years down the road and Deslauriers and/or Dubnyk were knocking on the door the situation changes drastically in Lowes favour.

In the end for me, this debate seems to boil down to two simple conclusions.

One side wants Conklin to perhaps prove his worth more before cashing in on a contract. A valid position based on the Brewer debate.

The other side either can see or have convinced ourselves to see where his potential will put him. Not 3 years from now or 2 years from now but for next year and the year after and believe that this is a case of locking up a talent before he has the leverage to cost even more down the road.

The beauty is that we will all get see which side was the most accurate in their conclusions as the next couple seasons unfold.

copperandblue is offline  
Old
07-09-2004, 03:46 PM
  #121
sorgs20
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 136
vCash: 500
It really is not worth even talking about the option yr. Obviously if Conklin does not become the goalie that the Oilers invision then it is a no brainer to not pick up the option. Depending on what the UFA age is in the new CBA he may or may not become a UFA.

Lets face facts, at the very least Conklin is a very good back-up and if Lowe chooses to bring in another goalie he will no doubt be a younger cheaper (unproven)goalie and they will still need to rely on Conklin.

This contract is also not a good comparison to what Lowe did with Brewer. Conklin will be 30 when this deal expires or 31 if the OIl pick up the option. Brewer is 25 and the minute Lowe signed him for over $2mil at such a young age he made Brewer at least a $2 million player for life. With each new contact his price tag is just going to go up.

sorgs20 is offline  
Old
07-09-2004, 03:49 PM
  #122
oil slick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,369
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by speeds
If worse came to worse, and Conklin ends up holding out (assuming of course that the season starts on time)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Conklin would go to arbitration instead of holding out. From reading through the previouse 4 pages, I'm coming down on the side of people who say an arbitrator might well rule at the 1.5 million dollar level anyways. Not a great contract IMO, not terrible either.

oil slick is offline  
Old
07-09-2004, 03:54 PM
  #123
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by speeds
Personally, I would say this contract is AT least 250K high per season, and the option is at least 500K too high. There was just no reason at all for Lowe to capitulate here, all he had to do was tell Conklin's agent that they are planning on alternating goalies because they see Conklin and Markkanen as similar goalies, whether that is true or not. What could Conklin's agent possibly say in response? "You're lying!" ????
I was banking on a $1.2-1.3 mil contract as well... until I looked around at what other goaltenders in the league were making. I think if you look at last years salaries, Conklin is still in the bottom 20 or so of the league. Regardless of what you tell his agent, the fact of the matter is Conklin had a good season. I don't think it matters what Lowe tells his agent, with arbitration being a possibility, and the fact that the Oilers got a chance to lock him up before the market was established (at possibly a higher rate), is worth paying him $250k more per season. Even splitting time, there are a lot of backup goaltenders making $1.25 mil or more.

Quote:
If worse came to worse, and Conklin ends up holding out (assuming of course that the season starts on time) EDM still has Jussi kicking around to start the year, who hasn't shown himself to be a markably worse goalie than Conklin anyways (and I'm not even getting into the issue of why they are committing so obviously to Conklin when they could well have taken their time here, and saved themselves some money in the process, and seen how it played out over a year or two)
So you are going to make a guy hold out for $250 k? Have goaltenders ever played well after a layoff?

Guys like Dafoe come to mind... he hasn't been the same since.

I like Markkanen as a goaltender, but he hasn't played more than 1800 minutes in a season since he came to North America. Conklin isn't overpaid based on his play, his age, or what other goaltenders make.

I mean it's one thing to be a hardass after a guy has a stinker of a year, but when the guy does everything you want out of him and more, is a little bit of a bonus a bad thing?

Would there be this problem if Conks signed a 2 year deal that paid him $1.3 mil per season along with a $400k signing bonus?

Quote:
IMO, Lowe panicked at a time when there is no reason in the world to do so. Not only did Conklin have no leverage, there was also no time pressure.
No time pressure? The fact that Edmonton gets continually screwed when other teams set the market for them should be time pressure enough. The Oilers continually lose out on players because other teams set the market higher than the Oilers could afford. If goaltenders start signing, Conklin and his agent may very well decide that arbitration is the best route.

Look at the Nedved situation... everytime someone else signs, everyone here asks "how does that affect the market for Nedved?". The Oilers just had a chance to solidify their goaltending for the next 2 years, and people are complaining because it is $200k more than they figured it might be?

Like I said, we'll see... if in 2 months Conklin is in the bottom 25 or so of goaltenders in terms of Salary, it's a pretty good move, especially if we see lesser goaltenders signing for more money.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
07-09-2004, 04:01 PM
  #124
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
I think it comes down to the Oilers having 2 choices...

Sign the guy and set the market for mid-range goaltenders...

or

Let other teams set the market for mid-range goaltenders (possibly leading to arbitration) and try and work out a deal...

We've seen option 2 enough times here in Edmonton. Not sure how many times it's worked out for us though.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
07-16-2004, 07:33 PM
  #125
Asiaoil
Registered User
 
Asiaoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country: Thailand
Posts: 5,259
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by YKOil
in Millions

1.55 -- Denis
1.10 -- Nurminen
1.20 -- Vokoun
1.10 -- Legace
1.00 -- Garon
0.88 -- Kipper
0.56 -- Esche
0.55 -- Aebischer
0.55 -- Raycroft

And I would take someone like Biron at 2.20 over Conklin as well. Also, Gerber made 500k and Noronen made 550k last year.

1.5 million is NOT a great deal.


YKOil

Thought I would drag this thread up from the depths because Aebischer just re-signed a 1yr deal at $2.5M. Conks contract is looking OK and I'm glad we resigned him before this came out.

Asiaoil is offline  
Closed Thread

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 05:42 PM.

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.