|
|
Post by blny on May 22, 2018 19:39:25 GMT -5
Looks like 7x7. I was expecting 6x6. It's a lot of cash for a guy who averages 26g per 82 games, but he fit in well out there and did well in his first playoffs.
|
|
|
|
Post by folatre on May 22, 2018 21:18:06 GMT -5
Time will say. I think the 7/$49M is a product of him being younger than most UFAs.
There is no way San Jose can sign Hertl, Tierney, Thornton and Tavares.
Pacioretty may not get a seven year deal, but seeing these numbers should remind everyone that he is not going to cost less than 7 per season against the cap. Kane's deal may also be scary for a club like Ottawa who will soon have a youngish UFA on their hands in Duchene. And Duchene is a bit more productive offensively than Kane plus he is a centre rather than a wing and something tells me 8/$64M is the size contract that it may take to retain his services.
Another implication, at least of an indirect nature, is that a handful of clubs that were thinking of pursuing Kane on July 1 to help solve their goal scoring deficiencies may now have to accept that the price for Van Riemsdyk is going to be high and that perhaps trading for what they need is going to be only option.
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 22, 2018 22:54:48 GMT -5
It seems an overpayment to me.
Yes he looked good in that short sample at the end of the year. But it was a small sample. As the Cap goes up, salaries rise to meet the tide. No team gets a free lunch unless they have some older long term contracts at less than market value. Who knows...in a couple of years that may look like a good contract. Sheesh.
|
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on May 23, 2018 7:40:48 GMT -5
That conditional second round pick in the deal now becomes a first for BUF.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on May 23, 2018 10:57:30 GMT -5
Time will say. I think the 7/$49M is a product of him being younger than most UFAs. There is no way San Jose can sign Hertl, Tierney, Thornton and Tavares. Pacioretty may not get a seven year deal, but seeing these numbers should remind everyone that he is not going to cost less than 7 per season against the cap. Kane's deal may also be scary for a club like Ottawa who will soon have a youngish UFA on their hands in Duchene. And Duchene is a bit more productive offensively than Kane plus he is a centre rather than a wing and something tells me 8/$64M is the size contract that it may take to retain his services. Another implication, at least of an indirect nature, is that a handful of clubs that were thinking of pursuing Kane on July 1 to help solve their goal scoring deficiencies may now have to accept that the price for Van Riemsdyk is going to be high and that perhaps trading for what they need is going to be only option. They had $14 million and change of space going into next season. Kane just ate half that. Tavares was linked for some obvious reasons, but this signing indicates he wasn't in their plans. Thornton has said he'd take a pay cut to stay. We'll see how much of one he's willing to take. Personally, I think they go with Pavelski and Couture as their 1-2 punch next year. WRT to Max, I was always of the opinion it was going to cost $6.5 to $7 million a year on his next contract. This certainly confirms that. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 23, 2018 14:34:43 GMT -5
They had $14 million and change of space going into next season. Kane just ate half that. Tavares was linked for some obvious reasons, but this signing indicates he wasn't in their plans. Thornton has said he'd take a pay cut to stay. We'll see how much of one he's willing to take. Personally, I think they go with Pavelski and Couture as their 1-2 punch next year. WRT to Max, I was always of the opinion it was going to cost $6.5 to $7 million a year on his next contract. This certainly confirms that. Kane was already at $5.25M, so I'm assuming that the new contract will eat up another $1.75MM from their CAP. Which means the Sharks have 12.25MM in Cap space after the extension. Does that change the scenario at all? Joe Thornton's at $8MM. How much of a haircut will he take? Do the Sharks even need him if they sign Tavares? |
|
|
|
Post by blny on May 23, 2018 17:16:10 GMT -5
They had $14 million and change of space going into next season. Kane just ate half that. Tavares was linked for some obvious reasons, but this signing indicates he wasn't in their plans. Thornton has said he'd take a pay cut to stay. We'll see how much of one he's willing to take. Personally, I think they go with Pavelski and Couture as their 1-2 punch next year. WRT to Max, I was always of the opinion it was going to cost $6.5 to $7 million a year on his next contract. This certainly confirms that. Kane was already at $5.25M, so I'm assuming that the new contract will eat up another $1.75MM from their CAP. Which means the Sharks have 12.25MM in Cap space after the extension. Does that change the scenario at all? Joe Thornton's at $8MM. How much of a haircut will he take? Do the Sharks even need him if they sign Tavares? Capfriendly was only counting committed moneys next year. The contract can't be officially announced yet, but here's SJ's commitment next year - before July 1. www.capfriendly.com/teams/sharks They've got $60 million committed. At the old cap ceiling, they've got just over $14 million in space. Obviously, that number is likely to grow as it's expected the cap ceiling will be set in the area of $80 million. Maybe more. |
|
|
|
Post by folatre on May 23, 2018 21:49:27 GMT -5
I agree that the Sharks do not need Thornton if Tavares signs there. But even without Thornton, the numbers on capfriendly make it look tricky. With Kane at 7 AAV, San Jose has $67 and change committed.
I cannot imagine Tavares is willing to move to the other side of North America and also accommodate his new employer economically; for me Tavares is going to cost at least $11M AAV. Hertl needs close to $5M annually and Tierney and De Melo are probably combined another $2.5M. Wilson can save a couple of million in cap space buying out Paul Martin but it still would not be enough to keep everyone.
In the hypothetical scenario where Tavares wants to land in Northern California and Hertl is too costly long-term for the cap situation, it may not be bad business to take him off their hands for a modest package with some upside potential. I would offer up their choice of Scherbak or Jake Evans along with Habs second round pick from Washington; or in the event they really want to solve the Paul Martin problem, then it could be Hertl and Martin for Scherbak or Evans and Benn (or Schlemko if they want him back).
|
|
