OilFans.com :: Fan Forum: Speculation => 2023-24 Speculation Thread

Guest

Login / Register

This day on April 30
Acquired: Bryan Muir (1996)

Happy Birthday To: oilfan351, CaptainBucky, Oilersfanatic6, oilers80s, Molsonmagneto, uglyoil

OILERS INFO OILFANS
Tuesday, Apr 30, 2024 12:32 PM MT

F.A.Q.

Terms of Use F.A.Q.

F.A.Q.

Members

Search

Register

Login

Home

Speculation » 2023-24 Speculation Thread

Pages (11): [ « < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 > »]

Switch to flat view

Switch to tree view

Create a new topic

Submit Reply

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825236 is a reply to message #825235 ]	Tue, 15 August 2023 15:23

CrusaderPi
Messages: 7642
Registered: December 2003
Location: AB Highway 100

6 Cups

RDOilerfan wrote on Tue, 15 August 2023 15:05

The market was set with Byram 2 yrs, 3.85 and Miller 2 yrs 3.872. Those are the high marks in my opinion. Both of those guys are similar age. Miller put up almost the same points with a couple more goals. Byram only played 42 games dues to injury but if you take what he scored in 42 games, 10G-24, he would have scored WAY more goals than Bouchard and had more points.

Both those guys played more mins than Bouchard by a lot. Almost 3 mins. Both of those guys played on the PK where as Bouchard hardly played any. AND Bouchard gets way more sugar time on the Oilers PP, that is setting records in the NHL. So both of those 2 are scoring most of their points 5 on 5 which is harder to do.

So in my opinion, I don't see what the hold up for Bouchard is. There is 2 young, top 4 dmen who just signed. Both score as much as Bouchard so far, play significantly more mins, both play on the PK and both get way less time on the PP than Bouchard does. So if you are bridging him which really there is no choice for the Oilers, Bouchard shouldn't be making more than them based on where he is at right now. Plus supposedly McD told the team that to win, everyone has to take a little less. So do your part, take your 3.75 or less, know you are going to rack up the points getting your sugar time on the Oilers PP and crush the homerun that will be your next deal with maybe a ring on your finger to further up your value.

Another year where the plan will have to be starting with a 21 man roster. Starting to look like the Oilers will have to send Holloway down to clear cap space for Bouchard which will inevitably cause the same problem with his next contract.

Please do not feed the bears. Feeding the bears creates a dependent population unable to survive on their own. Bears.

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825237 is a reply to message #825233 ]	Tue, 15 August 2023 16:28

Kr55
Messages: 9649
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

Dragon_Matt wrote on Tue, 15 August 2023 12:52

If Bouchard doesn't sign a deal and holds out into the season (as he has no arb rights), does his value get diminished if we prove to run a reasonably potent powerplay without him?

I'd be more concerned about not having a RHD that can make a play with the puck. His ammo negotiating probably goes up based on our 5v5 performance alone.

"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013

"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015

5 x $5,000,000

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825238 is a reply to message #825237 ]	Tue, 15 August 2023 16:30

CrusaderPi
Messages: 7642
Registered: December 2003
Location: AB Highway 100

6 Cups

Kr55 wrote on Tue, 15 August 2023 16:28

Dragon_Matt wrote on Tue, 15 August 2023 12:52

If Bouchard doesn't sign a deal and holds out into the season (as he has no arb rights), does his value get diminished if we prove to run a reasonably potent powerplay without him?

I'd be more concerned about not having a RHD that can make a play with the puck. His ammo negotiating probably goes up based on our 5v5 performance alone.

Fortunately the Oilers defense is a source of strength like you'd expect when trying to win a cup.

Please do not feed the bears. Feeding the bears creates a dependent population unable to survive on their own. Bears.

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825239 is a reply to message #825238 ]	Tue, 15 August 2023 17:09

Kr55
Messages: 9649
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

CrusaderPi wrote on Tue, 15 August 2023 16:30

Kr55 wrote on Tue, 15 August 2023 16:28

Dragon_Matt wrote on Tue, 15 August 2023 12:52

If Bouchard doesn't sign a deal and holds out into the season (as he has no arb rights), does his value get diminished if we prove to run a reasonably potent powerplay without him?

I'd be more concerned about not having a RHD that can make a play with the puck. His ammo negotiating probably goes up based on our 5v5 performance alone.

Fortunately the Oilers defense is a source of strength like you'd expect when trying to win a cup.

Just out of curiosity, looked at the PP performance of our D with McDavid the last few years.

4 D have more than 6:30 of PP ice time with McDavid over the last 3 years. Keith has 9 minutes so excluding him, because we didn't score a goal with him in that time.

The remaining 3 challengers are Nurse, Barrie and Bouch.

Nurse+McDavid PP 2020-23 - xGF/60 9.26 - GF/60 13.04
Barrie+McDavid PP 2020-23 - xGF/60 10.09 - GF/60 12.93
Bouch+McDavid PP 2020-23 - xGF/60 11.63 - GF/60 13.12

If we just go by this last season with the Barrie/Bouch head to head

Barrie+McDavid PP 2022/23 - xGF/60 10.64 - GF/60 15.94
Bouch+McDavid PP 2022/23 - xGF/60 12.16 - GF/60 16.49

I guess Nurse steps in? Maybe Ekholm? PP probably does OK, but I don't think I've seen a D actually contribute to the PP more than Bouch did once he was comfortable. We know who runs the show, and all the D has to do to still have a top PP in the league is pass the puck left and right with some accuracy. Barrie never really let his shot be a major factor. He just walked the blue line and fed left and right, and Nurse was able to do the same when asked.

So, if the PP does OK with Nurse or Ekholm, I guess Bouch's negotiation is hurt by how he was kinda replaced on the PP by a 9.25M or a 6M Dman, in addition to us having no good RHD puck movers. I like our odds to beat him down in price! We gave ourselves a really strong position with the "Look at how little cap space we have left after we signed a bunch of replicable guys, you have no choice but to accept what is left" argument.

[Updated on: Tue, 15 August 2023 17:27]

"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013

"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015

5 x $5,000,000

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825274 is a reply to message #824423 ]	Wed, 23 August 2023 08:14

smyth260
Messages: 949
Registered: November 2007

No Cups

Friedman reporting Bouchard is coming in at 2x3.9M, though not official from team yet.

Too bad, this is going to bite us. Draisaitl and Bouch due at the same time.

Clean house or bust

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825275 is a reply to message #825274 ]	Wed, 23 August 2023 08:33

RDOilerfan
Messages: 3720
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

I don't see an alternative. You sign him for a 1 yr at less and then you are dealing with a 60 pt season under his belt for next.

Longer term, I can't see him taking less than 7. The cap hasn't gone up hardly at all in in the last 5 years. In the 2018-2019 season the cap was 79.5. There's no money.

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825278 is a reply to message #825275 ]	Wed, 23 August 2023 08:41

Kr55
Messages: 9649
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 08:33

I don't see an alternative. You sign him for a 1 yr at less and then you are dealing with a 60 pt season under his belt for next.

Longer term, I can't see him taking less than 7. The cap hasn't gone up hardly at all in in the last 5 years. In the 2018-2019 season the cap was 79.5. There's no money.

Only alternatives were to have some foresight and sign him long term earlier. Or manage the cap properly the last 4 years and have cap space to sign your best offensive young D long term.

Neither of those happening are on management.

We will toss 3.5Mx4 at kassian for 1 month of effort and chasing tkachuk around for 1 night and overpay replacement level players and give them 2 years all the time, but we can't figure out how to properly manage contracts for our best homegrown players.

[Updated on: Wed, 23 August 2023 08:44]

"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013

"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015

5 x $5,000,000

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825279 is a reply to message #825278 ]	Wed, 23 August 2023 09:16

smyth260
Messages: 949
Registered: November 2007

No Cups

There were certainly ways to get him long term if the Oilers accepted that they could enter a season without Ceci, Warren Foegele, Kulak etc.

But they never contemplated that possibility.

Heck, even trading Kane would have been my preference to this.

Clean house or bust

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825280 is a reply to message #825278 ]	Wed, 23 August 2023 09:35

RDOilerfan
Messages: 3720
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

Kr55 wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 08:41

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 08:33

I don't see an alternative. You sign him for a 1 yr at less and then you are dealing with a 60 pt season under his belt for next.

Longer term, I can't see him taking less than 7. The cap hasn't gone up hardly at all in in the last 5 years. In the 2018-2019 season the cap was 79.5. There's no money.

Only alternatives were to have some foresight and sign him long term earlier. Or manage the cap properly the last 4 years and have cap space to sign your best offensive young D long term.

Neither of those happening are on management.

We will toss 3.5Mx4 at kassian for 1 month of effort and chasing tkachuk around for 1 night and overpay replacement level players and give them 2 years all the time, but we can't figure out how to properly manage contracts for our best homegrown players.

So when would the forsight have been to sign him earlier? His contract just ended. So you sign him up last year I guess. So what would the number have been? I live in the real world so give me a real number. Bouchard last year isn't signing long term for 4 mill. It's not happening.

They could have managed the cap better. Sure. How? What's the bad contract on the Oilers books right now? I look and I have a hard time picking one out where I think it's really, really bad. I am sure you will say Nurse. Fine. His contract has been talked to death, it came up at the perfect time and he's paid too much. I get it and I agree. It's too high. But by how much? Probably 1 mill maybe 1.25. Again, I live in the real world and in the real world given what all he does, the amount of minutes he plays, what he scores 5 on 5, he's not a 6 mill dman. He's probably an 8.

Campbell makes 5 mill. Given how he played last season, it's not great. But look at the comparables last year and even this year. Hill played well for 1.5 months and makes 4.9 mill now. That's what it costs for a goalie in their late 20's to 30's who is not a high end guy who could start.

The cap has gone up 4 mill in 5 yrs. That's a fact. You still have to ice a team that is good and competitve. If you look at their top 6, there isn't 1 guy grossly overpaid. They got 3 guys making just over 5 mill scoring 80+ points or 30 goals or both. That's good value. Even Kane for all his injuries last year had 16 goals in 41 games, that's a 32 goal pace. That's a cheap contract. If you look at the bottom 6, the only guy that might be slightly overpaid is Foegele. But we aren't talking a ton here. He's probably making 750K too much. If you look at the defense, it's not an expensive defense. Nurse is slightly overpaid but not by a ton. The rest are good value contracts. The goaltending makes 7.6 mill combined. That's not an expensive tandem.

So where is all these cap savings while still icing a very good team that you can come up with an extra 3-4 mill to give to Bouchard for his long term deal?

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825281 is a reply to message #825280 ]	Wed, 23 August 2023 10:09

smyth260
Messages: 949
Registered: November 2007

No Cups

Ceci, Foegele, Nurse, Campbell, the buyout of James Neal perhaps 1 year too early is where the cap is/was poorly managed.

A good GM probably isn’t giving long term deals to any of those guys except Nurse. We have them all for 3 plus years with limited ambition or flexibility to find a cheaper replacement.

Hill and Campbell are not at all the same. Hill won the cup and got rewarded with a lower salary and 3 years shorter term than Campbell. Not a good look for Holland.

Clean house or bust

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825284 is a reply to message #825281 ]	Wed, 23 August 2023 10:26

RDOilerfan
Messages: 3720
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

smyth260 wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 10:09

Ceci, Foegele, Nurse, Campbell, the buyout of James Neal perhaps 1 year too early is where the cap is/was poorly managed.

A good GM probably isn’t giving long term deals to any of those guys except Nurse. We have them all for 3 plus years with limited ambition or flexibility to find a cheaper replacement.

Hill and Campbell are not at all the same. Hill won the cup and got rewarded with a lower salary and 3 years shorter term than Campbell. Not a good look for Holland.

What do you base your Ceci comment on?

I see Ceci's name brought up and when I do, I have to bite my tongue because in my opinion, when you bring up Ceci as needing to go, I start to question a person and I say that not because I love the guy. He wasn't very good last year but he was injured for most of it so that played a HUGE factor in his play. His first year he was good. He makes 3.25 mill which in the NHL, is not a lot for a every day, top 4 dman. I am a solutions guy, that's what I do for a living, I solve problems. So who are you going to get who's a right shot, can play in your top 4 and makes less than 3.25 mill?

Let's keep in mind that the Oilers are supposed to be a cup team so if you are moving out Ceci, you are wanting to improve on him. So who's that guy? Who's better than Ceci but makes way less money? Give me a name please.

Campbell. I get it, he was bad last year. He has an entire career of decent numbers but he was really bad last year. So similar to Ceci. Who are you getting who's better than Campbell who is cheaper? I am not a Campbell lover what so ever so I am all for getting someone else who's cheaper. So give me a name please.

Like I said, I think you need to come up with 3+ mill to have enough money to sign Bouchard on a long term because a long term probably starts with a 7 right now and I don't for a second think if you tries last year, it's much less than that. The Oilers need to ice a very good team that is going for the cup with McD and Leon in their primes plus with the goal of wanting them to stay. So you can't be downgrading talent, nor can the answer be "just play Broberg on his offside in the top 4". That's ridiculous.

So do the exercise. We need 3.1 mill.

Who's replacing Ceci for way less money that's better.
Who's replacing Campbell for way less money that's better.

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825282 is a reply to message #825280 ]	Wed, 23 August 2023 10:13

CrusaderPi
Messages: 7642
Registered: December 2003
Location: AB Highway 100

6 Cups

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 09:35

Kr55 wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 08:41

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 08:33

I don't see an alternative. You sign him for a 1 yr at less and then you are dealing with a 60 pt season under his belt for next.

Longer term, I can't see him taking less than 7. The cap hasn't gone up hardly at all in in the last 5 years. In the 2018-2019 season the cap was 79.5. There's no money.

Only alternatives were to have some foresight and sign him long term earlier. Or manage the cap properly the last 4 years and have cap space to sign your best offensive young D long term.

Neither of those happening are on management.

We will toss 3.5Mx4 at kassian for 1 month of effort and chasing tkachuk around for 1 night and overpay replacement level players and give them 2 years all the time, but we can't figure out how to properly manage contracts for our best homegrown players.

So when would the forsight have been to sign him earlier? His contract just ended. So you sign him up last year I guess. So what would the number have been? I live in the real world so give me a real number. Bouchard last year isn't signing long term for 4 mill. It's not happening.

They could have managed the cap better. Sure. How? What's the bad contract on the Oilers books right now? I look and I have a hard time picking one out where I think it's really, really bad. I am sure you will say Nurse. Fine. His contract has been talked to death, it came up at the perfect time and he's paid too much. I get it and I agree. It's too high. But by how much? Probably 1 mill maybe 1.25. Again, I live in the real world and in the real world given what all he does, the amount of minutes he plays, what he scores 5 on 5, he's not a 6 mill dman. He's probably an 8.

Campbell makes 5 mill. Given how he played last season, it's not great. But look at the comparables last year and even this year. Hill played well for 1.5 months and makes 4.9 mill now. That's what it costs for a goalie in their late 20's to 30's who is not a high end guy who could start.

The cap has gone up 4 mill in 5 yrs. That's a fact. You still have to ice a team that is good and competitve. If you look at their top 6, there isn't 1 guy grossly overpaid. They got 3 guys making just over 5 mill scoring 80+ points or 30 goals or both. That's good value. Even Kane for all his injuries last year had 16 goals in 41 games, that's a 32 goal pace. That's a cheap contract. If you look at the bottom 6, the only guy that might be slightly overpaid is Foegele. But we aren't talking a ton here. He's probably making 750K too much. If you look at the defense, it's not an expensive defense. Nurse is slightly overpaid but not by a ton. The rest are good value contracts. The goaltending makes 7.6 mill combined. That's not an expensive tandem.

So where is all these cap savings while still icing a very good team that you can come up with an extra 3-4 mill to give to Bouchard for his long term deal?

We've talked about this. The Oilers screwed up in the bubble season by barely playing Bouchard. They wasted a season without learning what he was. That's why they had to resign Barrie and that's why the Bouchard contract has been kicked down the road. Eventually deferring decisions always comes back to haunt a team. Inevitably bad managers always defer decision making.

This isn't hindsight either. This was talked about this in the bubble season. People here knew this was coming despite many of us not even being professional hockey experts with jobs in the industry. Now it's here. Other people can make all the excuses they want for missing an obvious and predictable problem that has been staring at everyone for years, but Holland screwed up here by not dealing with this until now and is continuing to screw up by kicking the contract 2 years further down the road.

The best part is Bouchard, if he stays with the Oilers, will probably end up being overpaid. Just like Nurse. This will force the next GM to have a hand tied behind his back dealing with the next homegrown problem or kick it down the road until this part of the cycle repeats itself.

Please do not feed the bears. Feeding the bears creates a dependent population unable to survive on their own. Bears.

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825285 is a reply to message #825282 ]	Wed, 23 August 2023 10:38

RDOilerfan
Messages: 3720
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

CrusaderPi wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 10:13

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 09:35

Kr55 wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 08:41

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 08:33

I don't see an alternative. You sign him for a 1 yr at less and then you are dealing with a 60 pt season under his belt for next.

Longer term, I can't see him taking less than 7. The cap hasn't gone up hardly at all in in the last 5 years. In the 2018-2019 season the cap was 79.5. There's no money.

Only alternatives were to have some foresight and sign him long term earlier. Or manage the cap properly the last 4 years and have cap space to sign your best offensive young D long term.

Neither of those happening are on management.

We will toss 3.5Mx4 at kassian for 1 month of effort and chasing tkachuk around for 1 night and overpay replacement level players and give them 2 years all the time, but we can't figure out how to properly manage contracts for our best homegrown players.

So when would the forsight have been to sign him earlier? His contract just ended. So you sign him up last year I guess. So what would the number have been? I live in the real world so give me a real number. Bouchard last year isn't signing long term for 4 mill. It's not happening.

They could have managed the cap better. Sure. How? What's the bad contract on the Oilers books right now? I look and I have a hard time picking one out where I think it's really, really bad. I am sure you will say Nurse. Fine. His contract has been talked to death, it came up at the perfect time and he's paid too much. I get it and I agree. It's too high. But by how much? Probably 1 mill maybe 1.25. Again, I live in the real world and in the real world given what all he does, the amount of minutes he plays, what he scores 5 on 5, he's not a 6 mill dman. He's probably an 8.

Campbell makes 5 mill. Given how he played last season, it's not great. But look at the comparables last year and even this year. Hill played well for 1.5 months and makes 4.9 mill now. That's what it costs for a goalie in their late 20's to 30's who is not a high end guy who could start.

The cap has gone up 4 mill in 5 yrs. That's a fact. You still have to ice a team that is good and competitve. If you look at their top 6, there isn't 1 guy grossly overpaid. They got 3 guys making just over 5 mill scoring 80+ points or 30 goals or both. That's good value. Even Kane for all his injuries last year had 16 goals in 41 games, that's a 32 goal pace. That's a cheap contract. If you look at the bottom 6, the only guy that might be slightly overpaid is Foegele. But we aren't talking a ton here. He's probably making 750K too much. If you look at the defense, it's not an expensive defense. Nurse is slightly overpaid but not by a ton. The rest are good value contracts. The goaltending makes 7.6 mill combined. That's not an expensive tandem.

So where is all these cap savings while still icing a very good team that you can come up with an extra 3-4 mill to give to Bouchard for his long term deal?

We've talked about this. The Oilers screwed up in the bubble season by barely playing Bouchard. They wasted a season without learning what he was. That's why they had to resign Barrie and that's why the Bouchard contract has been kicked down the road. Eventually deferring decisions always comes back to haunt a team. Inevitably bad managers always defer decision making.

This isn't hindsight either. This was talked about this in the bubble season. People here knew this was coming despite many of us not even being professional hockey experts with jobs in the industry. Now it's here. Other people can make all the excuses they want for missing an obvious and predictable problem that has been staring at everyone for years, but Holland screwed up here by not dealing with this until now and is continuing to screw up by kicking the contract 2 years further down the road.

The best part is Bouchard, if he stays with the Oilers, will probably end up being overpaid. Just like Nurse. This will force the next GM to have a hand tied behind his back dealing with the next homegrown problem or kick it down the road until this part of the cycle repeats itself.

I don't see how playing Bouchard more in the bubble season changes his contract. So you play him that bubble year. He gets his feet wet, gets more experience, get more comfortable with the league. So then in the in the 21-22 season when the NHL is back, he probably improves on his numbers. He had 12 goals, 43 pts in 21-22. If he had of played the bubble season, he's most likely matching what he did in 21-22, maybe even improving on those numbers. So how is that going to drop his cap number down if they tried to go long term last year? Then if they wait and he plays out this year. If he had of played the bubble season, chances are he probably doesn't have his dip this year and his numbers are better. So again, how does playing the bubble year which would help him be a better player right now, drop the cap number down?

I get this site is mostly a complaints site. Fans come here, gripe about the management, gripe about the players they don't like but provide no solutions. So on what planet do people in here think Bouchard whether it was signed last year or this year is getting less than 7 mill on a long term deal and again, where is the money coming from?

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825286 is a reply to message #825285 ]	Wed, 23 August 2023 10:48

CrusaderPi
Messages: 7642
Registered: December 2003
Location: AB Highway 100

6 Cups

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 10:38

I don't see how playing Bouchard more in the bubble season changes his contract. So you play him that bubble year. He gets his feet wet, gets more experience, get more comfortable with the league. So then in the in the 21-22 season when the NHL is back, he probably improves on his numbers. He had 12 goals, 43 pts in 21-22. If he had of played the bubble season, he's most likely matching what he did in 21-22, maybe even improving on those numbers. So how is that going to drop his cap number down if they tried to go long term last year? Then if they wait and he plays out this year. If he had of played the bubble season, chances are he probably doesn't have his dip this year and his numbers are better. So again, how does playing the bubble year which would help him be a better player right now, drop the cap number down?

I get this site is mostly a complaints site. Fans come here, gripe about the management, gripe about the players they don't like but provide no solutions. So on what planet do people in here think Bouchard whether it was signed last year or this year is getting less than 7 mill on a long term deal and again, where is the money coming from?

You make a young player performing well sound like a bad thing.

Bouchard getting to develop during the bubble year and playing well is a good thing. It allows the team to better project what he'll provide and cost in the future. If a smart manager knows he can rely on a defenseman he starts making sure he has cap space available when it's time to sign longer term deal. The problem isn't what Bouchard deserves to get paid RDO. The problem is the Oilers inability to plan for what he deserves to get paid. Bouchard earning a big contract is a very good problem to have assuming the team is managed well. Hoping a young player underperforms so he's cheaper is dumb.

Sadly, there are no solutions now. The Oilers back themselves into a corner like they always do and will have to ice a lesser team to make it work. This happens because people are unwilling to accept mistakes were made in the past and lessons to be learned from those mistakes. There are solutions for the future, but it requires planning ahead. I don't think the Oilers are capable of that.

Please do not feed the bears. Feeding the bears creates a dependent population unable to survive on their own. Bears.

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825287 is a reply to message #825286 ]	Wed, 23 August 2023 11:05

RDOilerfan
Messages: 3720
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

CrusaderPi wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 10:48

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 10:38

I don't see how playing Bouchard more in the bubble season changes his contract. So you play him that bubble year. He gets his feet wet, gets more experience, get more comfortable with the league. So then in the in the 21-22 season when the NHL is back, he probably improves on his numbers. He had 12 goals, 43 pts in 21-22. If he had of played the bubble season, he's most likely matching what he did in 21-22, maybe even improving on those numbers. So how is that going to drop his cap number down if they tried to go long term last year? Then if they wait and he plays out this year. If he had of played the bubble season, chances are he probably doesn't have his dip this year and his numbers are better. So again, how does playing the bubble year which would help him be a better player right now, drop the cap number down?

I get this site is mostly a complaints site. Fans come here, gripe about the management, gripe about the players they don't like but provide no solutions. So on what planet do people in here think Bouchard whether it was signed last year or this year is getting less than 7 mill on a long term deal and again, where is the money coming from?

You make a young player performing well sound like a bad thing.

Bouchard getting to develop during the bubble year and playing well is a good thing. It allows the team to better project what he'll provide and cost in the future. If a smart manager knows he can rely on a defenseman he starts making sure he has cap space available when it's time to sign longer term deal. The problem isn't what Bouchard deserves to get paid RDO. The problem is the Oilers inability to plan for what he deserves to get paid. Bouchard earning a big contract is a very good problem to have assuming the team is managed well. Hoping a young player underperforms so he's cheaper is dumb.

Sadly, there are no solutions now. The Oilers back themselves into a corner like they always do and will have to ice a lesser team to make it work. This happens because people are unwilling to accept mistakes were made in the past and lessons to be learned from those mistakes. There are solutions for the future, but it requires planning ahead. I don't think the Oilers are capable of that.

Point out where I said playing Bouchard more is a bad thing? All I said is if I they did play him in the bubble year, all it probably would have done is make his stats even better. So I don't see how his contract demands on a long term deal drops at all. It probably goes up.

The only thing I remotely said that might go with your statement is the idea of dumping Ceci for nothing so you can give Bouchard his money, then playing 22 yr old with less than 70 games Broberg on his off side in your top 4 when you are supposed to be a cup team is a bad idea. I am high on Broberg, I think he could be very good. I want them to play him a lot this year. I'd have no problem if they want to play him on the right side IN THE 3RD PAIRING in an effort to groom him to be a top 4 guy. But I am not in favor of when you are trying to win a cup, throwing him to the wolves this year, dumping Ceci so you have zero cover and hoping he can excel in the top 4 on his offside. I think that is utterly insane to do that.

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825288 is a reply to message #825287 ]	Wed, 23 August 2023 11:15

CrusaderPi
Messages: 7642
Registered: December 2003
Location: AB Highway 100

6 Cups

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 11:05

Point out where I said playing Bouchard more is a bad thing?

Right here

Quote:

. So you play him that bubble year. He gets his feet wet, gets more experience, get more comfortable with the league. So then in the in the 21-22 season when the NHL is back, he probably improves on his numbers. He had 12 goals, 43 pts in 21-22. If he had of played the bubble season, he's most likely matching what he did in 21-22, maybe even improving on those numbers. So how is that going to drop his cap number down if they tried to go long term last year? Then if they wait and he plays out this year. If he had of played the bubble season, chances are he probably doesn't have his dip this year and his numbers are better. So again, how does playing the bubble year which would help him be a better player right now, drop the cap number down?

Quote:

All I said is if I they did play him in the bubble year, all it probably would have done is make his stats even better. So I don't see how his contract demands on a long term deal drops at all. It probably goes up.

You see have it could be taken as a negative? No?

Quote:

The only thing I remotely said that might go with your statement is the idea of dumping Ceci for nothing so you can give Bouchard his money, then playing 22 yr old with less than 70 games Broberg on his off side in your top 4 when you are supposed to be a cup team is a bad idea. I am high on Broberg, I think he could be very good. I want them to play him a lot this year. I'd have no problem if they want to play him on the right side IN THE 3RD PAIRING in an effort to groom him to be a top 4 guy. But I am not in favor of when you are trying to win a cup, throwing him to the wolves this year, dumping Ceci so you have zero cover and hoping he can excel in the top 4 on his offside. I think that is utterly insane to do that.

But what if Broberg plays well and wants more money? Wouldn't it be better to sit him so he can be payed less when his contract is up? How does Broberg playing well and inevitably making more money help the Oilers cap problems?

The Oilers simply have no foresight. Every problem catches them by surprise.

Please do not feed the bears. Feeding the bears creates a dependent population unable to survive on their own. Bears.

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825290 is a reply to message #825288 ]	Wed, 23 August 2023 12:25

RDOilerfan
Messages: 3720
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

CrusaderPi wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 11:15

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 11:05

Point out where I said playing Bouchard more is a bad thing?

Right here

Quote:

. So you play him that bubble year. He gets his feet wet, gets more experience, get more comfortable with the league. So then in the in the 21-22 season when the NHL is back, he probably improves on his numbers. He had 12 goals, 43 pts in 21-22. If he had of played the bubble season, he's most likely matching what he did in 21-22, maybe even improving on those numbers. So how is that going to drop his cap number down if they tried to go long term last year? Then if they wait and he plays out this year. If he had of played the bubble season, chances are he probably doesn't have his dip this year and his numbers are better. So again, how does playing the bubble year which would help him be a better player right now, drop the cap number down?

Quote:

All I said is if I they did play him in the bubble year, all it probably would have done is make his stats even better. So I don't see how his contract demands on a long term deal drops at all. It probably goes up.

You see have it could be taken as a negative? No?

Quote:

The only thing I remotely said that might go with your statement is the idea of dumping Ceci for nothing so you can give Bouchard his money, then playing 22 yr old with less than 70 games Broberg on his off side in your top 4 when you are supposed to be a cup team is a bad idea. I am high on Broberg, I think he could be very good. I want them to play him a lot this year. I'd have no problem if they want to play him on the right side IN THE 3RD PAIRING in an effort to groom him to be a top 4 guy. But I am not in favor of when you are trying to win a cup, throwing him to the wolves this year, dumping Ceci so you have zero cover and hoping he can excel in the top 4 on his offside. I think that is utterly insane to do that.

But what if Broberg plays well and wants more money? Wouldn't it be better to sit him so he can be payed less when his contract is up? How does Broberg playing well and inevitably making more money help the Oilers cap problems?

The Oilers simply have no foresight. Every problem catches them by surprise.

No I can not see what so ever how what I said can be taken negatively unless a person is trying to make something up for the purpose of unnecessarily debating me because they like confrontation. I literally said in the first paragraph that you quoted from me, that by playing him in the bubble year, all it would do is make him a better player than he is right now and he would be more expensive. The better a player does over more seasons, the better numbers he puts up, the more money he makes. That's generally how it works. That's all I said. It's right there. I think on a long term today, it probably starts with a 7 and I didn't see how there was anyway that number goes down especially if he played more in the bubble. It would only make his case even more in my opinion.

In no way what so ever was I saying Bouchard being a better player is a negative or it's a bad idea for the team that Bouchard to be a better player. So you are making it up.

I don't know what you want me to say about Broberg. So for the Oilers to have forsight which apparently they lack in your mind, they should be negotiating Broberg to a long term deal right now, is that what you are trying to say?
You are saying, you'd prefer the Oilers to not play him at all this year, is that what you are getting at?

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825293 is a reply to message #825290 ]	Wed, 23 August 2023 13:41

CrusaderPi
Messages: 7642
Registered: December 2003
Location: AB Highway 100

6 Cups

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 12:25

No I can not see what so ever how what I said can be taken negatively unless a person is trying to make something up for the purpose of unnecessarily debating me because they like confrontation. I literally said in the first paragraph that you quoted from me, that by playing him in the bubble year, all it would do is make him a better player than he is right now and he would be more expensive. The better a player does over more seasons, the better numbers he puts up, the more money he makes. That's generally how it works. That's all I said. It's right there. I think on a long term today, it probably starts with a 7 and I didn't see how there was anyway that number goes down especially if he played more in the bubble. It would only make his case even more in my opinion.

In no way what so ever was I saying Bouchard being a better player is a negative or it's a bad idea for the team that Bouchard to be a better player. So you are making it up.

I don't know what you want me to say about Broberg. So for the Oilers to have forsight which apparently they lack in your mind, they should be negotiating Broberg to a long term deal right now, is that what you are trying to say?
You are saying, you'd prefer the Oilers to not play him at all this year, is that what you are getting at?

When the conversation is about the Bouchard contract being difficult to fit into the cap because of mismanagement saying he'd be more expensive and therefore more difficult to fit under a mismanaged cap could be seen as a negative. Like imagine if he thought he was worth 4.5 on a short term team. OR even 5. Goodness that would be difficult to fit under the cap. The problem is the Oilers didn't give themselves time to figure out what Bouchard was worth and had to hedge against him, which tied up cap space. Cap space was already tied up because this exact same thing happening five years earlier with Nurse. This is what made the Oilers cap situation so bad that it they are unable to afford a more expensive short term deal that will be cheaper in the long term.

With Broberg, I'm simply comparing and contrasting where he is in his career based on the Bouchard timeline. Think the Oilers will need to bridge Broberg next year? I do. Now, bridging him might be the right choice (who can say, he's barely played NHL hockey) but it should be understood that they don't have the choice to sign him long term. Why? Constant and cyclical mismanagement. But yes, if the Oilers were smart and they thought of Broberg as a long term Oiler they would be working on signing him long term now.

There's a difference between making something up and coming to a different conclusion.

Please do not feed the bears. Feeding the bears creates a dependent population unable to survive on their own. Bears.

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825295 is a reply to message #825293 ]	Wed, 23 August 2023 13:54

Dragon_Matt
Messages: 711
Registered: January 2009
Location: edmonton

No Cups

Also, they forced the Nurse situation. His contract was a year away from expiring still.

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825298 is a reply to message #825295 ]	Wed, 23 August 2023 14:21

Kr55
Messages: 9649
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

Dragon_Matt wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 13:54

Also, they forced the Nurse situation. His contract was a year away from expiring still.

That was executed with genius precision. First, help get Chicago get out of the Keith deal to free up cap space so they could trade for and give Seth Jones a blank cheque in a desperate attempt to distract from the abuse scandal. Then with the D market completely screwed, beg Darnell to sign for 8 years at the newly set top end of the D market rate 1 year before his deal expired. Not to mention all the bridges because we could never afford a long term deal.

Another solid example of how well our team is managed.

[Updated on: Wed, 23 August 2023 14:23]

"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013

"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015

5 x $5,000,000

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825302 is a reply to message #825293 ]	Wed, 23 August 2023 15:06

RDOilerfan
Messages: 3720
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

CrusaderPi wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 13:41

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 12:25

No I can not see what so ever how what I said can be taken negatively unless a person is trying to make something up for the purpose of unnecessarily debating me because they like confrontation. I literally said in the first paragraph that you quoted from me, that by playing him in the bubble year, all it would do is make him a better player than he is right now and he would be more expensive. The better a player does over more seasons, the better numbers he puts up, the more money he makes. That's generally how it works. That's all I said. It's right there. I think on a long term today, it probably starts with a 7 and I didn't see how there was anyway that number goes down especially if he played more in the bubble. It would only make his case even more in my opinion.

In no way what so ever was I saying Bouchard being a better player is a negative or it's a bad idea for the team that Bouchard to be a better player. So you are making it up.

I don't know what you want me to say about Broberg. So for the Oilers to have forsight which apparently they lack in your mind, they should be negotiating Broberg to a long term deal right now, is that what you are trying to say?
You are saying, you'd prefer the Oilers to not play him at all this year, is that what you are getting at?

When the conversation is about the Bouchard contract being difficult to fit into the cap because of mismanagement saying he'd be more expensive and therefore more difficult to fit under a mismanaged cap could be seen as a negative. Like imagine if he thought he was worth 4.5 on a short term team. OR even 5. Goodness that would be difficult to fit under the cap. The problem is the Oilers didn't give themselves time to figure out what Bouchard was worth and had to hedge against him, which tied up cap space. Cap space was already tied up because this exact same thing happening five years earlier with Nurse. This is what made the Oilers cap situation so bad that it they are unable to afford a more expensive short term deal that will be cheaper in the long term.

With Broberg, I'm simply comparing and contrasting where he is in his career based on the Bouchard timeline. Think the Oilers will need to bridge Broberg next year? I do. Now, bridging him might be the right choice (who can say, he's barely played NHL hockey) but it should be understood that they don't have the choice to sign him long term. Why? Constant and cyclical mismanagement. But yes, if the Oilers were smart and they thought of Broberg as a long term Oiler they would be working on signing him long term now.

There's a difference between making something up and coming to a different conclusion.

What I find difficult in this site and why I get into so many confrontations is how many posters in here are so incredibly wishy washy and ever hypocritical,

Several years right before the last Nurse bridge, there was a thread in here talking about the next contract for Nurse and how he could have been bridged or signed long term. The media was floating around ideas that a long term deal for Nurse before his last bridge would cost around 7 mill. Many fans in here, were losing their minds over that idea. These fans, I bet yourself included, thought it would be incredibly stupid to sign up Nurse for long term at the number that was being floated. He was unproved, it was a gross overpay, etc, etc. Now those same fans are the ones complaining that the Oilers were stupid to kick the Nurse contract down the and they should have signed it years ago instead of bridging him.

I seem to remember getting into arguments with those same people about Leon's contract. They overpaid, it was stupid, how could they do that. Now it's the best contract in the league by a mile and has been for just about the whole deal.

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825304 is a reply to message #825302 ]	Wed, 23 August 2023 15:33

CrusaderPi
Messages: 7642
Registered: December 2003
Location: AB Highway 100

6 Cups

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 15:06

What I find difficult in this site and why I get into so many confrontations is how many posters in here are so incredibly wishy washy and ever hypocritical,

Several years right before the last Nurse bridge, there was a thread in here talking about the next contract for Nurse and how he could have been bridged or signed long term. The media was floating around ideas that a long term deal for Nurse before his last bridge would cost around 7 mill. Many fans in here, were losing their minds over that idea. These fans, I bet yourself included, thought it would be incredibly stupid to sign up Nurse for long term at the number that was being floated. He was unproved, it was a gross overpay, etc, etc. Now those same fans are the ones complaining that the Oilers were stupid to kick the Nurse contract down the and they should have signed it years ago instead of bridging him.

I seem to remember getting into arguments with those same people about Leon's contract. They overpaid, it was stupid, how could they do that. Now it's the best contract in the league by a mile and has been for just about the whole deal.

You get into so many confrontations here because of your posting style. Being wrong is different than being hypocritical.

Of all the options the Oilers had with Nurse the one they picked was the worst option. So it's more than possible there are people here who were opposed to a long term Nurse deal instead of a bridge AND to think it was stupid to kick the can down the road AND to think it was stupid to sign him a year early. If you believe those three things, you're probably right. Likewise the Oilers have managed to pick the worst option for Bouchard. It's the predictability of this cap hell that bugs me the most. I honestly can't understand why anyone is so willing to let them off the hook.

Thinking one player should be bridged does not mean you have to think all players should be bridged. Bringing Leon's contract into this a silly argument.

Please do not feed the bears. Feeding the bears creates a dependent population unable to survive on their own. Bears.

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825308 is a reply to message #825302 ]	Wed, 23 August 2023 17:38

Kr55
Messages: 9649
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 15:06

CrusaderPi wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 13:41

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 12:25

No I can not see what so ever how what I said can be taken negatively unless a person is trying to make something up for the purpose of unnecessarily debating me because they like confrontation. I literally said in the first paragraph that you quoted from me, that by playing him in the bubble year, all it would do is make him a better player than he is right now and he would be more expensive. The better a player does over more seasons, the better numbers he puts up, the more money he makes. That's generally how it works. That's all I said. It's right there. I think on a long term today, it probably starts with a 7 and I didn't see how there was anyway that number goes down especially if he played more in the bubble. It would only make his case even more in my opinion.

In no way what so ever was I saying Bouchard being a better player is a negative or it's a bad idea for the team that Bouchard to be a better player. So you are making it up.

I don't know what you want me to say about Broberg. So for the Oilers to have forsight which apparently they lack in your mind, they should be negotiating Broberg to a long term deal right now, is that what you are trying to say?
You are saying, you'd prefer the Oilers to not play him at all this year, is that what you are getting at?

When the conversation is about the Bouchard contract being difficult to fit into the cap because of mismanagement saying he'd be more expensive and therefore more difficult to fit under a mismanaged cap could be seen as a negative. Like imagine if he thought he was worth 4.5 on a short term team. OR even 5. Goodness that would be difficult to fit under the cap. The problem is the Oilers didn't give themselves time to figure out what Bouchard was worth and had to hedge against him, which tied up cap space. Cap space was already tied up because this exact same thing happening five years earlier with Nurse. This is what made the Oilers cap situation so bad that it they are unable to afford a more expensive short term deal that will be cheaper in the long term.

With Broberg, I'm simply comparing and contrasting where he is in his career based on the Bouchard timeline. Think the Oilers will need to bridge Broberg next year? I do. Now, bridging him might be the right choice (who can say, he's barely played NHL hockey) but it should be understood that they don't have the choice to sign him long term. Why? Constant and cyclical mismanagement. But yes, if the Oilers were smart and they thought of Broberg as a long term Oiler they would be working on signing him long term now.

There's a difference between making something up and coming to a different conclusion.

What I find difficult in this site and why I get into so many confrontations is how many posters in here are so incredibly wishy washy and ever hypocritical,

Several years right before the last Nurse bridge, there was a thread in here talking about the next contract for Nurse and how he could have been bridged or signed long term. The media was floating around ideas that a long term deal for Nurse before his last bridge would cost around 7 mill. Many fans in here, were losing their minds over that idea. These fans, I bet yourself included, thought it would be incredibly stupid to sign up Nurse for long term at the number that was being floated. He was unproved, it was a gross overpay, etc, etc. Now those same fans are the ones complaining that the Oilers were stupid to kick the Nurse contract down the and they should have signed it years ago instead of bridging him.

I seem to remember getting into arguments with those same people about Leon's contract. They overpaid, it was stupid, how could they do that. Now it's the best contract in the league by a mile and has been for just about the whole deal.

I never fully agreed with critiques of Drai's deal. He had a crazy playoffs, and he was no doubt going to bet on himself with a bridge if we weren't going to pay him like an elite player. We decided to not let him have a crazy couple seasons and run the price up even more and it worked out very well for us.

Nurse though, one of the most poorly handled players we've had for the purpose of making sure he is paid according to his actual value. Years and years of spoon-feeding him endless McDavid ice time to pump his stats and hide all the faults in his game that would show up every time he was playing with forwards that couldn't constantly push the play out of our zone. We did everything possible to pump his value up, including the final icing on the cake, helping Chicago give that insane deal to Seth Jones. Everything just worked out perfectly for Nurse, golden ice time, poor D depth with Klef out to keep us desperate for NHL quality LHD, the D market blowing up at the perfect time for his negotiation, his friendship with our top player that we need to keep happy by any means necessary. In the end, via some bridges and poor management cap wise and in ensuring quality depth, we probably gave Nurse 1.5-2M more than he should get.

Bouch has a good chance to do what Drai was going to do to us that Chia managed to avoid. Funny the similarities actually, Drai had the insane playoff run before extending, and had a bit of a slow start in the NHL during regular seasons. Bouch racked up crazy playoff stats too after the slow start (more due to us just not playing him in the right situations). But it's a bridge this time.

"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013

"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015

5 x $5,000,000

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825316 is a reply to message #825302 ]	Thu, 24 August 2023 11:23

inverno76
Messages: 2125
Registered: September 2005
Location: Prince Albert, Saskatchew...

2 Cups

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 15:06

CrusaderPi wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 13:41

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 12:25

No I can not see what so ever how what I said can be taken negatively unless a person is trying to make something up for the purpose of unnecessarily debating me because they like confrontation. I literally said in the first paragraph that you quoted from me, that by playing him in the bubble year, all it would do is make him a better player than he is right now and he would be more expensive. The better a player does over more seasons, the better numbers he puts up, the more money he makes. That's generally how it works. That's all I said. It's right there. I think on a long term today, it probably starts with a 7 and I didn't see how there was anyway that number goes down especially if he played more in the bubble. It would only make his case even more in my opinion.

In no way what so ever was I saying Bouchard being a better player is a negative or it's a bad idea for the team that Bouchard to be a better player. So you are making it up.

I don't know what you want me to say about Broberg. So for the Oilers to have forsight which apparently they lack in your mind, they should be negotiating Broberg to a long term deal right now, is that what you are trying to say?
You are saying, you'd prefer the Oilers to not play him at all this year, is that what you are getting at?

When the conversation is about the Bouchard contract being difficult to fit into the cap because of mismanagement saying he'd be more expensive and therefore more difficult to fit under a mismanaged cap could be seen as a negative. Like imagine if he thought he was worth 4.5 on a short term team. OR even 5. Goodness that would be difficult to fit under the cap. The problem is the Oilers didn't give themselves time to figure out what Bouchard was worth and had to hedge against him, which tied up cap space. Cap space was already tied up because this exact same thing happening five years earlier with Nurse. This is what made the Oilers cap situation so bad that it they are unable to afford a more expensive short term deal that will be cheaper in the long term.

With Broberg, I'm simply comparing and contrasting where he is in his career based on the Bouchard timeline. Think the Oilers will need to bridge Broberg next year? I do. Now, bridging him might be the right choice (who can say, he's barely played NHL hockey) but it should be understood that they don't have the choice to sign him long term. Why? Constant and cyclical mismanagement. But yes, if the Oilers were smart and they thought of Broberg as a long term Oiler they would be working on signing him long term now.

There's a difference between making something up and coming to a different conclusion.

What I find difficult in this site and why I get into so many confrontations is how many posters in here are so incredibly wishy washy and ever hypocritical,

Several years right before the last Nurse bridge, there was a thread in here talking about the next contract for Nurse and how he could have been bridged or signed long term. The media was floating around ideas that a long term deal for Nurse before his last bridge would cost around 7 mill. Many fans in here, were losing their minds over that idea. These fans, I bet yourself included, thought it would be incredibly stupid to sign up Nurse for long term at the number that was being floated. He was unproved, it was a gross overpay, etc, etc. Now those same fans are the ones complaining that the Oilers were stupid to kick the Nurse contract down the and they should have signed it years ago instead of bridging him.

I seem to remember getting into arguments with those same people about Leon's contract. They overpaid, it was stupid, how could they do that. Now it's the best contract in the league by a mile and has been for just about the whole deal.

Draisaitl was overpaid at the time of his deal. His comprable was Pastrnak and McKinnon who both signed for much less.

Letting Bouchard play earlier would have given the Oilers a known asset earlier in his career and could have allowed them to make different free agent signings. Do we re-up Barrie (although a piece of the Ekholm trade)? Do we trade and sign Kulak? Is Duncan Keith needed as a mentor (does that change Seth Jones deal and in turn the Nurse contract)?

Playing Bouchard earlier has altered the Cap in a significant manner. The Oilers lack of foresight has impacted the current and previous salary cap. Dead cap space played a huge role. Mistakes are great if we learn from them. Repeating them is the enemy.

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825318 is a reply to message #825316 ]	Thu, 24 August 2023 11:36

RDOilerfan
Messages: 3720
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:23

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 15:06

CrusaderPi wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 13:41

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 12:25

No I can not see what so ever how what I said can be taken negatively unless a person is trying to make something up for the purpose of unnecessarily debating me because they like confrontation. I literally said in the first paragraph that you quoted from me, that by playing him in the bubble year, all it would do is make him a better player than he is right now and he would be more expensive. The better a player does over more seasons, the better numbers he puts up, the more money he makes. That's generally how it works. That's all I said. It's right there. I think on a long term today, it probably starts with a 7 and I didn't see how there was anyway that number goes down especially if he played more in the bubble. It would only make his case even more in my opinion.

In no way what so ever was I saying Bouchard being a better player is a negative or it's a bad idea for the team that Bouchard to be a better player. So you are making it up.

I don't know what you want me to say about Broberg. So for the Oilers to have forsight which apparently they lack in your mind, they should be negotiating Broberg to a long term deal right now, is that what you are trying to say?
You are saying, you'd prefer the Oilers to not play him at all this year, is that what you are getting at?

When the conversation is about the Bouchard contract being difficult to fit into the cap because of mismanagement saying he'd be more expensive and therefore more difficult to fit under a mismanaged cap could be seen as a negative. Like imagine if he thought he was worth 4.5 on a short term team. OR even 5. Goodness that would be difficult to fit under the cap. The problem is the Oilers didn't give themselves time to figure out what Bouchard was worth and had to hedge against him, which tied up cap space. Cap space was already tied up because this exact same thing happening five years earlier with Nurse. This is what made the Oilers cap situation so bad that it they are unable to afford a more expensive short term deal that will be cheaper in the long term.

With Broberg, I'm simply comparing and contrasting where he is in his career based on the Bouchard timeline. Think the Oilers will need to bridge Broberg next year? I do. Now, bridging him might be the right choice (who can say, he's barely played NHL hockey) but it should be understood that they don't have the choice to sign him long term. Why? Constant and cyclical mismanagement. But yes, if the Oilers were smart and they thought of Broberg as a long term Oiler they would be working on signing him long term now.

There's a difference between making something up and coming to a different conclusion.

What I find difficult in this site and why I get into so many confrontations is how many posters in here are so incredibly wishy washy and ever hypocritical,

Several years right before the last Nurse bridge, there was a thread in here talking about the next contract for Nurse and how he could have been bridged or signed long term. The media was floating around ideas that a long term deal for Nurse before his last bridge would cost around 7 mill. Many fans in here, were losing their minds over that idea. These fans, I bet yourself included, thought it would be incredibly stupid to sign up Nurse for long term at the number that was being floated. He was unproved, it was a gross overpay, etc, etc. Now those same fans are the ones complaining that the Oilers were stupid to kick the Nurse contract down the and they should have signed it years ago instead of bridging him.

I seem to remember getting into arguments with those same people about Leon's contract. They overpaid, it was stupid, how could they do that. Now it's the best contract in the league by a mile and has been for just about the whole deal.

Draisaitl was overpaid at the time of his deal. His comprable was Pastrnak and McKinnon who both signed for much less.

Letting Bouchard play earlier would have given the Oilers a known asset earlier in his career and could have allowed them to make different free agent signings. Do we re-up Barrie (although a piece of the Ekholm trade)? Do we trade and sign Kulak? Is Duncan Keith needed as a mentor (does that change Seth Jones deal and in turn the Nurse contract)?

Playing Bouchard earlier has altered the Cap in a significant manner. The Oilers lack of foresight has impacted the current and previous salary cap. Dead cap space played a huge role. Mistakes are great if we learn from them. Repeating them is the enemy.

When teams sign young players coming out of his ELC, they aren't signing him based on what he is worth that day. They are projecting what he will do over the length of his contract with the hope that player will at least be worth what he makes after a couple of seasons preferably his contract is a bargain. For Leon in his first year of the contract, he scored 70 pts. So for that 1 season, one can argue he was "overpaid" but in year 2 of his contract he scored 50g - 105 pts. So in year 2, he was at minimum worth every penny he made and he's continued to be the best contract in the NHL by a mile in my opinion.

So when someone says he was overpaid at the time of the contract, I believe that is an incorrect statement because the contract number wasn't given for season 1, its given for the seasons after.

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825324 is a reply to message #825318 ]	Thu, 24 August 2023 15:10

inverno76
Messages: 2125
Registered: September 2005
Location: Prince Albert, Saskatchew...

2 Cups

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:36

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:23

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 15:06

CrusaderPi wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 13:41

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 12:25

No I can not see what so ever how what I said can be taken negatively unless a person is trying to make something up for the purpose of unnecessarily debating me because they like confrontation. I literally said in the first paragraph that you quoted from me, that by playing him in the bubble year, all it would do is make him a better player than he is right now and he would be more expensive. The better a player does over more seasons, the better numbers he puts up, the more money he makes. That's generally how it works. That's all I said. It's right there. I think on a long term today, it probably starts with a 7 and I didn't see how there was anyway that number goes down especially if he played more in the bubble. It would only make his case even more in my opinion.

In no way what so ever was I saying Bouchard being a better player is a negative or it's a bad idea for the team that Bouchard to be a better player. So you are making it up.

I don't know what you want me to say about Broberg. So for the Oilers to have forsight which apparently they lack in your mind, they should be negotiating Broberg to a long term deal right now, is that what you are trying to say?
You are saying, you'd prefer the Oilers to not play him at all this year, is that what you are getting at?

When the conversation is about the Bouchard contract being difficult to fit into the cap because of mismanagement saying he'd be more expensive and therefore more difficult to fit under a mismanaged cap could be seen as a negative. Like imagine if he thought he was worth 4.5 on a short term team. OR even 5. Goodness that would be difficult to fit under the cap. The problem is the Oilers didn't give themselves time to figure out what Bouchard was worth and had to hedge against him, which tied up cap space. Cap space was already tied up because this exact same thing happening five years earlier with Nurse. This is what made the Oilers cap situation so bad that it they are unable to afford a more expensive short term deal that will be cheaper in the long term.

With Broberg, I'm simply comparing and contrasting where he is in his career based on the Bouchard timeline. Think the Oilers will need to bridge Broberg next year? I do. Now, bridging him might be the right choice (who can say, he's barely played NHL hockey) but it should be understood that they don't have the choice to sign him long term. Why? Constant and cyclical mismanagement. But yes, if the Oilers were smart and they thought of Broberg as a long term Oiler they would be working on signing him long term now.

There's a difference between making something up and coming to a different conclusion.

What I find difficult in this site and why I get into so many confrontations is how many posters in here are so incredibly wishy washy and ever hypocritical,

Several years right before the last Nurse bridge, there was a thread in here talking about the next contract for Nurse and how he could have been bridged or signed long term. The media was floating around ideas that a long term deal for Nurse before his last bridge would cost around 7 mill. Many fans in here, were losing their minds over that idea. These fans, I bet yourself included, thought it would be incredibly stupid to sign up Nurse for long term at the number that was being floated. He was unproved, it was a gross overpay, etc, etc. Now those same fans are the ones complaining that the Oilers were stupid to kick the Nurse contract down the and they should have signed it years ago instead of bridging him.

I seem to remember getting into arguments with those same people about Leon's contract. They overpaid, it was stupid, how could they do that. Now it's the best contract in the league by a mile and has been for just about the whole deal.

Draisaitl was overpaid at the time of his deal. His comprable was Pastrnak and McKinnon who both signed for much less.

Letting Bouchard play earlier would have given the Oilers a known asset earlier in his career and could have allowed them to make different free agent signings. Do we re-up Barrie (although a piece of the Ekholm trade)? Do we trade and sign Kulak? Is Duncan Keith needed as a mentor (does that change Seth Jones deal and in turn the Nurse contract)?

Playing Bouchard earlier has altered the Cap in a significant manner. The Oilers lack of foresight has impacted the current and previous salary cap. Dead cap space played a huge role. Mistakes are great if we learn from them. Repeating them is the enemy.

When teams sign young players coming out of his ELC, they aren't signing him based on what he is worth that day. They are projecting what he will do over the length of his contract with the hope that player will at least be worth what he makes after a couple of seasons preferably his contract is a bargain. For Leon in his first year of the contract, he scored 70 pts. So for that 1 season, one can argue he was "overpaid" but in year 2 of his contract he scored 50g - 105 pts. So in year 2, he was at minimum worth every penny he made and he's continued to be the best contract in the NHL by a mile in my opinion.

So when someone says he was overpaid at the time of the contract, I believe that is an incorrect statement because the contract number wasn't given for season 1, its given for the seasons after.

The team signing a player always should want value in the deal and the player always wants to maximize his term and money. Were the Avalanche and the Bruins just lucky that they got their value contracts at 2M less than Draisaitl? Colorado and Boston did the leg work and we still overpaid.

Not Even Peter Draisaitl could have predicted Leon to go off the way he did. Although it is a value contract now, it was not at the time of the signing and that is what people tend to forget that when looking back at his deal.

Imagine an extra 2M in the coffer right now? The Nurse, Bouchard, McLeod bridge deals and having a full roster today, plus etc etc etc extension was affected by that deal.

Edit addition: The Nurse deal was an overpayment from the get go regardless of the year they were prognasticating for. There is only one player Edmonton should have ever been open to given a blank check on this team, and even when they did he took a pay cut.

[Updated on: Thu, 24 August 2023 15:14]

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825325 is a reply to message #825324 ]	Thu, 24 August 2023 15:32

Kr55
Messages: 9649
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 15:10

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:36

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:23

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 15:06

CrusaderPi wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 13:41

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 12:25

No I can not see what so ever how what I said can be taken negatively unless a person is trying to make something up for the purpose of unnecessarily debating me because they like confrontation. I literally said in the first paragraph that you quoted from me, that by playing him in the bubble year, all it would do is make him a better player than he is right now and he would be more expensive. The better a player does over more seasons, the better numbers he puts up, the more money he makes. That's generally how it works. That's all I said. It's right there. I think on a long term today, it probably starts with a 7 and I didn't see how there was anyway that number goes down especially if he played more in the bubble. It would only make his case even more in my opinion.

In no way what so ever was I saying Bouchard being a better player is a negative or it's a bad idea for the team that Bouchard to be a better player. So you are making it up.

I don't know what you want me to say about Broberg. So for the Oilers to have forsight which apparently they lack in your mind, they should be negotiating Broberg to a long term deal right now, is that what you are trying to say?
You are saying, you'd prefer the Oilers to not play him at all this year, is that what you are getting at?

When the conversation is about the Bouchard contract being difficult to fit into the cap because of mismanagement saying he'd be more expensive and therefore more difficult to fit under a mismanaged cap could be seen as a negative. Like imagine if he thought he was worth 4.5 on a short term team. OR even 5. Goodness that would be difficult to fit under the cap. The problem is the Oilers didn't give themselves time to figure out what Bouchard was worth and had to hedge against him, which tied up cap space. Cap space was already tied up because this exact same thing happening five years earlier with Nurse. This is what made the Oilers cap situation so bad that it they are unable to afford a more expensive short term deal that will be cheaper in the long term.

With Broberg, I'm simply comparing and contrasting where he is in his career based on the Bouchard timeline. Think the Oilers will need to bridge Broberg next year? I do. Now, bridging him might be the right choice (who can say, he's barely played NHL hockey) but it should be understood that they don't have the choice to sign him long term. Why? Constant and cyclical mismanagement. But yes, if the Oilers were smart and they thought of Broberg as a long term Oiler they would be working on signing him long term now.

There's a difference between making something up and coming to a different conclusion.

What I find difficult in this site and why I get into so many confrontations is how many posters in here are so incredibly wishy washy and ever hypocritical,

Several years right before the last Nurse bridge, there was a thread in here talking about the next contract for Nurse and how he could have been bridged or signed long term. The media was floating around ideas that a long term deal for Nurse before his last bridge would cost around 7 mill. Many fans in here, were losing their minds over that idea. These fans, I bet yourself included, thought it would be incredibly stupid to sign up Nurse for long term at the number that was being floated. He was unproved, it was a gross overpay, etc, etc. Now those same fans are the ones complaining that the Oilers were stupid to kick the Nurse contract down the and they should have signed it years ago instead of bridging him.

I seem to remember getting into arguments with those same people about Leon's contract. They overpaid, it was stupid, how could they do that. Now it's the best contract in the league by a mile and has been for just about the whole deal.

Draisaitl was overpaid at the time of his deal. His comprable was Pastrnak and McKinnon who both signed for much less.

Letting Bouchard play earlier would have given the Oilers a known asset earlier in his career and could have allowed them to make different free agent signings. Do we re-up Barrie (although a piece of the Ekholm trade)? Do we trade and sign Kulak? Is Duncan Keith needed as a mentor (does that change Seth Jones deal and in turn the Nurse contract)?

Playing Bouchard earlier has altered the Cap in a significant manner. The Oilers lack of foresight has impacted the current and previous salary cap. Dead cap space played a huge role. Mistakes are great if we learn from them. Repeating them is the enemy.

When teams sign young players coming out of his ELC, they aren't signing him based on what he is worth that day. They are projecting what he will do over the length of his contract with the hope that player will at least be worth what he makes after a couple of seasons preferably his contract is a bargain. For Leon in his first year of the contract, he scored 70 pts. So for that 1 season, one can argue he was "overpaid" but in year 2 of his contract he scored 50g - 105 pts. So in year 2, he was at minimum worth every penny he made and he's continued to be the best contract in the NHL by a mile in my opinion.

So when someone says he was overpaid at the time of the contract, I believe that is an incorrect statement because the contract number wasn't given for season 1, its given for the seasons after.

The team signing a player always should want value in the deal and the player always wants to maximize his term and money. Were the Avalanche and the Bruins just lucky that they got their value contracts at 2M less than Draisaitl? Colorado and Boston did the leg work and we still overpaid.

Not Even Peter Draisaitl could have predicted Leon to go off the way he did. Although it is a value contract now, it was not at the time of the signing and that is what people tend to forget that when looking back at his deal.

Imagine an extra 2M in the coffer right now? The Nurse, Bouchard, McLeod bridge deals and having a full roster today, plus etc etc etc extension was affected by that deal.

Edit addition: The Nurse deal was an overpayment from the get go regardless of the year they were prognasticating for. There is only one player Edmonton should have ever been open to given a blank check on this team, and even when they did he took a pay cut.

Personalities come into play for these situations too. Pasta was happy as a pig in crap when he signed his deal. The vets on Boston with their cup rings also set a standard. pasta was the 3rd best player on his line when he extended and made it clear he didn't care about the money, he just wanted to sign asap and try to win. Nate was similar, he signed quick, he just wanted to win something and get his head down and grind, and he won a cup because of it.

Drai, I think he is a much more calculating guy. Lots of players are like that, some are very difficult to negotiate with. We're also comparing to 6 year deals. Pasta is getting 2 years at 11.25M now while Drai keeps making 8.5 when we desperately need that space. MacK did 7 years, and negotiated after taking part in some pitful Avs seasons and having 2 seasons where he performed worse than his rookie year. Nice timing for the Avs.

I don't want to give credit to Chia or anything, he was terrible, but ironically, he did sign Bergeron deal that helped put a bit of a ceiling on what Pasta could claim he was worth on the Bruins team as the 3rd best player on his line. Bergeron's deal also helps put a lit on Marchand's extension. No such luxury here. We are always all in on handing the team to kids, and McDavid got his deal done to set a standard.

"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013

"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015

5 x $5,000,000

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825331 is a reply to message #825324 ]	Fri, 25 August 2023 08:30

RDOilerfan
Messages: 3720
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 15:10

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:36

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:23

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 15:06

CrusaderPi wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 13:41

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 12:25

No I can not see what so ever how what I said can be taken negatively unless a person is trying to make something up for the purpose of unnecessarily debating me because they like confrontation. I literally said in the first paragraph that you quoted from me, that by playing him in the bubble year, all it would do is make him a better player than he is right now and he would be more expensive. The better a player does over more seasons, the better numbers he puts up, the more money he makes. That's generally how it works. That's all I said. It's right there. I think on a long term today, it probably starts with a 7 and I didn't see how there was anyway that number goes down especially if he played more in the bubble. It would only make his case even more in my opinion.

In no way what so ever was I saying Bouchard being a better player is a negative or it's a bad idea for the team that Bouchard to be a better player. So you are making it up.

I don't know what you want me to say about Broberg. So for the Oilers to have forsight which apparently they lack in your mind, they should be negotiating Broberg to a long term deal right now, is that what you are trying to say?
You are saying, you'd prefer the Oilers to not play him at all this year, is that what you are getting at?

When the conversation is about the Bouchard contract being difficult to fit into the cap because of mismanagement saying he'd be more expensive and therefore more difficult to fit under a mismanaged cap could be seen as a negative. Like imagine if he thought he was worth 4.5 on a short term team. OR even 5. Goodness that would be difficult to fit under the cap. The problem is the Oilers didn't give themselves time to figure out what Bouchard was worth and had to hedge against him, which tied up cap space. Cap space was already tied up because this exact same thing happening five years earlier with Nurse. This is what made the Oilers cap situation so bad that it they are unable to afford a more expensive short term deal that will be cheaper in the long term.

With Broberg, I'm simply comparing and contrasting where he is in his career based on the Bouchard timeline. Think the Oilers will need to bridge Broberg next year? I do. Now, bridging him might be the right choice (who can say, he's barely played NHL hockey) but it should be understood that they don't have the choice to sign him long term. Why? Constant and cyclical mismanagement. But yes, if the Oilers were smart and they thought of Broberg as a long term Oiler they would be working on signing him long term now.

There's a difference between making something up and coming to a different conclusion.

What I find difficult in this site and why I get into so many confrontations is how many posters in here are so incredibly wishy washy and ever hypocritical,

Several years right before the last Nurse bridge, there was a thread in here talking about the next contract for Nurse and how he could have been bridged or signed long term. The media was floating around ideas that a long term deal for Nurse before his last bridge would cost around 7 mill. Many fans in here, were losing their minds over that idea. These fans, I bet yourself included, thought it would be incredibly stupid to sign up Nurse for long term at the number that was being floated. He was unproved, it was a gross overpay, etc, etc. Now those same fans are the ones complaining that the Oilers were stupid to kick the Nurse contract down the and they should have signed it years ago instead of bridging him.

I seem to remember getting into arguments with those same people about Leon's contract. They overpaid, it was stupid, how could they do that. Now it's the best contract in the league by a mile and has been for just about the whole deal.

Draisaitl was overpaid at the time of his deal. His comprable was Pastrnak and McKinnon who both signed for much less.

Letting Bouchard play earlier would have given the Oilers a known asset earlier in his career and could have allowed them to make different free agent signings. Do we re-up Barrie (although a piece of the Ekholm trade)? Do we trade and sign Kulak? Is Duncan Keith needed as a mentor (does that change Seth Jones deal and in turn the Nurse contract)?

Playing Bouchard earlier has altered the Cap in a significant manner. The Oilers lack of foresight has impacted the current and previous salary cap. Dead cap space played a huge role. Mistakes are great if we learn from them. Repeating them is the enemy.

When teams sign young players coming out of his ELC, they aren't signing him based on what he is worth that day. They are projecting what he will do over the length of his contract with the hope that player will at least be worth what he makes after a couple of seasons preferably his contract is a bargain. For Leon in his first year of the contract, he scored 70 pts. So for that 1 season, one can argue he was "overpaid" but in year 2 of his contract he scored 50g - 105 pts. So in year 2, he was at minimum worth every penny he made and he's continued to be the best contract in the NHL by a mile in my opinion.

So when someone says he was overpaid at the time of the contract, I believe that is an incorrect statement because the contract number wasn't given for season 1, its given for the seasons after.

The team signing a player always should want value in the deal and the player always wants to maximize his term and money. Were the Avalanche and the Bruins just lucky that they got their value contracts at 2M less than Draisaitl? Colorado and Boston did the leg work and we still overpaid.

Not Even Peter Draisaitl could have predicted Leon to go off the way he did. Although it is a value contract now, it was not at the time of the signing and that is what people tend to forget that when looking back at his deal.

Imagine an extra 2M in the coffer right now? The Nurse, Bouchard, McLeod bridge deals and having a full roster today, plus etc etc etc extension was affected by that deal.

Edit addition: The Nurse deal was an overpayment from the get go regardless of the year they were prognasticating for. There is only one player Edmonton should have ever been open to given a blank check on this team, and even when they did he took a pay cut.

I can't figure out what you are arguing with me about. You said teams should always want value in the deal they sign players too. I 100% agree with you. The Oilers got extreme value.

18-19 - Paying Leon 8.5 mill, in 80 games they got 50 goals, 105 pts.
19-20 - In 71 games, they got 43 goals, 110 pts. That season was shortened by covid. That's 50 goals, 127 pts in 82. He won't the hart and scoring title.
20-21 - Shortened season. In 56 games they got 31 goals, 84 pts. That's 45 goals, 123 ots.
21-22 - 80 games, 55 goals, 110 pts.
22-23 - 80 games, 52 goals, 128 pts.

What do you want to bet he scores around 50 goals and over 110 pts this year? Nothing is guaranteed in life but if he plays the whole season, I feel pretty darn confident he will get those numbers.

On top of that, they got 49 playoff games where he scored 31g, 77 pts. Go ahead and pick a player you want to compare him too and for the money Leon makes compared to production, he's the best value in the league by a mile and it started right away. They were getting a 50 goal scorer and over 100s at the beginning of the deal and it's continued the entire time. To compare, to get similar production from a player not McD, it costs the Leafs, 11.634 for Matthews to put up similar numbers.

People love to bring up MacKinnon, go look at his numbers before signing his contract. They suck. Let's also keep in mind which people LOVE to leave out, when the contract was signed. MacKinnon signed his deal July 6, 2016. That was for 6.3 mill per after he put up 21 goals, 52 pts in 71 games. That's 24 g, 60 pts in 82 games without playoffs. The year after that, he put up 16 goals, 53 pts in 82. No playoffs.

Leon signed his deal Aug 16, 2017 after he put up 29 goals, 77 pts plus another 6 goals 16 pts in 13 games in the playoffs. Like it or not, players, teams and agents VALUE playoffs a lot. So not only did Leon outscore Mackinnon in his last year of his ELC but quite a bit, Leon also had a very good playoff which bumps up his value.

So to say Leon was worth what MacKinnon got in my opinion is completely false because Leon scored more goals and points in the regular season plus did well in the playoffs. Players use other players contracts as a guide and then compare themselves. So when comparing Leon to Nat, Leon scored more and should have been paid more based on regular season results. Then you add in some playoff success. On top of that, you have to add in the contracts were signed in different years. Every year, salaries go up. The league min goes up, the highest a player can physically make goes up. So you also have to take that into account that just from year to year, the salary of a higher end player would go up. I would bet money that if MacKinnon was due in 17-18, even if he put up the same numbers, he would have gotten more than 6.3 mill.

So I just don't get your stance. Leon's contract has been an extreme value deal for the whole thing. Even if you want to compare him to McD. McD makes 12.5 mill, 4 mill more. I think McD is worth every penny but if you look at his numbers compared to Leons, is McD giving the Oilers 4 mill more scoring wise? No he's not.

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825336 is a reply to message #825331 ]	Fri, 25 August 2023 10:14

inverno76
Messages: 2125
Registered: September 2005
Location: Prince Albert, Saskatchew...

2 Cups

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 08:30

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 15:10

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:36

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:23

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 15:06

CrusaderPi wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 13:41

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 12:25

No I can not see what so ever how what I said can be taken negatively unless a person is trying to make something up for the purpose of unnecessarily debating me because they like confrontation. I literally said in the first paragraph that you quoted from me, that by playing him in the bubble year, all it would do is make him a better player than he is right now and he would be more expensive. The better a player does over more seasons, the better numbers he puts up, the more money he makes. That's generally how it works. That's all I said. It's right there. I think on a long term today, it probably starts with a 7 and I didn't see how there was anyway that number goes down especially if he played more in the bubble. It would only make his case even more in my opinion.

In no way what so ever was I saying Bouchard being a better player is a negative or it's a bad idea for the team that Bouchard to be a better player. So you are making it up.

I don't know what you want me to say about Broberg. So for the Oilers to have forsight which apparently they lack in your mind, they should be negotiating Broberg to a long term deal right now, is that what you are trying to say?
You are saying, you'd prefer the Oilers to not play him at all this year, is that what you are getting at?

When the conversation is about the Bouchard contract being difficult to fit into the cap because of mismanagement saying he'd be more expensive and therefore more difficult to fit under a mismanaged cap could be seen as a negative. Like imagine if he thought he was worth 4.5 on a short term team. OR even 5. Goodness that would be difficult to fit under the cap. The problem is the Oilers didn't give themselves time to figure out what Bouchard was worth and had to hedge against him, which tied up cap space. Cap space was already tied up because this exact same thing happening five years earlier with Nurse. This is what made the Oilers cap situation so bad that it they are unable to afford a more expensive short term deal that will be cheaper in the long term.

With Broberg, I'm simply comparing and contrasting where he is in his career based on the Bouchard timeline. Think the Oilers will need to bridge Broberg next year? I do. Now, bridging him might be the right choice (who can say, he's barely played NHL hockey) but it should be understood that they don't have the choice to sign him long term. Why? Constant and cyclical mismanagement. But yes, if the Oilers were smart and they thought of Broberg as a long term Oiler they would be working on signing him long term now.

There's a difference between making something up and coming to a different conclusion.

What I find difficult in this site and why I get into so many confrontations is how many posters in here are so incredibly wishy washy and ever hypocritical,

Several years right before the last Nurse bridge, there was a thread in here talking about the next contract for Nurse and how he could have been bridged or signed long term. The media was floating around ideas that a long term deal for Nurse before his last bridge would cost around 7 mill. Many fans in here, were losing their minds over that idea. These fans, I bet yourself included, thought it would be incredibly stupid to sign up Nurse for long term at the number that was being floated. He was unproved, it was a gross overpay, etc, etc. Now those same fans are the ones complaining that the Oilers were stupid to kick the Nurse contract down the and they should have signed it years ago instead of bridging him.

I seem to remember getting into arguments with those same people about Leon's contract. They overpaid, it was stupid, how could they do that. Now it's the best contract in the league by a mile and has been for just about the whole deal.

Draisaitl was overpaid at the time of his deal. His comprable was Pastrnak and McKinnon who both signed for much less.

Letting Bouchard play earlier would have given the Oilers a known asset earlier in his career and could have allowed them to make different free agent signings. Do we re-up Barrie (although a piece of the Ekholm trade)? Do we trade and sign Kulak? Is Duncan Keith needed as a mentor (does that change Seth Jones deal and in turn the Nurse contract)?

Playing Bouchard earlier has altered the Cap in a significant manner. The Oilers lack of foresight has impacted the current and previous salary cap. Dead cap space played a huge role. Mistakes are great if we learn from them. Repeating them is the enemy.

When teams sign young players coming out of his ELC, they aren't signing him based on what he is worth that day. They are projecting what he will do over the length of his contract with the hope that player will at least be worth what he makes after a couple of seasons preferably his contract is a bargain. For Leon in his first year of the contract, he scored 70 pts. So for that 1 season, one can argue he was "overpaid" but in year 2 of his contract he scored 50g - 105 pts. So in year 2, he was at minimum worth every penny he made and he's continued to be the best contract in the NHL by a mile in my opinion.

So when someone says he was overpaid at the time of the contract, I believe that is an incorrect statement because the contract number wasn't given for season 1, its given for the seasons after.

The team signing a player always should want value in the deal and the player always wants to maximize his term and money. Were the Avalanche and the Bruins just lucky that they got their value contracts at 2M less than Draisaitl? Colorado and Boston did the leg work and we still overpaid.

Not Even Peter Draisaitl could have predicted Leon to go off the way he did. Although it is a value contract now, it was not at the time of the signing and that is what people tend to forget that when looking back at his deal.

Imagine an extra 2M in the coffer right now? The Nurse, Bouchard, McLeod bridge deals and having a full roster today, plus etc etc etc extension was affected by that deal.

Edit addition: The Nurse deal was an overpayment from the get go regardless of the year they were prognasticating for. There is only one player Edmonton should have ever been open to given a blank check on this team, and even when they did he took a pay cut.

I can't figure out what you are arguing with me about. You said teams should always want value in the deal they sign players too. I 100% agree with you. The Oilers got extreme value.

18-19 - Paying Leon 8.5 mill, in 80 games they got 50 goals, 105 pts.
19-20 - In 71 games, they got 43 goals, 110 pts. That season was shortened by covid. That's 50 goals, 127 pts in 82. He won't the hart and scoring title.
20-21 - Shortened season. In 56 games they got 31 goals, 84 pts. That's 45 goals, 123 ots.
21-22 - 80 games, 55 goals, 110 pts.
22-23 - 80 games, 52 goals, 128 pts.

What do you want to bet he scores around 50 goals and over 110 pts this year? Nothing is guaranteed in life but if he plays the whole season, I feel pretty darn confident he will get those numbers.

On top of that, they got 49 playoff games where he scored 31g, 77 pts. Go ahead and pick a player you want to compare him too and for the money Leon makes compared to production, he's the best value in the league by a mile and it started right away. They were getting a 50 goal scorer and over 100s at the beginning of the deal and it's continued the entire time. To compare, to get similar production from a player not McD, it costs the Leafs, 11.634 for Matthews to put up similar numbers.

People love to bring up MacKinnon, go look at his numbers before signing his contract. They suck. Let's also keep in mind which people LOVE to leave out, when the contract was signed. MacKinnon signed his deal July 6, 2016. That was for 6.3 mill per after he put up 21 goals, 52 pts in 71 games. That's 24 g, 60 pts in 82 games without playoffs. The year after that, he put up 16 goals, 53 pts in 82. No playoffs.

Leon signed his deal Aug 16, 2017 after he put up 29 goals, 77 pts plus another 6 goals 16 pts in 13 games in the playoffs. Like it or not, players, teams and agents VALUE playoffs a lot. So not only did Leon outscore Mackinnon in his last year of his ELC but quite a bit, Leon also had a very good playoff which bumps up his value.

So to say Leon was worth what MacKinnon got in my opinion is completely false because Leon scored more goals and points in the regular season plus did well in the playoffs. Players use other players contracts as a guide and then compare themselves. So when comparing Leon to Nat, Leon scored more and should have been paid more based on regular season results. Then you add in some playoff success. On top of that, you have to add in the contracts were signed in different years. Every year, salaries go up. The league min goes up, the highest a player can physically make goes up. So you also have to take that into account that just from year to year, the salary of a higher end player would go up. I would bet money that if MacKinnon was due in 17-18, even if he put up the same numbers, he would have gotten more than 6.3 mill.

So I just don't get your stance. Leon's contract has been an extreme value deal for the whole thing. Even if you want to compare him to McD. McD makes 12.5 mill, 4 mill more. I think McD is worth every penny but if you look at his numbers compared to Leons, is McD giving the Oilers 4 mill more scoring wise? No he's not.

Draisaitl is a massive value contract now and early into his signing. I am saying the Oilers took more risk than needed by giving too much too soon. Six years since the signing, and even in today's market a 8.5M cap hit is on the high end signing for a 2nd year deal.

Leon was also never projected to be a 50 goal scorer. Not when he was drafted. Not when he left the WHL. Not when he entered the league, and not when he signed that deal.

The Oilers got lucky with the deal. I love he guy and I agree it is a massive underpayment now, but a 6.5 to 7M deal would have been in the right target area for contract #2.

As for McDavid. He was projected to be superstar from the age 12. Nothing happened in his career path happened to suggest otherwise and regardless of what he signs for throughout his career it will be a value deal.

Kr55, I agree that Pasta and Nate were in different situations, but was the extra two years for Draisaitl really worth 28M at the time? 23.9M more than McKinnon. There were millions of dollars to be squeezed on that deal with comps signed one year earlier.

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825338 is a reply to message #825336 ]	Fri, 25 August 2023 10:30

Kr55
Messages: 9649
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

inverno76 wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 10:14

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 08:30

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 15:10

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:36

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:23

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 15:06

CrusaderPi wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 13:41

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 12:25

No I can not see what so ever how what I said can be taken negatively unless a person is trying to make something up for the purpose of unnecessarily debating me because they like confrontation. I literally said in the first paragraph that you quoted from me, that by playing him in the bubble year, all it would do is make him a better player than he is right now and he would be more expensive. The better a player does over more seasons, the better numbers he puts up, the more money he makes. That's generally how it works. That's all I said. It's right there. I think on a long term today, it probably starts with a 7 and I didn't see how there was anyway that number goes down especially if he played more in the bubble. It would only make his case even more in my opinion.

In no way what so ever was I saying Bouchard being a better player is a negative or it's a bad idea for the team that Bouchard to be a better player. So you are making it up.

I don't know what you want me to say about Broberg. So for the Oilers to have forsight which apparently they lack in your mind, they should be negotiating Broberg to a long term deal right now, is that what you are trying to say?
You are saying, you'd prefer the Oilers to not play him at all this year, is that what you are getting at?

When the conversation is about the Bouchard contract being difficult to fit into the cap because of mismanagement saying he'd be more expensive and therefore more difficult to fit under a mismanaged cap could be seen as a negative. Like imagine if he thought he was worth 4.5 on a short term team. OR even 5. Goodness that would be difficult to fit under the cap. The problem is the Oilers didn't give themselves time to figure out what Bouchard was worth and had to hedge against him, which tied up cap space. Cap space was already tied up because this exact same thing happening five years earlier with Nurse. This is what made the Oilers cap situation so bad that it they are unable to afford a more expensive short term deal that will be cheaper in the long term.

With Broberg, I'm simply comparing and contrasting where he is in his career based on the Bouchard timeline. Think the Oilers will need to bridge Broberg next year? I do. Now, bridging him might be the right choice (who can say, he's barely played NHL hockey) but it should be understood that they don't have the choice to sign him long term. Why? Constant and cyclical mismanagement. But yes, if the Oilers were smart and they thought of Broberg as a long term Oiler they would be working on signing him long term now.

There's a difference between making something up and coming to a different conclusion.

What I find difficult in this site and why I get into so many confrontations is how many posters in here are so incredibly wishy washy and ever hypocritical,

Several years right before the last Nurse bridge, there was a thread in here talking about the next contract for Nurse and how he could have been bridged or signed long term. The media was floating around ideas that a long term deal for Nurse before his last bridge would cost around 7 mill. Many fans in here, were losing their minds over that idea. These fans, I bet yourself included, thought it would be incredibly stupid to sign up Nurse for long term at the number that was being floated. He was unproved, it was a gross overpay, etc, etc. Now those same fans are the ones complaining that the Oilers were stupid to kick the Nurse contract down the and they should have signed it years ago instead of bridging him.

I seem to remember getting into arguments with those same people about Leon's contract. They overpaid, it was stupid, how could they do that. Now it's the best contract in the league by a mile and has been for just about the whole deal.

Draisaitl was overpaid at the time of his deal. His comprable was Pastrnak and McKinnon who both signed for much less.

Letting Bouchard play earlier would have given the Oilers a known asset earlier in his career and could have allowed them to make different free agent signings. Do we re-up Barrie (although a piece of the Ekholm trade)? Do we trade and sign Kulak? Is Duncan Keith needed as a mentor (does that change Seth Jones deal and in turn the Nurse contract)?

Playing Bouchard earlier has altered the Cap in a significant manner. The Oilers lack of foresight has impacted the current and previous salary cap. Dead cap space played a huge role. Mistakes are great if we learn from them. Repeating them is the enemy.

When teams sign young players coming out of his ELC, they aren't signing him based on what he is worth that day. They are projecting what he will do over the length of his contract with the hope that player will at least be worth what he makes after a couple of seasons preferably his contract is a bargain. For Leon in his first year of the contract, he scored 70 pts. So for that 1 season, one can argue he was "overpaid" but in year 2 of his contract he scored 50g - 105 pts. So in year 2, he was at minimum worth every penny he made and he's continued to be the best contract in the NHL by a mile in my opinion.

So when someone says he was overpaid at the time of the contract, I believe that is an incorrect statement because the contract number wasn't given for season 1, its given for the seasons after.

The team signing a player always should want value in the deal and the player always wants to maximize his term and money. Were the Avalanche and the Bruins just lucky that they got their value contracts at 2M less than Draisaitl? Colorado and Boston did the leg work and we still overpaid.

Not Even Peter Draisaitl could have predicted Leon to go off the way he did. Although it is a value contract now, it was not at the time of the signing and that is what people tend to forget that when looking back at his deal.

Imagine an extra 2M in the coffer right now? The Nurse, Bouchard, McLeod bridge deals and having a full roster today, plus etc etc etc extension was affected by that deal.

Edit addition: The Nurse deal was an overpayment from the get go regardless of the year they were prognasticating for. There is only one player Edmonton should have ever been open to given a blank check on this team, and even when they did he took a pay cut.

I can't figure out what you are arguing with me about. You said teams should always want value in the deal they sign players too. I 100% agree with you. The Oilers got extreme value.

18-19 - Paying Leon 8.5 mill, in 80 games they got 50 goals, 105 pts.
19-20 - In 71 games, they got 43 goals, 110 pts. That season was shortened by covid. That's 50 goals, 127 pts in 82. He won't the hart and scoring title.
20-21 - Shortened season. In 56 games they got 31 goals, 84 pts. That's 45 goals, 123 ots.
21-22 - 80 games, 55 goals, 110 pts.
22-23 - 80 games, 52 goals, 128 pts.

What do you want to bet he scores around 50 goals and over 110 pts this year? Nothing is guaranteed in life but if he plays the whole season, I feel pretty darn confident he will get those numbers.

On top of that, they got 49 playoff games where he scored 31g, 77 pts. Go ahead and pick a player you want to compare him too and for the money Leon makes compared to production, he's the best value in the league by a mile and it started right away. They were getting a 50 goal scorer and over 100s at the beginning of the deal and it's continued the entire time. To compare, to get similar production from a player not McD, it costs the Leafs, 11.634 for Matthews to put up similar numbers.

People love to bring up MacKinnon, go look at his numbers before signing his contract. They suck. Let's also keep in mind which people LOVE to leave out, when the contract was signed. MacKinnon signed his deal July 6, 2016. That was for 6.3 mill per after he put up 21 goals, 52 pts in 71 games. That's 24 g, 60 pts in 82 games without playoffs. The year after that, he put up 16 goals, 53 pts in 82. No playoffs.

Leon signed his deal Aug 16, 2017 after he put up 29 goals, 77 pts plus another 6 goals 16 pts in 13 games in the playoffs. Like it or not, players, teams and agents VALUE playoffs a lot. So not only did Leon outscore Mackinnon in his last year of his ELC but quite a bit, Leon also had a very good playoff which bumps up his value.

So to say Leon was worth what MacKinnon got in my opinion is completely false because Leon scored more goals and points in the regular season plus did well in the playoffs. Players use other players contracts as a guide and then compare themselves. So when comparing Leon to Nat, Leon scored more and should have been paid more based on regular season results. Then you add in some playoff success. On top of that, you have to add in the contracts were signed in different years. Every year, salaries go up. The league min goes up, the highest a player can physically make goes up. So you also have to take that into account that just from year to year, the salary of a higher end player would go up. I would bet money that if MacKinnon was due in 17-18, even if he put up the same numbers, he would have gotten more than 6.3 mill.

So I just don't get your stance. Leon's contract has been an extreme value deal for the whole thing. Even if you want to compare him to McD. McD makes 12.5 mill, 4 mill more. I think McD is worth every penny but if you look at his numbers compared to Leons, is McD giving the Oilers 4 mill more scoring wise? No he's not.

Draisaitl is a massive value contract now and early into his signing. I am saying the Oilers took more risk than needed by giving too much too soon. Six years since the signing, and even in today's market a 8.5M cap hit is on the high end signing for a 2nd year deal.

Leon was also never projected to be a 50 goal scorer. Not when he was drafted. Not when he left the WHL. Not when he entered the league, and not when he signed that deal.

The Oilers got lucky with the deal. I love he guy and I agree it is a massive underpayment now, but a 6.5 to 7M deal would have been in the right target area for contract #2.

As for McDavid. He was projected to be superstar from the age 12. Nothing happened in his career path happened to suggest otherwise and regardless of what he signs for throughout his career it will be a value deal.

Kr55, I agree that Pasta and Nate were in different situations, but was the extra two years for Draisaitl really worth 28M at the time? 23.9M more than McKinnon. There were millions of dollars to be squeezed on that deal with comps signed one year earlier.

I think the hard part to ever know is how difficult Drai was going to be in the negotiation. If his agent was suggesting they would look at offer sheets after the insane playoffs he just had. If Drai's agent was putting his foot down that if he didn't get within that 70% mark of McDavid's deal they would take their chances with a bridge, knowing well that Drai would at the very least get lots of ice time with McDavid to pump his stats.

Or maybe Chia just rolled over and took the first ask Drai's agent put on the table :) That would be very Chia. Drai did have a really good bargaining position though for an agent to play with, I will at least say that, and in retrospect, almost any option they took, Drai was going to make a heck of a lot of money.

Worked out reasonably well for everyone, but we made dozens of crap moves to cancel out the benefit of having 2 of the best of the last decade at current bargain deals.

"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013

"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015

5 x $5,000,000

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825341 is a reply to message #825338 ]	Fri, 25 August 2023 11:07

inverno76
Messages: 2125
Registered: September 2005
Location: Prince Albert, Saskatchew...

2 Cups

Kr55 wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 10:30

inverno76 wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 10:14

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 08:30

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 15:10

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:36

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:23

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 15:06

CrusaderPi wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 13:41

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 12:25

No I can not see what so ever how what I said can be taken negatively unless a person is trying to make something up for the purpose of unnecessarily debating me because they like confrontation. I literally said in the first paragraph that you quoted from me, that by playing him in the bubble year, all it would do is make him a better player than he is right now and he would be more expensive. The better a player does over more seasons, the better numbers he puts up, the more money he makes. That's generally how it works. That's all I said. It's right there. I think on a long term today, it probably starts with a 7 and I didn't see how there was anyway that number goes down especially if he played more in the bubble. It would only make his case even more in my opinion.

In no way what so ever was I saying Bouchard being a better player is a negative or it's a bad idea for the team that Bouchard to be a better player. So you are making it up.

I don't know what you want me to say about Broberg. So for the Oilers to have forsight which apparently they lack in your mind, they should be negotiating Broberg to a long term deal right now, is that what you are trying to say?
You are saying, you'd prefer the Oilers to not play him at all this year, is that what you are getting at?

When the conversation is about the Bouchard contract being difficult to fit into the cap because of mismanagement saying he'd be more expensive and therefore more difficult to fit under a mismanaged cap could be seen as a negative. Like imagine if he thought he was worth 4.5 on a short term team. OR even 5. Goodness that would be difficult to fit under the cap. The problem is the Oilers didn't give themselves time to figure out what Bouchard was worth and had to hedge against him, which tied up cap space. Cap space was already tied up because this exact same thing happening five years earlier with Nurse. This is what made the Oilers cap situation so bad that it they are unable to afford a more expensive short term deal that will be cheaper in the long term.

With Broberg, I'm simply comparing and contrasting where he is in his career based on the Bouchard timeline. Think the Oilers will need to bridge Broberg next year? I do. Now, bridging him might be the right choice (who can say, he's barely played NHL hockey) but it should be understood that they don't have the choice to sign him long term. Why? Constant and cyclical mismanagement. But yes, if the Oilers were smart and they thought of Broberg as a long term Oiler they would be working on signing him long term now.

There's a difference between making something up and coming to a different conclusion.

What I find difficult in this site and why I get into so many confrontations is how many posters in here are so incredibly wishy washy and ever hypocritical,

Several years right before the last Nurse bridge, there was a thread in here talking about the next contract for Nurse and how he could have been bridged or signed long term. The media was floating around ideas that a long term deal for Nurse before his last bridge would cost around 7 mill. Many fans in here, were losing their minds over that idea. These fans, I bet yourself included, thought it would be incredibly stupid to sign up Nurse for long term at the number that was being floated. He was unproved, it was a gross overpay, etc, etc. Now those same fans are the ones complaining that the Oilers were stupid to kick the Nurse contract down the and they should have signed it years ago instead of bridging him.

I seem to remember getting into arguments with those same people about Leon's contract. They overpaid, it was stupid, how could they do that. Now it's the best contract in the league by a mile and has been for just about the whole deal.

Draisaitl was overpaid at the time of his deal. His comprable was Pastrnak and McKinnon who both signed for much less.

Letting Bouchard play earlier would have given the Oilers a known asset earlier in his career and could have allowed them to make different free agent signings. Do we re-up Barrie (although a piece of the Ekholm trade)? Do we trade and sign Kulak? Is Duncan Keith needed as a mentor (does that change Seth Jones deal and in turn the Nurse contract)?

Playing Bouchard earlier has altered the Cap in a significant manner. The Oilers lack of foresight has impacted the current and previous salary cap. Dead cap space played a huge role. Mistakes are great if we learn from them. Repeating them is the enemy.

When teams sign young players coming out of his ELC, they aren't signing him based on what he is worth that day. They are projecting what he will do over the length of his contract with the hope that player will at least be worth what he makes after a couple of seasons preferably his contract is a bargain. For Leon in his first year of the contract, he scored 70 pts. So for that 1 season, one can argue he was "overpaid" but in year 2 of his contract he scored 50g - 105 pts. So in year 2, he was at minimum worth every penny he made and he's continued to be the best contract in the NHL by a mile in my opinion.

So when someone says he was overpaid at the time of the contract, I believe that is an incorrect statement because the contract number wasn't given for season 1, its given for the seasons after.

The team signing a player always should want value in the deal and the player always wants to maximize his term and money. Were the Avalanche and the Bruins just lucky that they got their value contracts at 2M less than Draisaitl? Colorado and Boston did the leg work and we still overpaid.

Not Even Peter Draisaitl could have predicted Leon to go off the way he did. Although it is a value contract now, it was not at the time of the signing and that is what people tend to forget that when looking back at his deal.

Imagine an extra 2M in the coffer right now? The Nurse, Bouchard, McLeod bridge deals and having a full roster today, plus etc etc etc extension was affected by that deal.

Edit addition: The Nurse deal was an overpayment from the get go regardless of the year they were prognasticating for. There is only one player Edmonton should have ever been open to given a blank check on this team, and even when they did he took a pay cut.

I can't figure out what you are arguing with me about. You said teams should always want value in the deal they sign players too. I 100% agree with you. The Oilers got extreme value.

18-19 - Paying Leon 8.5 mill, in 80 games they got 50 goals, 105 pts.
19-20 - In 71 games, they got 43 goals, 110 pts. That season was shortened by covid. That's 50 goals, 127 pts in 82. He won't the hart and scoring title.
20-21 - Shortened season. In 56 games they got 31 goals, 84 pts. That's 45 goals, 123 ots.
21-22 - 80 games, 55 goals, 110 pts.
22-23 - 80 games, 52 goals, 128 pts.

What do you want to bet he scores around 50 goals and over 110 pts this year? Nothing is guaranteed in life but if he plays the whole season, I feel pretty darn confident he will get those numbers.

On top of that, they got 49 playoff games where he scored 31g, 77 pts. Go ahead and pick a player you want to compare him too and for the money Leon makes compared to production, he's the best value in the league by a mile and it started right away. They were getting a 50 goal scorer and over 100s at the beginning of the deal and it's continued the entire time. To compare, to get similar production from a player not McD, it costs the Leafs, 11.634 for Matthews to put up similar numbers.

People love to bring up MacKinnon, go look at his numbers before signing his contract. They suck. Let's also keep in mind which people LOVE to leave out, when the contract was signed. MacKinnon signed his deal July 6, 2016. That was for 6.3 mill per after he put up 21 goals, 52 pts in 71 games. That's 24 g, 60 pts in 82 games without playoffs. The year after that, he put up 16 goals, 53 pts in 82. No playoffs.

Leon signed his deal Aug 16, 2017 after he put up 29 goals, 77 pts plus another 6 goals 16 pts in 13 games in the playoffs. Like it or not, players, teams and agents VALUE playoffs a lot. So not only did Leon outscore Mackinnon in his last year of his ELC but quite a bit, Leon also had a very good playoff which bumps up his value.

So to say Leon was worth what MacKinnon got in my opinion is completely false because Leon scored more goals and points in the regular season plus did well in the playoffs. Players use other players contracts as a guide and then compare themselves. So when comparing Leon to Nat, Leon scored more and should have been paid more based on regular season results. Then you add in some playoff success. On top of that, you have to add in the contracts were signed in different years. Every year, salaries go up. The league min goes up, the highest a player can physically make goes up. So you also have to take that into account that just from year to year, the salary of a higher end player would go up. I would bet money that if MacKinnon was due in 17-18, even if he put up the same numbers, he would have gotten more than 6.3 mill.

So I just don't get your stance. Leon's contract has been an extreme value deal for the whole thing. Even if you want to compare him to McD. McD makes 12.5 mill, 4 mill more. I think McD is worth every penny but if you look at his numbers compared to Leons, is McD giving the Oilers 4 mill more scoring wise? No he's not.

Draisaitl is a massive value contract now and early into his signing. I am saying the Oilers took more risk than needed by giving too much too soon. Six years since the signing, and even in today's market a 8.5M cap hit is on the high end signing for a 2nd year deal.

Leon was also never projected to be a 50 goal scorer. Not when he was drafted. Not when he left the WHL. Not when he entered the league, and not when he signed that deal.

The Oilers got lucky with the deal. I love he guy and I agree it is a massive underpayment now, but a 6.5 to 7M deal would have been in the right target area for contract #2.

As for McDavid. He was projected to be superstar from the age 12. Nothing happened in his career path happened to suggest otherwise and regardless of what he signs for throughout his career it will be a value deal.

Kr55, I agree that Pasta and Nate were in different situations, but was the extra two years for Draisaitl really worth 28M at the time? 23.9M more than McKinnon. There were millions of dollars to be squeezed on that deal with comps signed one year earlier.

I think the hard part to ever know is how difficult Drai was going to be in the negotiation. If his agent was suggesting they would look at offer sheets after the insane playoffs he just had. If Drai's agent was putting his foot down that if he didn't get within that 70% mark of McDavid's deal they would take their chances with a bridge, knowing well that Drai would at the very least get lots of ice time with McDavid to pump his stats.

Or maybe Chia just rolled over and took the first ask Drai's agent put on the table :) That would be very Chia. Drai did have a really good bargaining position though for an agent to play with, I will at least say that, and in retrospect, almost any option they took, Drai was going to make a heck of a lot of money.

Worked out reasonably well for everyone, but we made dozens of crap moves to cancel out the benefit of having 2 of the best of the last decade at current bargain deals.

It's hard to believe this was masterful GM'ing with all of the gross deals we have signed. I am grateful it has worked out so well for the team.

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825339 is a reply to message #825336 ]	Fri, 25 August 2023 10:37

RDOilerfan
Messages: 3720
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

inverno76 wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 10:14

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 08:30

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 15:10

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:36

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:23

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 15:06

CrusaderPi wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 13:41

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 12:25

No I can not see what so ever how what I said can be taken negatively unless a person is trying to make something up for the purpose of unnecessarily debating me because they like confrontation. I literally said in the first paragraph that you quoted from me, that by playing him in the bubble year, all it would do is make him a better player than he is right now and he would be more expensive. The better a player does over more seasons, the better numbers he puts up, the more money he makes. That's generally how it works. That's all I said. It's right there. I think on a long term today, it probably starts with a 7 and I didn't see how there was anyway that number goes down especially if he played more in the bubble. It would only make his case even more in my opinion.

In no way what so ever was I saying Bouchard being a better player is a negative or it's a bad idea for the team that Bouchard to be a better player. So you are making it up.

I don't know what you want me to say about Broberg. So for the Oilers to have forsight which apparently they lack in your mind, they should be negotiating Broberg to a long term deal right now, is that what you are trying to say?
You are saying, you'd prefer the Oilers to not play him at all this year, is that what you are getting at?

When the conversation is about the Bouchard contract being difficult to fit into the cap because of mismanagement saying he'd be more expensive and therefore more difficult to fit under a mismanaged cap could be seen as a negative. Like imagine if he thought he was worth 4.5 on a short term team. OR even 5. Goodness that would be difficult to fit under the cap. The problem is the Oilers didn't give themselves time to figure out what Bouchard was worth and had to hedge against him, which tied up cap space. Cap space was already tied up because this exact same thing happening five years earlier with Nurse. This is what made the Oilers cap situation so bad that it they are unable to afford a more expensive short term deal that will be cheaper in the long term.

With Broberg, I'm simply comparing and contrasting where he is in his career based on the Bouchard timeline. Think the Oilers will need to bridge Broberg next year? I do. Now, bridging him might be the right choice (who can say, he's barely played NHL hockey) but it should be understood that they don't have the choice to sign him long term. Why? Constant and cyclical mismanagement. But yes, if the Oilers were smart and they thought of Broberg as a long term Oiler they would be working on signing him long term now.

There's a difference between making something up and coming to a different conclusion.

What I find difficult in this site and why I get into so many confrontations is how many posters in here are so incredibly wishy washy and ever hypocritical,

Several years right before the last Nurse bridge, there was a thread in here talking about the next contract for Nurse and how he could have been bridged or signed long term. The media was floating around ideas that a long term deal for Nurse before his last bridge would cost around 7 mill. Many fans in here, were losing their minds over that idea. These fans, I bet yourself included, thought it would be incredibly stupid to sign up Nurse for long term at the number that was being floated. He was unproved, it was a gross overpay, etc, etc. Now those same fans are the ones complaining that the Oilers were stupid to kick the Nurse contract down the and they should have signed it years ago instead of bridging him.

I seem to remember getting into arguments with those same people about Leon's contract. They overpaid, it was stupid, how could they do that. Now it's the best contract in the league by a mile and has been for just about the whole deal.

Draisaitl was overpaid at the time of his deal. His comprable was Pastrnak and McKinnon who both signed for much less.

Letting Bouchard play earlier would have given the Oilers a known asset earlier in his career and could have allowed them to make different free agent signings. Do we re-up Barrie (although a piece of the Ekholm trade)? Do we trade and sign Kulak? Is Duncan Keith needed as a mentor (does that change Seth Jones deal and in turn the Nurse contract)?

Playing Bouchard earlier has altered the Cap in a significant manner. The Oilers lack of foresight has impacted the current and previous salary cap. Dead cap space played a huge role. Mistakes are great if we learn from them. Repeating them is the enemy.

When teams sign young players coming out of his ELC, they aren't signing him based on what he is worth that day. They are projecting what he will do over the length of his contract with the hope that player will at least be worth what he makes after a couple of seasons preferably his contract is a bargain. For Leon in his first year of the contract, he scored 70 pts. So for that 1 season, one can argue he was "overpaid" but in year 2 of his contract he scored 50g - 105 pts. So in year 2, he was at minimum worth every penny he made and he's continued to be the best contract in the NHL by a mile in my opinion.

So when someone says he was overpaid at the time of the contract, I believe that is an incorrect statement because the contract number wasn't given for season 1, its given for the seasons after.

The team signing a player always should want value in the deal and the player always wants to maximize his term and money. Were the Avalanche and the Bruins just lucky that they got their value contracts at 2M less than Draisaitl? Colorado and Boston did the leg work and we still overpaid.

Not Even Peter Draisaitl could have predicted Leon to go off the way he did. Although it is a value contract now, it was not at the time of the signing and that is what people tend to forget that when looking back at his deal.

Imagine an extra 2M in the coffer right now? The Nurse, Bouchard, McLeod bridge deals and having a full roster today, plus etc etc etc extension was affected by that deal.

Edit addition: The Nurse deal was an overpayment from the get go regardless of the year they were prognasticating for. There is only one player Edmonton should have ever been open to given a blank check on this team, and even when they did he took a pay cut.

I can't figure out what you are arguing with me about. You said teams should always want value in the deal they sign players too. I 100% agree with you. The Oilers got extreme value.

18-19 - Paying Leon 8.5 mill, in 80 games they got 50 goals, 105 pts.
19-20 - In 71 games, they got 43 goals, 110 pts. That season was shortened by covid. That's 50 goals, 127 pts in 82. He won't the hart and scoring title.
20-21 - Shortened season. In 56 games they got 31 goals, 84 pts. That's 45 goals, 123 ots.
21-22 - 80 games, 55 goals, 110 pts.
22-23 - 80 games, 52 goals, 128 pts.

What do you want to bet he scores around 50 goals and over 110 pts this year? Nothing is guaranteed in life but if he plays the whole season, I feel pretty darn confident he will get those numbers.

On top of that, they got 49 playoff games where he scored 31g, 77 pts. Go ahead and pick a player you want to compare him too and for the money Leon makes compared to production, he's the best value in the league by a mile and it started right away. They were getting a 50 goal scorer and over 100s at the beginning of the deal and it's continued the entire time. To compare, to get similar production from a player not McD, it costs the Leafs, 11.634 for Matthews to put up similar numbers.

People love to bring up MacKinnon, go look at his numbers before signing his contract. They suck. Let's also keep in mind which people LOVE to leave out, when the contract was signed. MacKinnon signed his deal July 6, 2016. That was for 6.3 mill per after he put up 21 goals, 52 pts in 71 games. That's 24 g, 60 pts in 82 games without playoffs. The year after that, he put up 16 goals, 53 pts in 82. No playoffs.

Leon signed his deal Aug 16, 2017 after he put up 29 goals, 77 pts plus another 6 goals 16 pts in 13 games in the playoffs. Like it or not, players, teams and agents VALUE playoffs a lot. So not only did Leon outscore Mackinnon in his last year of his ELC but quite a bit, Leon also had a very good playoff which bumps up his value.

So to say Leon was worth what MacKinnon got in my opinion is completely false because Leon scored more goals and points in the regular season plus did well in the playoffs. Players use other players contracts as a guide and then compare themselves. So when comparing Leon to Nat, Leon scored more and should have been paid more based on regular season results. Then you add in some playoff success. On top of that, you have to add in the contracts were signed in different years. Every year, salaries go up. The league min goes up, the highest a player can physically make goes up. So you also have to take that into account that just from year to year, the salary of a higher end player would go up. I would bet money that if MacKinnon was due in 17-18, even if he put up the same numbers, he would have gotten more than 6.3 mill.

So I just don't get your stance. Leon's contract has been an extreme value deal for the whole thing. Even if you want to compare him to McD. McD makes 12.5 mill, 4 mill more. I think McD is worth every penny but if you look at his numbers compared to Leons, is McD giving the Oilers 4 mill more scoring wise? No he's not.

Draisaitl is a massive value contract now and early into his signing. I am saying the Oilers took more risk than needed by giving too much too soon. Six years since the signing, and even in today's market a 8.5M cap hit is on the high end signing for a 2nd year deal.

Leon was also never projected to be a 50 goal scorer. Not when he was drafted. Not when he left the WHL. Not when he entered the league, and not when he signed that deal.

The Oilers got lucky with the deal. I love he guy and I agree it is a massive underpayment now, but a 6.5 to 7M deal would have been in the right target area for contract #2.

As for McDavid. He was projected to be superstar from the age 12. Nothing happened in his career path happened to suggest otherwise and regardless of what he signs for throughout his career it will be a value deal.

Kr55, I agree that Pasta and Nate were in different situations, but was the extra two years for Draisaitl really worth 28M at the time? 23.9M more than McKinnon. There were millions of dollars to be squeezed on that deal with comps signed one year earlier.

I guess we will just never agree on this. I just can't get my head around how anyone thinks his contract was ever an overpay.

MacKinnon signed for 6.3 mill and score barely over 50 pts. I believe when you are signing a young player early on, their salary has to go up by 10%. I don't know the exact wording but I believe that is correct.

So 10% raise on MacKinnon just because you have too basically puts you at 6.9. Then you have to factor in guys generally get more than the other guy just because. Look at Bouchards deal. Byram signs for 3.85, Miller signs for 22K more, then Bouchard signs for 28K more than Miller. WHY? All the numbers for all 3 have them at the same age, very similar experience levels, same points, if anything Bouchard gets a bump from being on the Oilers record setting PP and the other 2 played significantly more mins that Bouchard. So in my opinion, Bouchard probably should have been paid less than Byram slightly but he didn't just because he was the last one to sign. Now I get that he will score more points this year but a ton of that will because he's on the Oilers PP. But regardless, he got more just because that's what happens.

So back to Leon. He signed a year later than MacKinnon, so he will get more just because that is how the system works. Its not an Oilers thing, it's what happens. So now we are at 7 because of the year later. Then you have to factor in he scored more goals and almost 20 more pts than Mackinnon. So that make it so he can command more. You get paid for points and goals and he got more goals and points. So now you are pushing 8 then you have to factor in playoff success which like it or not, impacts a players pay. Adin Hill got more than double his salary because he got hot in the playoffs for 6 weeks. There is absolutely no chance in hell he is making 4.9 mill this year without that run. You know I am right. So playoff success factors into what a guy gets paid. Leon had a great playoff right before his new contract.

If you want to say Leon's contract at the time should have been a couple 100K less, sure. I won't lose sleep tonight over that. But 2 mill less, no chance in hell. That is completely unrealistic to think that in my opinion.

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825340 is a reply to message #825339 ]	Fri, 25 August 2023 11:02

inverno76
Messages: 2125
Registered: September 2005
Location: Prince Albert, Saskatchew...

2 Cups

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 10:37

inverno76 wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 10:14

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 08:30

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 15:10

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:36

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:23

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 15:06

CrusaderPi wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 13:41

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 12:25

No I can not see what so ever how what I said can be taken negatively unless a person is trying to make something up for the purpose of unnecessarily debating me because they like confrontation. I literally said in the first paragraph that you quoted from me, that by playing him in the bubble year, all it would do is make him a better player than he is right now and he would be more expensive. The better a player does over more seasons, the better numbers he puts up, the more money he makes. That's generally how it works. That's all I said. It's right there. I think on a long term today, it probably starts with a 7 and I didn't see how there was anyway that number goes down especially if he played more in the bubble. It would only make his case even more in my opinion.

In no way what so ever was I saying Bouchard being a better player is a negative or it's a bad idea for the team that Bouchard to be a better player. So you are making it up.

I don't know what you want me to say about Broberg. So for the Oilers to have forsight which apparently they lack in your mind, they should be negotiating Broberg to a long term deal right now, is that what you are trying to say?
You are saying, you'd prefer the Oilers to not play him at all this year, is that what you are getting at?

When the conversation is about the Bouchard contract being difficult to fit into the cap because of mismanagement saying he'd be more expensive and therefore more difficult to fit under a mismanaged cap could be seen as a negative. Like imagine if he thought he was worth 4.5 on a short term team. OR even 5. Goodness that would be difficult to fit under the cap. The problem is the Oilers didn't give themselves time to figure out what Bouchard was worth and had to hedge against him, which tied up cap space. Cap space was already tied up because this exact same thing happening five years earlier with Nurse. This is what made the Oilers cap situation so bad that it they are unable to afford a more expensive short term deal that will be cheaper in the long term.

With Broberg, I'm simply comparing and contrasting where he is in his career based on the Bouchard timeline. Think the Oilers will need to bridge Broberg next year? I do. Now, bridging him might be the right choice (who can say, he's barely played NHL hockey) but it should be understood that they don't have the choice to sign him long term. Why? Constant and cyclical mismanagement. But yes, if the Oilers were smart and they thought of Broberg as a long term Oiler they would be working on signing him long term now.

There's a difference between making something up and coming to a different conclusion.

What I find difficult in this site and why I get into so many confrontations is how many posters in here are so incredibly wishy washy and ever hypocritical,

Several years right before the last Nurse bridge, there was a thread in here talking about the next contract for Nurse and how he could have been bridged or signed long term. The media was floating around ideas that a long term deal for Nurse before his last bridge would cost around 7 mill. Many fans in here, were losing their minds over that idea. These fans, I bet yourself included, thought it would be incredibly stupid to sign up Nurse for long term at the number that was being floated. He was unproved, it was a gross overpay, etc, etc. Now those same fans are the ones complaining that the Oilers were stupid to kick the Nurse contract down the and they should have signed it years ago instead of bridging him.

I seem to remember getting into arguments with those same people about Leon's contract. They overpaid, it was stupid, how could they do that. Now it's the best contract in the league by a mile and has been for just about the whole deal.

Draisaitl was overpaid at the time of his deal. His comprable was Pastrnak and McKinnon who both signed for much less.

Letting Bouchard play earlier would have given the Oilers a known asset earlier in his career and could have allowed them to make different free agent signings. Do we re-up Barrie (although a piece of the Ekholm trade)? Do we trade and sign Kulak? Is Duncan Keith needed as a mentor (does that change Seth Jones deal and in turn the Nurse contract)?

Playing Bouchard earlier has altered the Cap in a significant manner. The Oilers lack of foresight has impacted the current and previous salary cap. Dead cap space played a huge role. Mistakes are great if we learn from them. Repeating them is the enemy.

When teams sign young players coming out of his ELC, they aren't signing him based on what he is worth that day. They are projecting what he will do over the length of his contract with the hope that player will at least be worth what he makes after a couple of seasons preferably his contract is a bargain. For Leon in his first year of the contract, he scored 70 pts. So for that 1 season, one can argue he was "overpaid" but in year 2 of his contract he scored 50g - 105 pts. So in year 2, he was at minimum worth every penny he made and he's continued to be the best contract in the NHL by a mile in my opinion.

So when someone says he was overpaid at the time of the contract, I believe that is an incorrect statement because the contract number wasn't given for season 1, its given for the seasons after.

The team signing a player always should want value in the deal and the player always wants to maximize his term and money. Were the Avalanche and the Bruins just lucky that they got their value contracts at 2M less than Draisaitl? Colorado and Boston did the leg work and we still overpaid.

Not Even Peter Draisaitl could have predicted Leon to go off the way he did. Although it is a value contract now, it was not at the time of the signing and that is what people tend to forget that when looking back at his deal.

Imagine an extra 2M in the coffer right now? The Nurse, Bouchard, McLeod bridge deals and having a full roster today, plus etc etc etc extension was affected by that deal.

Edit addition: The Nurse deal was an overpayment from the get go regardless of the year they were prognasticating for. There is only one player Edmonton should have ever been open to given a blank check on this team, and even when they did he took a pay cut.

I can't figure out what you are arguing with me about. You said teams should always want value in the deal they sign players too. I 100% agree with you. The Oilers got extreme value.

18-19 - Paying Leon 8.5 mill, in 80 games they got 50 goals, 105 pts.
19-20 - In 71 games, they got 43 goals, 110 pts. That season was shortened by covid. That's 50 goals, 127 pts in 82. He won't the hart and scoring title.
20-21 - Shortened season. In 56 games they got 31 goals, 84 pts. That's 45 goals, 123 ots.
21-22 - 80 games, 55 goals, 110 pts.
22-23 - 80 games, 52 goals, 128 pts.

What do you want to bet he scores around 50 goals and over 110 pts this year? Nothing is guaranteed in life but if he plays the whole season, I feel pretty darn confident he will get those numbers.

On top of that, they got 49 playoff games where he scored 31g, 77 pts. Go ahead and pick a player you want to compare him too and for the money Leon makes compared to production, he's the best value in the league by a mile and it started right away. They were getting a 50 goal scorer and over 100s at the beginning of the deal and it's continued the entire time. To compare, to get similar production from a player not McD, it costs the Leafs, 11.634 for Matthews to put up similar numbers.

People love to bring up MacKinnon, go look at his numbers before signing his contract. They suck. Let's also keep in mind which people LOVE to leave out, when the contract was signed. MacKinnon signed his deal July 6, 2016. That was for 6.3 mill per after he put up 21 goals, 52 pts in 71 games. That's 24 g, 60 pts in 82 games without playoffs. The year after that, he put up 16 goals, 53 pts in 82. No playoffs.

Leon signed his deal Aug 16, 2017 after he put up 29 goals, 77 pts plus another 6 goals 16 pts in 13 games in the playoffs. Like it or not, players, teams and agents VALUE playoffs a lot. So not only did Leon outscore Mackinnon in his last year of his ELC but quite a bit, Leon also had a very good playoff which bumps up his value.

So to say Leon was worth what MacKinnon got in my opinion is completely false because Leon scored more goals and points in the regular season plus did well in the playoffs. Players use other players contracts as a guide and then compare themselves. So when comparing Leon to Nat, Leon scored more and should have been paid more based on regular season results. Then you add in some playoff success. On top of that, you have to add in the contracts were signed in different years. Every year, salaries go up. The league min goes up, the highest a player can physically make goes up. So you also have to take that into account that just from year to year, the salary of a higher end player would go up. I would bet money that if MacKinnon was due in 17-18, even if he put up the same numbers, he would have gotten more than 6.3 mill.

So I just don't get your stance. Leon's contract has been an extreme value deal for the whole thing. Even if you want to compare him to McD. McD makes 12.5 mill, 4 mill more. I think McD is worth every penny but if you look at his numbers compared to Leons, is McD giving the Oilers 4 mill more scoring wise? No he's not.

Draisaitl is a massive value contract now and early into his signing. I am saying the Oilers took more risk than needed by giving too much too soon. Six years since the signing, and even in today's market a 8.5M cap hit is on the high end signing for a 2nd year deal.

Leon was also never projected to be a 50 goal scorer. Not when he was drafted. Not when he left the WHL. Not when he entered the league, and not when he signed that deal.

The Oilers got lucky with the deal. I love he guy and I agree it is a massive underpayment now, but a 6.5 to 7M deal would have been in the right target area for contract #2.

As for McDavid. He was projected to be superstar from the age 12. Nothing happened in his career path happened to suggest otherwise and regardless of what he signs for throughout his career it will be a value deal.

Kr55, I agree that Pasta and Nate were in different situations, but was the extra two years for Draisaitl really worth 28M at the time? 23.9M more than McKinnon. There were millions of dollars to be squeezed on that deal with comps signed one year earlier.

I guess we will just never agree on this. I just can't get my head around how anyone thinks his contract was ever an overpay.

MacKinnon signed for 6.3 mill and score barely over 50 pts. I believe when you are signing a young player early on, their salary has to go up by 10%. I don't know the exact wording but I believe that is correct.

So 10% raise on MacKinnon just because you have too basically puts you at 6.9. Then you have to factor in guys generally get more than the other guy just because. Look at Bouchards deal. Byram signs for 3.85, Miller signs for 22K more, then Bouchard signs for 28K more than Miller. WHY? All the numbers for all 3 have them at the same age, very similar experience levels, same points, if anything Bouchard gets a bump from being on the Oilers record setting PP and the other 2 played significantly more mins that Bouchard. So in my opinion, Bouchard probably should have been paid less than Byram slightly but he didn't just because he was the last one to sign. Now I get that he will score more points this year but a ton of that will because he's on the Oilers PP. But regardless, he got more just because that's what happens.

So back to Leon. He signed a year later than MacKinnon, so he will get more just because that is how the system works. Its not an Oilers thing, it's what happens. So now we are at 7 because of the year later. Then you have to factor in he scored more goals and almost 20 more pts than Mackinnon. So that make it so he can command more. You get paid for points and goals and he got more goals and points. So now you are pushing 8 then you have to factor in playoff success which like it or not, impacts a players pay. Adin Hill got more than double his salary because he got hot in the playoffs for 6 weeks. There is absolutely no chance in hell he is making 4.9 mill this year without that run. You know I am right. So playoff success factors into what a guy gets paid. Leon had a great playoff right before his new contract.

If you want to say Leon's contract at the time should have been a couple 100K less, sure. I won't lose sleep tonight over that. But 2 mill less, no chance in hell. That is completely unrealistic to think that in my opinion.

I am okay to agree to disagree. I am glad to have Neon Leon on the team and I can only wish we get lucky every time we sign a multi-year 2nd contract.

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825342 is a reply to message #825340 ]	Fri, 25 August 2023 11:50

RDOilerfan
Messages: 3720
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

inverno76 wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 11:02

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 10:37

inverno76 wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 10:14

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 08:30

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 15:10

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:36

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:23

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 15:06

CrusaderPi wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 13:41

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 12:25

No I can not see what so ever how what I said can be taken negatively unless a person is trying to make something up for the purpose of unnecessarily debating me because they like confrontation. I literally said in the first paragraph that you quoted from me, that by playing him in the bubble year, all it would do is make him a better player than he is right now and he would be more expensive. The better a player does over more seasons, the better numbers he puts up, the more money he makes. That's generally how it works. That's all I said. It's right there. I think on a long term today, it probably starts with a 7 and I didn't see how there was anyway that number goes down especially if he played more in the bubble. It would only make his case even more in my opinion.

In no way what so ever was I saying Bouchard being a better player is a negative or it's a bad idea for the team that Bouchard to be a better player. So you are making it up.

I don't know what you want me to say about Broberg. So for the Oilers to have forsight which apparently they lack in your mind, they should be negotiating Broberg to a long term deal right now, is that what you are trying to say?
You are saying, you'd prefer the Oilers to not play him at all this year, is that what you are getting at?

When the conversation is about the Bouchard contract being difficult to fit into the cap because of mismanagement saying he'd be more expensive and therefore more difficult to fit under a mismanaged cap could be seen as a negative. Like imagine if he thought he was worth 4.5 on a short term team. OR even 5. Goodness that would be difficult to fit under the cap. The problem is the Oilers didn't give themselves time to figure out what Bouchard was worth and had to hedge against him, which tied up cap space. Cap space was already tied up because this exact same thing happening five years earlier with Nurse. This is what made the Oilers cap situation so bad that it they are unable to afford a more expensive short term deal that will be cheaper in the long term.

With Broberg, I'm simply comparing and contrasting where he is in his career based on the Bouchard timeline. Think the Oilers will need to bridge Broberg next year? I do. Now, bridging him might be the right choice (who can say, he's barely played NHL hockey) but it should be understood that they don't have the choice to sign him long term. Why? Constant and cyclical mismanagement. But yes, if the Oilers were smart and they thought of Broberg as a long term Oiler they would be working on signing him long term now.

There's a difference between making something up and coming to a different conclusion.

What I find difficult in this site and why I get into so many confrontations is how many posters in here are so incredibly wishy washy and ever hypocritical,

Several years right before the last Nurse bridge, there was a thread in here talking about the next contract for Nurse and how he could have been bridged or signed long term. The media was floating around ideas that a long term deal for Nurse before his last bridge would cost around 7 mill. Many fans in here, were losing their minds over that idea. These fans, I bet yourself included, thought it would be incredibly stupid to sign up Nurse for long term at the number that was being floated. He was unproved, it was a gross overpay, etc, etc. Now those same fans are the ones complaining that the Oilers were stupid to kick the Nurse contract down the and they should have signed it years ago instead of bridging him.

I seem to remember getting into arguments with those same people about Leon's contract. They overpaid, it was stupid, how could they do that. Now it's the best contract in the league by a mile and has been for just about the whole deal.

Draisaitl was overpaid at the time of his deal. His comprable was Pastrnak and McKinnon who both signed for much less.

Letting Bouchard play earlier would have given the Oilers a known asset earlier in his career and could have allowed them to make different free agent signings. Do we re-up Barrie (although a piece of the Ekholm trade)? Do we trade and sign Kulak? Is Duncan Keith needed as a mentor (does that change Seth Jones deal and in turn the Nurse contract)?

Playing Bouchard earlier has altered the Cap in a significant manner. The Oilers lack of foresight has impacted the current and previous salary cap. Dead cap space played a huge role. Mistakes are great if we learn from them. Repeating them is the enemy.

When teams sign young players coming out of his ELC, they aren't signing him based on what he is worth that day. They are projecting what he will do over the length of his contract with the hope that player will at least be worth what he makes after a couple of seasons preferably his contract is a bargain. For Leon in his first year of the contract, he scored 70 pts. So for that 1 season, one can argue he was "overpaid" but in year 2 of his contract he scored 50g - 105 pts. So in year 2, he was at minimum worth every penny he made and he's continued to be the best contract in the NHL by a mile in my opinion.

So when someone says he was overpaid at the time of the contract, I believe that is an incorrect statement because the contract number wasn't given for season 1, its given for the seasons after.

The team signing a player always should want value in the deal and the player always wants to maximize his term and money. Were the Avalanche and the Bruins just lucky that they got their value contracts at 2M less than Draisaitl? Colorado and Boston did the leg work and we still overpaid.

Not Even Peter Draisaitl could have predicted Leon to go off the way he did. Although it is a value contract now, it was not at the time of the signing and that is what people tend to forget that when looking back at his deal.

Imagine an extra 2M in the coffer right now? The Nurse, Bouchard, McLeod bridge deals and having a full roster today, plus etc etc etc extension was affected by that deal.

Edit addition: The Nurse deal was an overpayment from the get go regardless of the year they were prognasticating for. There is only one player Edmonton should have ever been open to given a blank check on this team, and even when they did he took a pay cut.

I can't figure out what you are arguing with me about. You said teams should always want value in the deal they sign players too. I 100% agree with you. The Oilers got extreme value.

18-19 - Paying Leon 8.5 mill, in 80 games they got 50 goals, 105 pts.
19-20 - In 71 games, they got 43 goals, 110 pts. That season was shortened by covid. That's 50 goals, 127 pts in 82. He won't the hart and scoring title.
20-21 - Shortened season. In 56 games they got 31 goals, 84 pts. That's 45 goals, 123 ots.
21-22 - 80 games, 55 goals, 110 pts.
22-23 - 80 games, 52 goals, 128 pts.

What do you want to bet he scores around 50 goals and over 110 pts this year? Nothing is guaranteed in life but if he plays the whole season, I feel pretty darn confident he will get those numbers.

On top of that, they got 49 playoff games where he scored 31g, 77 pts. Go ahead and pick a player you want to compare him too and for the money Leon makes compared to production, he's the best value in the league by a mile and it started right away. They were getting a 50 goal scorer and over 100s at the beginning of the deal and it's continued the entire time. To compare, to get similar production from a player not McD, it costs the Leafs, 11.634 for Matthews to put up similar numbers.

People love to bring up MacKinnon, go look at his numbers before signing his contract. They suck. Let's also keep in mind which people LOVE to leave out, when the contract was signed. MacKinnon signed his deal July 6, 2016. That was for 6.3 mill per after he put up 21 goals, 52 pts in 71 games. That's 24 g, 60 pts in 82 games without playoffs. The year after that, he put up 16 goals, 53 pts in 82. No playoffs.

Leon signed his deal Aug 16, 2017 after he put up 29 goals, 77 pts plus another 6 goals 16 pts in 13 games in the playoffs. Like it or not, players, teams and agents VALUE playoffs a lot. So not only did Leon outscore Mackinnon in his last year of his ELC but quite a bit, Leon also had a very good playoff which bumps up his value.

So to say Leon was worth what MacKinnon got in my opinion is completely false because Leon scored more goals and points in the regular season plus did well in the playoffs. Players use other players contracts as a guide and then compare themselves. So when comparing Leon to Nat, Leon scored more and should have been paid more based on regular season results. Then you add in some playoff success. On top of that, you have to add in the contracts were signed in different years. Every year, salaries go up. The league min goes up, the highest a player can physically make goes up. So you also have to take that into account that just from year to year, the salary of a higher end player would go up. I would bet money that if MacKinnon was due in 17-18, even if he put up the same numbers, he would have gotten more than 6.3 mill.

So I just don't get your stance. Leon's contract has been an extreme value deal for the whole thing. Even if you want to compare him to McD. McD makes 12.5 mill, 4 mill more. I think McD is worth every penny but if you look at his numbers compared to Leons, is McD giving the Oilers 4 mill more scoring wise? No he's not.

Draisaitl is a massive value contract now and early into his signing. I am saying the Oilers took more risk than needed by giving too much too soon. Six years since the signing, and even in today's market a 8.5M cap hit is on the high end signing for a 2nd year deal.

Leon was also never projected to be a 50 goal scorer. Not when he was drafted. Not when he left the WHL. Not when he entered the league, and not when he signed that deal.

The Oilers got lucky with the deal. I love he guy and I agree it is a massive underpayment now, but a 6.5 to 7M deal would have been in the right target area for contract #2.

As for McDavid. He was projected to be superstar from the age 12. Nothing happened in his career path happened to suggest otherwise and regardless of what he signs for throughout his career it will be a value deal.

Kr55, I agree that Pasta and Nate were in different situations, but was the extra two years for Draisaitl really worth 28M at the time? 23.9M more than McKinnon. There were millions of dollars to be squeezed on that deal with comps signed one year earlier.

I guess we will just never agree on this. I just can't get my head around how anyone thinks his contract was ever an overpay.

MacKinnon signed for 6.3 mill and score barely over 50 pts. I believe when you are signing a young player early on, their salary has to go up by 10%. I don't know the exact wording but I believe that is correct.

So 10% raise on MacKinnon just because you have too basically puts you at 6.9. Then you have to factor in guys generally get more than the other guy just because. Look at Bouchards deal. Byram signs for 3.85, Miller signs for 22K more, then Bouchard signs for 28K more than Miller. WHY? All the numbers for all 3 have them at the same age, very similar experience levels, same points, if anything Bouchard gets a bump from being on the Oilers record setting PP and the other 2 played significantly more mins that Bouchard. So in my opinion, Bouchard probably should have been paid less than Byram slightly but he didn't just because he was the last one to sign. Now I get that he will score more points this year but a ton of that will because he's on the Oilers PP. But regardless, he got more just because that's what happens.

So back to Leon. He signed a year later than MacKinnon, so he will get more just because that is how the system works. Its not an Oilers thing, it's what happens. So now we are at 7 because of the year later. Then you have to factor in he scored more goals and almost 20 more pts than Mackinnon. So that make it so he can command more. You get paid for points and goals and he got more goals and points. So now you are pushing 8 then you have to factor in playoff success which like it or not, impacts a players pay. Adin Hill got more than double his salary because he got hot in the playoffs for 6 weeks. There is absolutely no chance in hell he is making 4.9 mill this year without that run. You know I am right. So playoff success factors into what a guy gets paid. Leon had a great playoff right before his new contract.

If you want to say Leon's contract at the time should have been a couple 100K less, sure. I won't lose sleep tonight over that. But 2 mill less, no chance in hell. That is completely unrealistic to think that in my opinion.

I am okay to agree to disagree. I am glad to have Neon Leon on the team and I can only wish we get lucky every time we sign a multi-year 2nd contract.

Is that not what signing young players too longer deals are all about? For the most part, you give them a little more than maybe they are worth at that the start in the hopes that after a couple of years, they have progressed to the point they are on a value deal?

I assume then given your stance, pretending the Oilers had extra cap space, if the Oilers signed Bouchard to a 8 yr deal worth 7 per season. You would call it an overpay right now and complain about it but in a year or 2 when he puts up 70 pts, you call it a steal?

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825344 is a reply to message #825342 ]	Fri, 25 August 2023 12:54

inverno76
Messages: 2125
Registered: September 2005
Location: Prince Albert, Saskatchew...

2 Cups

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 11:50

inverno76 wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 11:02

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 10:37

inverno76 wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 10:14

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 08:30

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 15:10

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:36

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:23

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 15:06

CrusaderPi wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 13:41

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 12:25

No I can not see what so ever how what I said can be taken negatively unless a person is trying to make something up for the purpose of unnecessarily debating me because they like confrontation. I literally said in the first paragraph that you quoted from me, that by playing him in the bubble year, all it would do is make him a better player than he is right now and he would be more expensive. The better a player does over more seasons, the better numbers he puts up, the more money he makes. That's generally how it works. That's all I said. It's right there. I think on a long term today, it probably starts with a 7 and I didn't see how there was anyway that number goes down especially if he played more in the bubble. It would only make his case even more in my opinion.

In no way what so ever was I saying Bouchard being a better player is a negative or it's a bad idea for the team that Bouchard to be a better player. So you are making it up.

I don't know what you want me to say about Broberg. So for the Oilers to have forsight which apparently they lack in your mind, they should be negotiating Broberg to a long term deal right now, is that what you are trying to say?
You are saying, you'd prefer the Oilers to not play him at all this year, is that what you are getting at?

When the conversation is about the Bouchard contract being difficult to fit into the cap because of mismanagement saying he'd be more expensive and therefore more difficult to fit under a mismanaged cap could be seen as a negative. Like imagine if he thought he was worth 4.5 on a short term team. OR even 5. Goodness that would be difficult to fit under the cap. The problem is the Oilers didn't give themselves time to figure out what Bouchard was worth and had to hedge against him, which tied up cap space. Cap space was already tied up because this exact same thing happening five years earlier with Nurse. This is what made the Oilers cap situation so bad that it they are unable to afford a more expensive short term deal that will be cheaper in the long term.

With Broberg, I'm simply comparing and contrasting where he is in his career based on the Bouchard timeline. Think the Oilers will need to bridge Broberg next year? I do. Now, bridging him might be the right choice (who can say, he's barely played NHL hockey) but it should be understood that they don't have the choice to sign him long term. Why? Constant and cyclical mismanagement. But yes, if the Oilers were smart and they thought of Broberg as a long term Oiler they would be working on signing him long term now.

There's a difference between making something up and coming to a different conclusion.

What I find difficult in this site and why I get into so many confrontations is how many posters in here are so incredibly wishy washy and ever hypocritical,

Several years right before the last Nurse bridge, there was a thread in here talking about the next contract for Nurse and how he could have been bridged or signed long term. The media was floating around ideas that a long term deal for Nurse before his last bridge would cost around 7 mill. Many fans in here, were losing their minds over that idea. These fans, I bet yourself included, thought it would be incredibly stupid to sign up Nurse for long term at the number that was being floated. He was unproved, it was a gross overpay, etc, etc. Now those same fans are the ones complaining that the Oilers were stupid to kick the Nurse contract down the and they should have signed it years ago instead of bridging him.

I seem to remember getting into arguments with those same people about Leon's contract. They overpaid, it was stupid, how could they do that. Now it's the best contract in the league by a mile and has been for just about the whole deal.

Draisaitl was overpaid at the time of his deal. His comprable was Pastrnak and McKinnon who both signed for much less.

Letting Bouchard play earlier would have given the Oilers a known asset earlier in his career and could have allowed them to make different free agent signings. Do we re-up Barrie (although a piece of the Ekholm trade)? Do we trade and sign Kulak? Is Duncan Keith needed as a mentor (does that change Seth Jones deal and in turn the Nurse contract)?

Playing Bouchard earlier has altered the Cap in a significant manner. The Oilers lack of foresight has impacted the current and previous salary cap. Dead cap space played a huge role. Mistakes are great if we learn from them. Repeating them is the enemy.

When teams sign young players coming out of his ELC, they aren't signing him based on what he is worth that day. They are projecting what he will do over the length of his contract with the hope that player will at least be worth what he makes after a couple of seasons preferably his contract is a bargain. For Leon in his first year of the contract, he scored 70 pts. So for that 1 season, one can argue he was "overpaid" but in year 2 of his contract he scored 50g - 105 pts. So in year 2, he was at minimum worth every penny he made and he's continued to be the best contract in the NHL by a mile in my opinion.

So when someone says he was overpaid at the time of the contract, I believe that is an incorrect statement because the contract number wasn't given for season 1, its given for the seasons after.

The team signing a player always should want value in the deal and the player always wants to maximize his term and money. Were the Avalanche and the Bruins just lucky that they got their value contracts at 2M less than Draisaitl? Colorado and Boston did the leg work and we still overpaid.

Not Even Peter Draisaitl could have predicted Leon to go off the way he did. Although it is a value contract now, it was not at the time of the signing and that is what people tend to forget that when looking back at his deal.

Imagine an extra 2M in the coffer right now? The Nurse, Bouchard, McLeod bridge deals and having a full roster today, plus etc etc etc extension was affected by that deal.

Edit addition: The Nurse deal was an overpayment from the get go regardless of the year they were prognasticating for. There is only one player Edmonton should have ever been open to given a blank check on this team, and even when they did he took a pay cut.

I can't figure out what you are arguing with me about. You said teams should always want value in the deal they sign players too. I 100% agree with you. The Oilers got extreme value.

18-19 - Paying Leon 8.5 mill, in 80 games they got 50 goals, 105 pts.
19-20 - In 71 games, they got 43 goals, 110 pts. That season was shortened by covid. That's 50 goals, 127 pts in 82. He won't the hart and scoring title.
20-21 - Shortened season. In 56 games they got 31 goals, 84 pts. That's 45 goals, 123 ots.
21-22 - 80 games, 55 goals, 110 pts.
22-23 - 80 games, 52 goals, 128 pts.

What do you want to bet he scores around 50 goals and over 110 pts this year? Nothing is guaranteed in life but if he plays the whole season, I feel pretty darn confident he will get those numbers.

On top of that, they got 49 playoff games where he scored 31g, 77 pts. Go ahead and pick a player you want to compare him too and for the money Leon makes compared to production, he's the best value in the league by a mile and it started right away. They were getting a 50 goal scorer and over 100s at the beginning of the deal and it's continued the entire time. To compare, to get similar production from a player not McD, it costs the Leafs, 11.634 for Matthews to put up similar numbers.

People love to bring up MacKinnon, go look at his numbers before signing his contract. They suck. Let's also keep in mind which people LOVE to leave out, when the contract was signed. MacKinnon signed his deal July 6, 2016. That was for 6.3 mill per after he put up 21 goals, 52 pts in 71 games. That's 24 g, 60 pts in 82 games without playoffs. The year after that, he put up 16 goals, 53 pts in 82. No playoffs.

Leon signed his deal Aug 16, 2017 after he put up 29 goals, 77 pts plus another 6 goals 16 pts in 13 games in the playoffs. Like it or not, players, teams and agents VALUE playoffs a lot. So not only did Leon outscore Mackinnon in his last year of his ELC but quite a bit, Leon also had a very good playoff which bumps up his value.

So to say Leon was worth what MacKinnon got in my opinion is completely false because Leon scored more goals and points in the regular season plus did well in the playoffs. Players use other players contracts as a guide and then compare themselves. So when comparing Leon to Nat, Leon scored more and should have been paid more based on regular season results. Then you add in some playoff success. On top of that, you have to add in the contracts were signed in different years. Every year, salaries go up. The league min goes up, the highest a player can physically make goes up. So you also have to take that into account that just from year to year, the salary of a higher end player would go up. I would bet money that if MacKinnon was due in 17-18, even if he put up the same numbers, he would have gotten more than 6.3 mill.

So I just don't get your stance. Leon's contract has been an extreme value deal for the whole thing. Even if you want to compare him to McD. McD makes 12.5 mill, 4 mill more. I think McD is worth every penny but if you look at his numbers compared to Leons, is McD giving the Oilers 4 mill more scoring wise? No he's not.

Draisaitl is a massive value contract now and early into his signing. I am saying the Oilers took more risk than needed by giving too much too soon. Six years since the signing, and even in today's market a 8.5M cap hit is on the high end signing for a 2nd year deal.

Leon was also never projected to be a 50 goal scorer. Not when he was drafted. Not when he left the WHL. Not when he entered the league, and not when he signed that deal.

The Oilers got lucky with the deal. I love he guy and I agree it is a massive underpayment now, but a 6.5 to 7M deal would have been in the right target area for contract #2.

As for McDavid. He was projected to be superstar from the age 12. Nothing happened in his career path happened to suggest otherwise and regardless of what he signs for throughout his career it will be a value deal.

Kr55, I agree that Pasta and Nate were in different situations, but was the extra two years for Draisaitl really worth 28M at the time? 23.9M more than McKinnon. There were millions of dollars to be squeezed on that deal with comps signed one year earlier.

I guess we will just never agree on this. I just can't get my head around how anyone thinks his contract was ever an overpay.

MacKinnon signed for 6.3 mill and score barely over 50 pts. I believe when you are signing a young player early on, their salary has to go up by 10%. I don't know the exact wording but I believe that is correct.

So 10% raise on MacKinnon just because you have too basically puts you at 6.9. Then you have to factor in guys generally get more than the other guy just because. Look at Bouchards deal. Byram signs for 3.85, Miller signs for 22K more, then Bouchard signs for 28K more than Miller. WHY? All the numbers for all 3 have them at the same age, very similar experience levels, same points, if anything Bouchard gets a bump from being on the Oilers record setting PP and the other 2 played significantly more mins that Bouchard. So in my opinion, Bouchard probably should have been paid less than Byram slightly but he didn't just because he was the last one to sign. Now I get that he will score more points this year but a ton of that will because he's on the Oilers PP. But regardless, he got more just because that's what happens.

So back to Leon. He signed a year later than MacKinnon, so he will get more just because that is how the system works. Its not an Oilers thing, it's what happens. So now we are at 7 because of the year later. Then you have to factor in he scored more goals and almost 20 more pts than Mackinnon. So that make it so he can command more. You get paid for points and goals and he got more goals and points. So now you are pushing 8 then you have to factor in playoff success which like it or not, impacts a players pay. Adin Hill got more than double his salary because he got hot in the playoffs for 6 weeks. There is absolutely no chance in hell he is making 4.9 mill this year without that run. You know I am right. So playoff success factors into what a guy gets paid. Leon had a great playoff right before his new contract.

If you want to say Leon's contract at the time should have been a couple 100K less, sure. I won't lose sleep tonight over that. But 2 mill less, no chance in hell. That is completely unrealistic to think that in my opinion.

I am okay to agree to disagree. I am glad to have Neon Leon on the team and I can only wish we get lucky every time we sign a multi-year 2nd contract.

Is that not what signing young players too longer deals are all about? For the most part, you give them a little more than maybe they are worth at that the start in the hopes that after a couple of years, they have progressed to the point they are on a value deal?

I assume then given your stance, pretending the Oilers had extra cap space, if the Oilers signed Bouchard to a 8 yr deal worth 7 per season. You would call it an overpay right now and complain about it but in a year or 2 when he puts up 70 pts, you call it a steal?

Nope. 7M per season X 8 for a RHD that put up comparable numbers to Makar at the same NHL experience would be a value deal. Giving him 9.9M (10% more than Makar) would be a gross overpay and Zack Werensky'ish.

7M would be substantially less than what Sergachev signed last year at 25 years old (8.5M).

I also thought we agreed to disagree?

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825346 is a reply to message #825344 ]	Fri, 25 August 2023 13:26

RDOilerfan
Messages: 3720
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

inverno76 wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 12:54

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 11:50

inverno76 wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 11:02

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 10:37

inverno76 wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 10:14

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 25 August 2023 08:30

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 15:10

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:36

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:23

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 15:06

CrusaderPi wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 13:41

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 12:25

No I can not see what so ever how what I said can be taken negatively unless a person is trying to make something up for the purpose of unnecessarily debating me because they like confrontation. I literally said in the first paragraph that you quoted from me, that by playing him in the bubble year, all it would do is make him a better player than he is right now and he would be more expensive. The better a player does over more seasons, the better numbers he puts up, the more money he makes. That's generally how it works. That's all I said. It's right there. I think on a long term today, it probably starts with a 7 and I didn't see how there was anyway that number goes down especially if he played more in the bubble. It would only make his case even more in my opinion.

In no way what so ever was I saying Bouchard being a better player is a negative or it's a bad idea for the team that Bouchard to be a better player. So you are making it up.

I don't know what you want me to say about Broberg. So for the Oilers to have forsight which apparently they lack in your mind, they should be negotiating Broberg to a long term deal right now, is that what you are trying to say?
You are saying, you'd prefer the Oilers to not play him at all this year, is that what you are getting at?

When the conversation is about the Bouchard contract being difficult to fit into the cap because of mismanagement saying he'd be more expensive and therefore more difficult to fit under a mismanaged cap could be seen as a negative. Like imagine if he thought he was worth 4.5 on a short term team. OR even 5. Goodness that would be difficult to fit under the cap. The problem is the Oilers didn't give themselves time to figure out what Bouchard was worth and had to hedge against him, which tied up cap space. Cap space was already tied up because this exact same thing happening five years earlier with Nurse. This is what made the Oilers cap situation so bad that it they are unable to afford a more expensive short term deal that will be cheaper in the long term.

With Broberg, I'm simply comparing and contrasting where he is in his career based on the Bouchard timeline. Think the Oilers will need to bridge Broberg next year? I do. Now, bridging him might be the right choice (who can say, he's barely played NHL hockey) but it should be understood that they don't have the choice to sign him long term. Why? Constant and cyclical mismanagement. But yes, if the Oilers were smart and they thought of Broberg as a long term Oiler they would be working on signing him long term now.

There's a difference between making something up and coming to a different conclusion.

What I find difficult in this site and why I get into so many confrontations is how many posters in here are so incredibly wishy washy and ever hypocritical,

Several years right before the last Nurse bridge, there was a thread in here talking about the next contract for Nurse and how he could have been bridged or signed long term. The media was floating around ideas that a long term deal for Nurse before his last bridge would cost around 7 mill. Many fans in here, were losing their minds over that idea. These fans, I bet yourself included, thought it would be incredibly stupid to sign up Nurse for long term at the number that was being floated. He was unproved, it was a gross overpay, etc, etc. Now those same fans are the ones complaining that the Oilers were stupid to kick the Nurse contract down the and they should have signed it years ago instead of bridging him.

I seem to remember getting into arguments with those same people about Leon's contract. They overpaid, it was stupid, how could they do that. Now it's the best contract in the league by a mile and has been for just about the whole deal.

Draisaitl was overpaid at the time of his deal. His comprable was Pastrnak and McKinnon who both signed for much less.

Letting Bouchard play earlier would have given the Oilers a known asset earlier in his career and could have allowed them to make different free agent signings. Do we re-up Barrie (although a piece of the Ekholm trade)? Do we trade and sign Kulak? Is Duncan Keith needed as a mentor (does that change Seth Jones deal and in turn the Nurse contract)?

Playing Bouchard earlier has altered the Cap in a significant manner. The Oilers lack of foresight has impacted the current and previous salary cap. Dead cap space played a huge role. Mistakes are great if we learn from them. Repeating them is the enemy.

When teams sign young players coming out of his ELC, they aren't signing him based on what he is worth that day. They are projecting what he will do over the length of his contract with the hope that player will at least be worth what he makes after a couple of seasons preferably his contract is a bargain. For Leon in his first year of the contract, he scored 70 pts. So for that 1 season, one can argue he was "overpaid" but in year 2 of his contract he scored 50g - 105 pts. So in year 2, he was at minimum worth every penny he made and he's continued to be the best contract in the NHL by a mile in my opinion.

So when someone says he was overpaid at the time of the contract, I believe that is an incorrect statement because the contract number wasn't given for season 1, its given for the seasons after.

The team signing a player always should want value in the deal and the player always wants to maximize his term and money. Were the Avalanche and the Bruins just lucky that they got their value contracts at 2M less than Draisaitl? Colorado and Boston did the leg work and we still overpaid.

Not Even Peter Draisaitl could have predicted Leon to go off the way he did. Although it is a value contract now, it was not at the time of the signing and that is what people tend to forget that when looking back at his deal.

Imagine an extra 2M in the coffer right now? The Nurse, Bouchard, McLeod bridge deals and having a full roster today, plus etc etc etc extension was affected by that deal.

Edit addition: The Nurse deal was an overpayment from the get go regardless of the year they were prognasticating for. There is only one player Edmonton should have ever been open to given a blank check on this team, and even when they did he took a pay cut.

I can't figure out what you are arguing with me about. You said teams should always want value in the deal they sign players too. I 100% agree with you. The Oilers got extreme value.

18-19 - Paying Leon 8.5 mill, in 80 games they got 50 goals, 105 pts.
19-20 - In 71 games, they got 43 goals, 110 pts. That season was shortened by covid. That's 50 goals, 127 pts in 82. He won't the hart and scoring title.
20-21 - Shortened season. In 56 games they got 31 goals, 84 pts. That's 45 goals, 123 ots.
21-22 - 80 games, 55 goals, 110 pts.
22-23 - 80 games, 52 goals, 128 pts.

What do you want to bet he scores around 50 goals and over 110 pts this year? Nothing is guaranteed in life but if he plays the whole season, I feel pretty darn confident he will get those numbers.

On top of that, they got 49 playoff games where he scored 31g, 77 pts. Go ahead and pick a player you want to compare him too and for the money Leon makes compared to production, he's the best value in the league by a mile and it started right away. They were getting a 50 goal scorer and over 100s at the beginning of the deal and it's continued the entire time. To compare, to get similar production from a player not McD, it costs the Leafs, 11.634 for Matthews to put up similar numbers.

People love to bring up MacKinnon, go look at his numbers before signing his contract. They suck. Let's also keep in mind which people LOVE to leave out, when the contract was signed. MacKinnon signed his deal July 6, 2016. That was for 6.3 mill per after he put up 21 goals, 52 pts in 71 games. That's 24 g, 60 pts in 82 games without playoffs. The year after that, he put up 16 goals, 53 pts in 82. No playoffs.

Leon signed his deal Aug 16, 2017 after he put up 29 goals, 77 pts plus another 6 goals 16 pts in 13 games in the playoffs. Like it or not, players, teams and agents VALUE playoffs a lot. So not only did Leon outscore Mackinnon in his last year of his ELC but quite a bit, Leon also had a very good playoff which bumps up his value.

So to say Leon was worth what MacKinnon got in my opinion is completely false because Leon scored more goals and points in the regular season plus did well in the playoffs. Players use other players contracts as a guide and then compare themselves. So when comparing Leon to Nat, Leon scored more and should have been paid more based on regular season results. Then you add in some playoff success. On top of that, you have to add in the contracts were signed in different years. Every year, salaries go up. The league min goes up, the highest a player can physically make goes up. So you also have to take that into account that just from year to year, the salary of a higher end player would go up. I would bet money that if MacKinnon was due in 17-18, even if he put up the same numbers, he would have gotten more than 6.3 mill.

So I just don't get your stance. Leon's contract has been an extreme value deal for the whole thing. Even if you want to compare him to McD. McD makes 12.5 mill, 4 mill more. I think McD is worth every penny but if you look at his numbers compared to Leons, is McD giving the Oilers 4 mill more scoring wise? No he's not.

Draisaitl is a massive value contract now and early into his signing. I am saying the Oilers took more risk than needed by giving too much too soon. Six years since the signing, and even in today's market a 8.5M cap hit is on the high end signing for a 2nd year deal.

Leon was also never projected to be a 50 goal scorer. Not when he was drafted. Not when he left the WHL. Not when he entered the league, and not when he signed that deal.

The Oilers got lucky with the deal. I love he guy and I agree it is a massive underpayment now, but a 6.5 to 7M deal would have been in the right target area for contract #2.

As for McDavid. He was projected to be superstar from the age 12. Nothing happened in his career path happened to suggest otherwise and regardless of what he signs for throughout his career it will be a value deal.

Kr55, I agree that Pasta and Nate were in different situations, but was the extra two years for Draisaitl really worth 28M at the time? 23.9M more than McKinnon. There were millions of dollars to be squeezed on that deal with comps signed one year earlier.

I guess we will just never agree on this. I just can't get my head around how anyone thinks his contract was ever an overpay.

MacKinnon signed for 6.3 mill and score barely over 50 pts. I believe when you are signing a young player early on, their salary has to go up by 10%. I don't know the exact wording but I believe that is correct.

So 10% raise on MacKinnon just because you have too basically puts you at 6.9. Then you have to factor in guys generally get more than the other guy just because. Look at Bouchards deal. Byram signs for 3.85, Miller signs for 22K more, then Bouchard signs for 28K more than Miller. WHY? All the numbers for all 3 have them at the same age, very similar experience levels, same points, if anything Bouchard gets a bump from being on the Oilers record setting PP and the other 2 played significantly more mins that Bouchard. So in my opinion, Bouchard probably should have been paid less than Byram slightly but he didn't just because he was the last one to sign. Now I get that he will score more points this year but a ton of that will because he's on the Oilers PP. But regardless, he got more just because that's what happens.

So back to Leon. He signed a year later than MacKinnon, so he will get more just because that is how the system works. Its not an Oilers thing, it's what happens. So now we are at 7 because of the year later. Then you have to factor in he scored more goals and almost 20 more pts than Mackinnon. So that make it so he can command more. You get paid for points and goals and he got more goals and points. So now you are pushing 8 then you have to factor in playoff success which like it or not, impacts a players pay. Adin Hill got more than double his salary because he got hot in the playoffs for 6 weeks. There is absolutely no chance in hell he is making 4.9 mill this year without that run. You know I am right. So playoff success factors into what a guy gets paid. Leon had a great playoff right before his new contract.

If you want to say Leon's contract at the time should have been a couple 100K less, sure. I won't lose sleep tonight over that. But 2 mill less, no chance in hell. That is completely unrealistic to think that in my opinion.

I am okay to agree to disagree. I am glad to have Neon Leon on the team and I can only wish we get lucky every time we sign a multi-year 2nd contract.

Is that not what signing young players too longer deals are all about? For the most part, you give them a little more than maybe they are worth at that the start in the hopes that after a couple of years, they have progressed to the point they are on a value deal?

I assume then given your stance, pretending the Oilers had extra cap space, if the Oilers signed Bouchard to a 8 yr deal worth 7 per season. You would call it an overpay right now and complain about it but in a year or 2 when he puts up 70 pts, you call it a steal?

Nope. 7M per season X 8 for a RHD that put up comparable numbers to Makar at the same NHL experience would be a value deal. Giving him 9.9M (10% more than Makar) would be a gross overpay and Zack Werensky'ish.

7M would be substantially less than what Sergachev signed last year at 25 years old (8.5M).

I also thought we agreed to disagree?

Ok then.

Sergachev played over 23 mins last year, over 22 the year before, 21 the year before compared to Bouchard just over 18. Sergachev prior to this season was in 3 cup finals as a top 4 dman, won 2 cups. But I can totally see how he's a good comparable to Bouchard.
icon_rolleyes

icon_rolleyes

Malar only score 50 pts in 57 games in the 19-20 season. That's only a 72 pt pace in 82. Then was a was a point per game dman with 44 pts in 44 games in the covid short season. Then he signed his big deal. So I again, I can totally see how Makar and Bouchard are a comparable. icon_rolleyes

icon_rolleyes

Nothing like using 22+, multiple cup winning or point per game, win norris trophy's as part of your back up but I guess so. But you are right, agree to disagree I guess. I will drop it now.

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825347 is a reply to message #825346 ]	Fri, 25 August 2023 14:33

inverno76
Messages: 2125
Registered: September 2005
Location: Prince Albert, Saskatchew...

2 Cups

Curious to who you would compare a 7M - 8 year deal signing to ... Zach Werenski in 2021? But he signed for 9.5M?

And I thought you were all about projecting output? With Bouchard's strong finish to last year and massive playoff performance he seems very similar to the Draisaitl theory. He's projected to be a 9-10M dman and I would be upset at a long-term 7M deal?
confused2

confused2

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825314 is a reply to message #825274 ]	Thu, 24 August 2023 11:06

inverno76
Messages: 2125
Registered: September 2005
Location: Prince Albert, Saskatchew...

2 Cups

smyth260 wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 08:14

Friedman reporting Bouchard is coming in at 2x3.9M, though not official from team yet.

Too bad, this is going to bite us. Draisaitl and Bouch due at the same time.

If Draisaitl does not re-sign an extension next summer then we have bigger things to worry about than the contracts ending simultaneously.

Getting Draisaitl locked up, and then McDavid will be priority. Moving Bouchard if needed will suck, but not the end of the world. He should fetch a handsome return and we have seen multiple offensive d-men fill the same role.

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825315 is a reply to message #825314 ]	Thu, 24 August 2023 11:12

Kr55
Messages: 9649
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:06

smyth260 wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 08:14

Friedman reporting Bouchard is coming in at 2x3.9M, though not official from team yet.

Too bad, this is going to bite us. Draisaitl and Bouch due at the same time.

If Draisaitl does not re-sign an extension next summer then we have bigger things to worry about than the contracts ending simultaneously.

Getting Draisaitl locked up, and then McDavid will be priority. Moving Bouchard if needed will suck, but not the end of the world. He should fetch a handsome return and we have seen multiple offensive d-men fill the same role.

The PP is less important than his 5v5 impact IMO. We are still bone dry on D that can make plays 5v5. Even more dry on the right side. Ceci is lousy 5v5, Barrie wasn't that good either overall 5v5. Not much else there.

But yeah, Drai gone, McDavid likely follows. It's back to tank time. May as well trade Bouch for 1st round picks.

"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013

"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015

5 x $5,000,000

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825317 is a reply to message #825315 ]	Thu, 24 August 2023 11:28

inverno76
Messages: 2125
Registered: September 2005
Location: Prince Albert, Saskatchew...

2 Cups

Kr55 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:12

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:06

smyth260 wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 08:14

Friedman reporting Bouchard is coming in at 2x3.9M, though not official from team yet.

Too bad, this is going to bite us. Draisaitl and Bouch due at the same time.

If Draisaitl does not re-sign an extension next summer then we have bigger things to worry about than the contracts ending simultaneously.

Getting Draisaitl locked up, and then McDavid will be priority. Moving Bouchard if needed will suck, but not the end of the world. He should fetch a handsome return and we have seen multiple offensive d-men fill the same role.

The PP is less important than his 5v5 impact IMO. We are still bone dry on D that can make plays 5v5. Even more dry on the right side. Ceci is lousy 5v5, Barrie wasn't that good either overall 5v5. Not much else there.

But yeah, Drai gone, McDavid likely follows. It's back to tank time. May as well trade Bouch for 1st round picks.

5v5 is our nemesis to winning a cup. If Bouchard wants to be paid like an elite and we cannot afford him there should be significantly cheaper replacement players that can give you similar 5v5 numbers available, and the PP could be replaced by Nurse, player X or possibly Ekholm without a significant drop.

Although sometimes I do not live in the real world, so take my two bits as you see fit.

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Re: 2023-24 Speculation Thread [message #825319 is a reply to message #825317 ]	Thu, 24 August 2023 11:57

Kr55
Messages: 9649
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:28

Kr55 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:12

inverno76 wrote on Thu, 24 August 2023 11:06

smyth260 wrote on Wed, 23 August 2023 08:14

Friedman reporting Bouchard is coming in at 2x3.9M, though not official from team yet.

Too bad, this is going to bite us. Draisaitl and Bouch due at the same time.

If Draisaitl does not re-sign an extension next summer then we have bigger things to worry about than the contracts ending simultaneously.

Getting Draisaitl locked up, and then McDavid will be priority. Moving Bouchard if needed will suck, but not the end of the world. He should fetch a handsome return and we have seen multiple offensive d-men fill the same role.

The PP is less important than his 5v5 impact IMO. We are still bone dry on D that can make plays 5v5. Even more dry on the right side. Ceci is lousy 5v5, Barrie wasn't that good either overall 5v5. Not much else there.

But yeah, Drai gone, McDavid likely follows. It's back to tank time. May as well trade Bouch for 1st round picks.

5v5 is our nemesis to winning a cup. If Bouchard wants to be paid like an elite and we cannot afford him there should be significantly cheaper replacement players that can give you similar 5v5 numbers available, and the PP could be replaced by Nurse, player X or possibly Ekholm without a significant drop.

Although sometimes I do not live in the real world, so take my two bits as you see fit.

If Bouch keeps trending like he has then I don't think you're getting similar 5v5 offensive contributions very easily any time soon, especially with how this team is managed. These are players that you draft and keep, or you pull off a robbery trade. We are more likely to be the robbed than the robber, unless there is some big shakeup coming in our management. The Oilers have been trying to get what Bouch is looking to become for over a decade and a half now. We've thrown away guys that ended up winning a Hart, and overpaid UFA turds and done all kinds of gross asset value destroying things along the way.

"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013

"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015

5 x $5,000,000

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

Pages (11): [ « < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 > »]

Previous Topic:	Toronto - Hot take
Next Topic:	Holland’s Successor

Copyright © OilFans.com 1996-2022.
All content is property of OilFans.com and cannot be used without expressed, written consent from this site.
Questions, comments and suggestions can be directed to oilfans@OilFans.com
Privacy Statement

Hosted by LogicalHosting.ca