Salary Cap Voracek

[brelic]

Someone on another board brought up an interesting point about Voracek.

He makes $2.25M this year on a one year contract. JVR just signed a 6 year extension worth $4.25M per year that will kick in next season.

Voracek and JVR are from the same draft class and are the same age.

Voracek has played one extra season and has a higher PPG ratio than JVR.

I would argue that Voracek is also a more complete player from what we see on the ice.

So, wanna bet that Voracek will get a $2m+ raise next year? He might actually be closer to $5M if the contract is 2-4 years in length.

Just another cap consideration I guess. There will be some pretty important decisions being made. If we get Suter or Weber, one of those two + will be gone.

[merrex]

If given a choice, I'd take Voracek over JVR in a heartbeat. The kid is tenacious on the backcheck and is showing he's a decent PKer to go along with his offensive talent. I may get grilled for this statement, but I think what we've seen from JVR so far is the real JVR. Above average offensive skills but lacking in heart and effort most of the time. You're right, we can't keep them both, so a trade offer I'd consider at the deadline would be Carle, JVR and 2 first rounders for Weber (provided we can get some sort of guarantee we can sign him).

There's no way I pay Carle 4.5- 5 million next year and JVR is definately not worth 4+ mil.

[Vincent05]

Just saying, Jvr might not care as he has that new contract. Voracek on the other hand will probably get somewhere close to JVR and so far this season has been looking good. Maybe because he's plaing for that contract? Once he gets it, will we see the old voracek from Columbus? He might be just like JVR next year. It just drives me nuts that once these kids get their money base on potential there seems to be no drive to get better. Only a select few aren't in the same boat tho, also sucks how salary for an ok player has escalated over the years. I can careless about that but there's a cap now and that hurts more than before.

Edited December 21, 2011 by Vincent05

[aziz]

Voracek and JVR are from the same draft class and are the same age.

i actually didn't realize that. kind puts JVR in some perspective. he still looks like a talented kid trying to figure out how to contribute, while voracek is starting to look like a useful part of the team that doesn't need the caveat of "still developing".

honestly, i'm starting to think JVR's days as a flyer are numbered. he just hasn't found a way to move forward, he's right where he was 2 years ago....but is making real money now.

[doom88]

At least JVR doesn't appear to have a NTC.

http://articles.philly.com/2011-08-31/sports/29949714_1_van-riemsdyk-salary-cap-salary-cap

[hf101]

Since the Columbus game Voracek has 16 points in 19 games, including 13 assists. Compared to JVR who has 3 g and 6 assists, with only 2 assists in the month of December.

Ideally, we need both these guys to contribute.

[flyercanuck]

i actually didn't realize that. kind puts JVR in some perspective. he still looks like a talented kid trying to figure out how to contribute, while voracek is starting to look like a useful part of the team that doesn't need the caveat of "still developing".

honestly, i'm starting to think JVR's days as a flyer are numbered. he just hasn't found a way to move forward, he's right where he was 2 years ago....but is making real money now.

His contract extension kicks in next year.

[aziz]

@flyercanuck

ok, true. point remains. i'm starting to get sour on his future as an impact player. with a potential cap crunch coming up......

[brelic]

@flyercanuck

ok, true. point remains. i'm starting to get sour on his future as an impact player. with a potential cap crunch coming up......

I hear you, but *if* it comes down to a decision between Voracek and JVR being moved, Homer will move Voracek. I still don't understand the 6 year extension, but it is what it is. I wouldn't even give Giroux 6 years. It's too long.

I love what Briere brings in the playoffs, and he consistently puts up close to a PPG during the regular season, but 4 years would have been perfect. Instead, we still have another 4 years @$6.5M per with a 35 year old player who will in all likelihood begin a decline.

[radoran]

I hear you, but *if* it comes down to a decision between Voracek and JVR being moved, Homer will move Voracek. I still don't understand the 6 year extension, but it is what it is. I wouldn't even give Giroux 6 years. It's too long.

I love what Briere brings in the playoffs, and he consistently puts up close to a PPG during the regular season, but 4 years would have been perfect. Instead, we still have another 4 years @$6.5M per with a 35 year old player who will in all likelihood begin a decline.

Three years after this one. Briere's up in 2015. As I read it, he'll be 37. It's definitely a worry with a smaller player.

GMs got all hot and bothered with these long term contracts allowing for lower cap numbers, but they missed the point that these are LONG TERM contracts.

More often than not, these contracts are counterproductive for the player (see: Ovechkin, Alex) and bad for the team (see: Bryzgalov, Ilya)

Buy Bryz out? Sure. Take a $2.8M cap hit each year FOR THE NEXT SIXTEEN YEARS.

Would not surprise me at all to see JVR shipped out at the trade deadline. Not. At. All. He's still got some serious value, is locked up for six years and has a fairly reasonable cap number for some Columbus-type squad needing to make sure they're near the salary floor.

[canoli]

Guys complain about "long-term contract" but tell me, what is the alternative? You want marquee names and impact players? Well they command high salaries. The only way to fit mega-million dollar salaries under the cap is to extend them over multiple years.

Ideally none of these guys would have guaranteed money - it's bullshit. We've seen it so often it's disgusting: a guy signs the big deal and then suddenly looks half-ass out on the ice. Maybe it's not even a conscious decision on his part, but all of a sudden he's a multi-millionaire at 22 years old, it's almost natural he slacks off his job and tries to enjoy the new high life.

[radoran]

Guys complain about "long-term contract" but tell me, what is the alternative? You want marquee names and impact players? Well they command high salaries. The only way to fit mega-million dollar salaries under the cap is to extend them over multiple years.

Ideally none of these guys would have guaranteed money - it's bullsh!t. We've seen it so often it's disgusting: a guy signs the big deal and then suddenly looks half-ass out on the ice. Maybe it's not even a conscious decision on his part, but all of a sudden he's a multi-millionaire at 22 years old, it's almost natural he slacks off his job and tries to enjoy the new high life.

I don't think 3-5 year deals are at all unreasonable.

It's the 9, 12, 15 year ones that start getting ridiculous. I think six is even pushing it.

The guaranteed money aspect works both ways. You are aaking players to literally risk life and limb out on the ice. At any given time, their career could end. And they have higher rates of post-career trauma (to joints, brain, etc.).

I wouldn't mind some sort of system where there is a defined pension and benefits for injured players who are forced out of a contract, but in lieu of that, I don't see it happening.

[canoli]

you're right Rad, I oversimplified it with the "there shouldn't be guaranteed money." But the NFL does it don't they? (I'm actually asking, I don't follow the NFL much) But they don't guarantee money to players do they? I thought they operate under performance bonuses mostly, and the contracts only pay off when a guy performs up to what was set out in the contract.

I'm winging it here I admit. I know there's a major difference between NFL and NHL contracts. Somebody who really knows can chime in maybe...

[radoran]

you're right Rad, I oversimplified it with the "there shouldn't be guaranteed money." But the NFL does it don't they? (I'm actually asking, I don't follow the NFL much) But they don't guarantee money to players do they? I thought they operate under performance bonuses mostly, and the contracts only pay off when a guy performs up to what was set out in the contract.

I'm winging it here I admit. I know there's a major difference between NFL and NHL contracts. Somebody who really knows can chime in maybe...

The NFL doesn't have "guaranteed contracts" which is why guys get such ridiculous "signing bonuses". Often players have no real expectation of being with a team for the entire length of the deal signed. I don't think most people expect Vick to play out his whole deal, for example.

There are performance bonuses - as there are in hockey. I don't know the specifics. I believe the NHL's CBA severely limits what bonuses can be paid on and the amount they can be within a contract. I don't think the NHLPA wants 100% "performance-based" contracts.

It starts to get harder to calculate, too - once you take into account "intangibles" which IMO are more important in hockey. You don't have to be a 30-goal scorer to be a valuable asset to your team. Properly compensating that on a performance based contract is important.

[Podein25]

If given a choice, I'd take Voracek over JVR in a heartbeat.

It's too son to come to this conclusion, and not only because it typically takes big guys longer to develop.

honestly, i'm starting to think JVR's days as a flyer are numbered.

Also too soon.

Patience is required with both of these guys. I'd like to see them both on the same team in a playoff series before I come to an conclusion on either of them. JVR was our best, most consistent, at times dominant, player last year in the playoffs. Let's at least see if he can do it again. If he can, we will all shut up about him, I guarantee it.

As for Voracek, he;s played all of 4 games of playoff hockey as a pro. I'd like to see him over a couple of rounds before I pass judgement on him.

/rant

[canoli]

I'm not so sure we'll shut up about JVR Podes - if he goes on another nice tear this PO year. It will quiet folks down, sure, maybe can the trade talk for awhile. But ultimately he's got to produce during the season too. He doesn't have to be 30-goal guy (though he could be) or a 75-point guy. But he does have to stop loafing and playing the perimeter all fkn season long. That's getting on the nerves of fans in Philly, it has to be.

[Podein25]

Fair enough @canoli

When I say shut up I mean in the same way that people (and when I say people I mean posters like, ahem, @flyercanuck) have shut up about Briere: 'cause he produces in the playoffs. But I see what you are saying. Patience is called for.

[brelic]

Fair enough @canoli

When I say shut up I mean in the same way that people (and when I say people I mean posters like, ahem, @flyercanuck) have shut up about Briere: 'cause he produces in the playoffs. But I see what you are saying. Patience is called for.

I think it comes down to JVR looking an awful lot like Carter in the way that he plays the game: a soft perimeter player that still puts up points. JVR is on pace for a career year in terms of points. Should we be happy with that? Probably, yeah

But that's what happens when you watch a team so closely. You begin to lose perspective. I'm sure if we watched, say, Vancouver or Chicago or the Rangers that closely, we'd start to harp on some players more than someone who doesn't.

I doubt Carter will ever change. He is what he is. Joe Thornton has never been a go-to guy in the playoffs despite putting up a ton of points in the season. Thornton is a career 1.01 PPG player in the season and 0.75 PPG player in the playoffs.

That being said, it's just so easy to get frustrated when you look at guys like Giroux, Voracek, and Read for example, and how they seem to be working hard on every shift regardless of whether they put up points. Guys like JVR, Briere, Hartnell have a tendency to play 'small' for long stretches.

[aziz]

my problem with JVR to this point is he doesn't seem to think the game. he doesn't seem to react to what's going on around him...he knows what he plans to do when he receives the puck, and it'll either work or not. if JVR picks up the puck with speed in the neutral zone, we all know he will put his head down, fly down the left wing, and either toe-drag shoot from the dot or do that power move to the front of the net...regardless of coverage or open linemates. there won't be a pass, there won't be a pull-up move to create space, he won't go around the net, won't look for a trailer. he forces the issue based on decisions made prior to the play actually happening. as opposed to his draft-mates, voracek and simmonds, who have their heads up and make plays based on what is happening around them.

it's a thing that young and talented players do, i get that. i just keep waiting for some spark of in-the-moment creativity or awareness to creap in...and i'm starting to realize we've waited for a little while now. maybe one day. again, i'm just thinking with cap issues coming soon..................

[DaGreatGazoo]

he doesn't seem to think the game

So you don't like him cause he's dumb? I got no problem with that.

Just bustin' your stones, Aziz.

I just don't see the sustained effort this year. Watch Giroux, Talbot, Simmonds, etc...there is NO doubt they bust ass for 45 secs a shift. The results may vary, but effort is there. Not seeing it with JVR..and after watching how he can play when he has that "mindset" in last year's playoffs, it's maddening. He could flat out dominate. Instead, we go 1-2 periods without hearing his name.

[mojo1917]

I posted this in a different thread but since we're talking JvR i'll put it here too,

flyercanuck, on Dec 20, 2011 - 08:18 PM, said:

"JVRs would have been a slapper had he heeded Holmgrens advice and played junior."

I cannot help but think this is why he is the way he is with regard to effort over a long grind of a season... juniors is an intense indoctrination into hockey life, you just do not get the same experiences at an american university. especially at UNH where there is much research on hemp and it's benefits to society.

i think had he played junior he'd have already experienced some of the growing pains we're seeing at the NHL level. that he's stuck with the big club tells you how much talent he must have.

Edited December 21, 2011 by mojo1917

[radoran]

I think different players react... differently.

You wouldn't say that Alexandre Daigle was better because he played junior, ready to take on the slings and arrows of a full NHL season.

How about Pat Falloon?

I'm not saying JVR *wouldn't* have benefitted from a different way of "learning" hockey. Just that there's no real "slam dunk" for it.

[idahophilly]

I'm still willing to show patience with JVR. No one will ever know what the benefits are or are not having not played juniors vs univerisity. The raw talent and size dictates a bit more time is in order before we use him as trade bait.

[aziz]

The raw talent and size dictates a bit more time is in order before we use him as trade bait.

counterpoint: the raw talent and size dictates that he will remain valuable as trade bait for a while longer...but not forever.

the way you phrased that makes me think you are taking the approach that trading a young player is the same as giving up on them, somehow. we can hope JVR becomes an 80 point winger one day...but if we could parlay that into someone who could become, say, a 60 point defenseman someday, does that represent throwing hands up?

personally, i'm less and less confident in JVR's eventual badassness, but that doesn't mean i think the team ought to just dump him. if there is value out there and a GM who retains hope that JVR can hit that allstar level of play eventually, who loses if there is a perceived value for perceived value trade?

[idahophilly]

No, I'm not saying its open ended. Just Me, IMO, I'd give him more time. He isn't worth too much right now anyway. So let him either get better or not. If he gets better then good for us that we have a better player or better trade value. Its like the stock market, you dont sell at the low...