ruxpin Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 That is NOT elite type defenseman money anymore. How much is Matt Carle making? This board needs to face it... D men are becoming more and more valuable in today's league and even the middle tier D men are making a lot more money now. Yeah, this really is the truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Or does everyone want Meszaros back? Actually I want him and MacDaddy. If I am gong to pay 2.M+ of Mesz salary while he is playing for someone else, I want something in return! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Yeah, this really is the truth. No, it really isn't. It is true that salaries increase and that players are making more money today. And that defencemen are prized assets. But there isn't another defenceman in a similar position to MacDonald who is signed for $5M. Not. One. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 IMO, he is being overpaid but the fact of the matter is there are a lot of pro athlestes (pretty much all of them) that are overpaid. Here is the rub and thus all these articles. If the contract is 4.25 - 4.5 for either 5 or 6 years, you would see very little written. Its the extra .500 k that is rubbing people (and perhaps a year too long). For me, I don't really care, particularly if he is making L. Schenn stable (whom nobody is going to take off our hands). That adds the .500k value right there for me. Add into the fact, that he seems like a good character guy (which bodes well for the "room"), I don't care. Granted, I am not the one writing the checks, but I don't see this as a hurtful move. Truthfully, if we are paying Grossman 3.5m (whom I like), then why not 5m (even if overpaid by 10%)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 If they signed him at $5m per season for 3 years, I don't think you'd see the same negative reaction from some fans and the media that I've read (THN, TSN, 700level). Or if they paid him 4.25 - 4.5 for 5-6 years same thing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 If the contract is 4.25 - 4.5 for either 5 or 6 years, you would see very little written. "This" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 My bad, it was VanFlyer (editing) stop using my name in vain! ^_^ Joking of course. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 If you don't sign him then you may end up having to trade assets (top six forward+) for a guy like Edler. And we already did trade future assets (cough), to get him. Thats actually how I kind of look at it (and maybe wrongfully so). The .500k more I paid keeps me (homer) saving face. Given that, Philly is a place where players want to play- regardless of being overpaid. I highly doubt if the Islanders offered the identical deal, he would have signed there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Here is the rub and thus all these articles. If the contract is 4.25 - 4.5 for either 5 or 6 years, you would see very little written. Its the extra .500 k that is rubbing people (and perhaps a year too long). For me, I don't really care, particularly if he is making L. Schenn stable (whom nobody is going to take off our hands). That adds the .500k value right there for me. Add into the fact, that he seems like a good character guy (which bodes well for the "room"), I don't care. Granted, I am not the one writing the checks, but I don't see this as a hurtful move. Truthfully, if we are paying Grossman 3.5m (whom I like), then why not 5m (even if overpaid by 10%)? all good points Van... I dont necessarily disagree but I am looking at this and trying to throw market value into the equation. Not sure how to effectively do this since we will never know what he would have got on the UFA market. I do not see this as a "hurtful move" but I do think Homer outbid himself again. I looked up on sportrac and MacD will be tied at 21 for the highest paid defensmen in 2014-15 season. Here is the group at 21: Dennis Wideman - Calary (5M through 2014-15, 5.25M in 2015-16 and 6M in 2016-17)Brent Seabrook - BH (5M through 2015-16)James Wisniewski - Jackets (5M 2015-16, 3M 2016-17)Jack Johnson - Jackets (5M through 2017-18)Paul Martin - Pens (5M 2014-2015)Gonchar - Stars (5M 2014-2015)Myers - Sabres (5M through 2015-16, 4M 2016-17, 3.5M 2017-18, 3M 2018-19)Garrison - 'nucks Tied for 15th at 5.5M per year is Girardi, Yandle, Pietrangelo and Matt Carle... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackStraw Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Actually I want him and MacDaddy. If I am gong to pay 2.M+ of Mesz salary while he is playing for someone else, I want something in return! But they won't be paying him after this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 It'll be good, I think. What I'm really hoping, though, is that they don't view him as their answer to a top pair defenseman. Your post made me laugh (in a sensible agreement way). I don't think they do to your point above. I think they look at it as a stabilizer to the gaff that is L. Schenn. JVR had to go. No qualms about it, just that the asset we got back is not to the liking. But, it could be worse. Kyle Turris (3rd round pick behind JVR- whom some wanted instead) was traded for David Runblad and a second round pick. Coyotes then later traded Runblad to chicago (with Briesbos) for a second round pick. So, Phoenix basically got two second rounders for Turris- who IMO is much better than JVR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Exactly. And the question for anyone that objects to the contract is, what's the alternative? Not sure...I just wonder if these guys go in for a meeting with Holmgren and he asks if they want to talk contract, then throws out numbers that any sane person wouldn't refuse. "Hey,how would you like to earn 10X what you did this year?" Seriously, who's going to say no? I mean is there even any bartering going on, or does Homer give him his upper limit first? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 But they won't be paying him after this season. I know, just irks me still- especially if he gets a ring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 I think they look at it as a stabilizer to the gaff that is L. Schenn. I can somewhat get behind this idea - that MacDonald makes Schenn better. But* Schenn's contract is up in two years. MacDonald's signed for four beyond that. It would be right in line with Homer's M.O. to fix a two year problem with a six year solution... I guess we could rely on Homer to pull another disappointing rabbit out of the hat to pair with MacDonald I mean is there even any bartering going on, or does Homer give him his upper limit first? The player has a number, his agent has a number, Homer has a higher number. So they agree on Homer's. * there's always a "but" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 The player has a number, his agent has a number, Homer adds them together to get his number Fixed it for ya Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 (edited) But* Schenn's contract is up in two years. MacDonald's signed for four beyond that. It would be right in line with Homer's M.O. to fix a two year problem with a six year solution... I don't know. I get your point, but lets pretend that its Ghost playing next to MacD 3 years from now. Edited April 16, 2014 by Vanflyer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bakanekimiwa Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 I do hope I'm not "choosing my bubble" by answering your direct question... LOL... looks like i touched a nerve. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojo1917 Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Why this has become the most controversial thing anyone has ever posted* escapes me. As I've said clearly in this thread, my concerns about the contract aren't strictly limited to the Flyers themselves. If another team had signed an Andrew MacDonald-type to a $5M contract, I'd have the same opinion. And that's because it skews the entire salary structure of the league - as @mojo1917 noted in talking about Howson setting the market with Wisniewski. I'm not going to insult you by explaining market behaviors especially since i've done said all I know'd 'bout it.; but for me the Wisnewski deal set a high bar for a competent defensman's salary. The price wasn't going to down from that point as the years go by... I blame Howson for MacDonald's deal. I also think the absence of a NMC is not a bad thing either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bakanekimiwa Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 I didn't choose any of the bubbles. They have been asserted to me. I'm not impressed with people who just assert things without any backup whatsoever and then are upset when the facts don't fit their preconceived notions. It's not. I've clearly said he should have gotten somewhere in the $4-$4.5M category. In this and other threads. The only people getting all hot and bothered about it aren't me. I'm engaged in a discussion on a message board with people who are asking specific questions and asserting specific things. upset? noo, not me. are you? you seem mad bro. specifically what did i not backup? i can't foresee the future as much as you can't. we're discussing philosophical differences of how the organization signs it's players. what facts don't fit my 'preconceived notions'? that's an absurd statement, btw. the 'facts' that you bring up have no relation, or bearing, to the Mac deal. this is where you accept the 'bubble' that's, apparently, been asserted to you and i don't. you asked if you were missing something. i think i, quite clearly, told you what you were missing. you're arguing a point and i'm counter-arguing your point. what's the problem? because i won't entertain your meaningless comparisons i have 'preconceived notions'? well, if by preconceived notions you mean... opinion, well we've all got them. that's the fun thing about sports... humans are not computer simulations and there is no other hockey player on the planet that can accurately be compared in the way that, it would seem, you would like to. so to see all these names and numbers brought up as statistical 'proof' that this is a bad deal just makes me laugh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bakanekimiwa Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 I'm not going to insult you by explaining market behaviors especially since i've done said all I know'd 'bout it.; but for me the Wisnewski deal set a high bar for a competent defensman's salary. The price wasn't going to down from that point as the years go by... I blame Howson for MacDonald's deal. I also think the absence of a NMC is not a bad thing either. and really... at the EOD... who the F cares if it skews the salary structure of the league. i mean... are we now holding this Mac deal up as THE cause of economic disparity in the league? will the Mac deal implode the league's economic structure by the waves it causes? i mean.. why don't we just take it to it's logical extreme at this point. lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 and really... at the EOD... who the F cares if it skews the salary structure of the league. i mean... are we now holding this Mac deal up as THE cause of economic disparity in the league? will the Mac deal implode the league's economic structure by the waves it causes? i mean.. why don't we just take it to it's logical extreme at this point. lol. You mean like the 14M dollars that Nashville will be paying Shea Weber for the next four years? Seriously, let that one sink in. The guy is a stud. Plays 26 minutes a game. Sores 50-55 pts a year (half on the PP). Macdonald should look like a bargain at that price! :-P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fanaticV3.0 Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 There is an added element to this that IMO should not be overlooked. While not the Flyers fault, MacDonald has played pro hockey for 7 years at an average of 490K a year. While most of us would be jubilant and certainly MacD's agent(s) should be fired, that is grossly underpaid for a guy playing 12-20min of NHL hockey a night. My point is that he needed to be made whole. So, the flyers throw 3M more at him for the term of the contract than he is probably worth (at max). He is happy and now set for life. I looked at the comparables and am hard press to see one or two out of 8-10 that I would want (same age, same term). I don't care what he made in the past, it's not up to us to make up for that. I agree with you about point production though. That's why I said what I said about Carle. I'm ok with him not producing 30-40 a year. I think he does a really good job at a lot of other parts of the game. Much better than Carle imo. I just don't like the deal. He'll end up making several million too much when it's all said and done as far as I'm concerned. What I do like about the deal is that I felt that needed a stud defenseman. While he's not it, they added a pretty good player in the meantime. So if they can add the stud, it's like a bonus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 I don't care what he made in the past, it's not up to us to make up for that. I agree with you about point production though. That's why I said what I said about Carle. I'm ok with him not producing 30-40 a year. I think he does a really good job at a lot of other parts of the game. Much better than Carle imo. I just don't like the deal. He'll end up making several million too much when it's all said and done as far as I'm concerned. What I do like about the deal is that I felt that needed a stud defenseman. While he's not it, they added a pretty good player in the meantime. So if they can add the stud, it's like a bonus. I think you and I are on the same page (as with several others). .250 - .750m too much, sure. A year long on the tooth in the length sure. Just be careful saying "several million". I think it is better to break it down to yearly. The newbies will see several million and think "wow, they screwed the pooch on that deal". When in reality the pooch may- or may not have been screwed by 1.25m - 4M in totality over the length of the contract. That does not even take into consideration escalating costs and all that stuff. In the end, the Flyers perhaps overpaid by 5-10%. Its not a crushing blow. I know the pundits will come out and say "stupid as stupid does" and all that stuff, but we needed a medium level guy that can stay at home when need be and push the puck out crisply and play 20+ minutes a night. Is he the best we could have gotten, maybe not. Is he the worse we could have gotten, definitely not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 @Vanflyer I give Homer a lot of crap, but as long he he gets a current Giroux/Simmonds/Voracek type deal for every overpayment he does, all is good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 I give Homer a lot of crap, but as long he he gets a current Giroux/Simmonds/Voracek type deal for every overpayment he does, all is good. Point well stated. Do you want that with your frustrated spear? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.