flyercanuck Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Kessel is an $8 million a year caphit.Eric Staal is 8Ovechkin 9.5Perry 8.6Malkin 9.5Subban 9Suter 7.5Campbell 7.1Nash 7.8Parise 7.5Letang 7.2 Next year Toews and Kane are 10.5 hits each. Every one of those contracts has looked bad at times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyClarkeFan16 Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 I think instead of paying Jake like a star we should just trade him b/c, you know, he will make too much money. I'd move Jake before I'd move Giroux. And if I'm moving Jake, it's only for a defender like Pietrangelo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 It already is an issue.. I beg to differ G does not make anyone on the ice with him better . At 3.5 mil good deal at 8.2 mil albatross. I like g not his contract .. !! The top player on your team - and captain in this case - is going to earn top dollar. It's fair market value for a guy entering his prime and it expires when he's 33. I don't know, I'd say that's one the rare reasonable contracts Homer gave out. It's high, but that's what it costs to retain your core players, and in this case, THE core player. The captain. And a top 10 player in the NHL. There are far worse problems with this team than Giroux's contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Over the past 5 seasons nobody in the NHL has put up more points than Giroux. Not Crosby, not Malkin, not Ovechkin, not Stamkos, nobody.If Giroux isn't worth his contract, who is?Guys who are actually in the playoffs, like those guys are? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertmega Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 @intheslot "As far as getting a leftwing and then he will be worth it is B S .. He should be making players around him better but he does not .." Really? Giving him Michael Raffl isn't exactly a lot to work with. Paying a player 8mm plus doesn't mean they make the Carcillos of the world look like the next Kevin Stevens. Rather getting 8mm plus a year means your play on the ice is worth just that. And in this case Giroux is doing just fine. Anyhow, if memory serves me correctly, when he had a career year in 2011-12, everybody was calling him Orange Jesus, now he is junk because he isn't carrying the entire team on his back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackStraw Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Guys who are actually in the playoffs, like those guys are? You mean like Giroux has been every year of his career except one (up to this point)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 @Bertmega Voracek certainly hasn't improved playing with Giroux. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 @Bertmega Voracek certainly hasn't improved playing with Giroux. No that is Berube's doing!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Well, Umberger helped too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KjellShocked Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Over the past 5 seasons nobody in the NHL has put up more points than Giroux. Not Crosby, not Malkin, not Ovechkin, not Stamkos, nobody.If Giroux isn't worth his contract, who is? I'm not disagreeing that Giroux isn't worth his contract. He certainly is for the time being. But that's not a fair comparison you made. All of those guys except for Ovechkin have missed significant time over the last 5 seasons. Kudos to Giroux for staying healthy but that's not a major reason to justify the contract. Right now, he's not playing up to his contract and he hasn't for over two months. 5 goals and 13 assists in 29 games since January 1 and his last even strength goal was January 19. That's not acceptable for a player of his stature especially when he is being paid like a player of his that stature. There is nothing wrong with questioning his value considering this is not the first time he's had a few months like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertmega Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 @Bertmega Voracek certainly hasn't improved playing with Giroux. That's Lindros' fault. Eric, Carl and Bonnie and to some degree, Brett's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackStraw Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 All of those guys except for Ovechkin have missed significant time over the last 5 seasons. Kudos to Giroux for staying healthy but that's not a major reason to justify the contract. Would you prefer that I had picked different names? P Kane, Toews, Kopitar, Backstrom... it doesn't matter. Pick whatever names you want, nobody means nobody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KjellShocked Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Would you prefer that I had picked different names? P Kane, Toews, Kopitar, Backstrom... it doesn't matter. Pick whatever names you want, nobody means nobody. Kane and Toews have cap hits this year that are $2,000,000 less than Giroux. Kopitar and Backstrom are about $1,500,000 less. If the whole argument here is about his contract, players making that much less than him aren't good comparisons. Theoretically, they should have fewer points than him. FWIW, a lot of people would take Kane or Toews over Giroux which would justify their new deals that take effect next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 You mean like Giroux has been every year of his career except one (up to this point)? Yeah, something like that. On the flip side, this will be half of his seasons as captain and "the man" for the team out of the playoffs... #serve #volley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackStraw Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Kane and Toews have cap hits this year that are $2,000,000 less than Giroux. Kopitar and Backstrom are about $1,500,000 less. If the whole argument here is about his contract, players making that much less than him aren't good comparisons. Theoretically, they should have fewer points than him. FWIW, a lot of people would take Kane or Toews over Giroux which would justify their new deals that take effect next year. Ok, I'll try it one more time. Over the last 5 years Claude Giroux has put up more points than any other player in the NHL. If he's not worth his contract then who is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Ok, I'll try it one more time. Over the last 5 years Claude Giroux has put up more points than any other player in the NHL. If he's not worth his contract then who is? Up front, let me say I agree with you. Giroux is the kind of guy who deserves it and is the leader of this team for at least the next 8 years. For argument's sake, though, Giroux has already peaked statistically. The statistical odds are that he will never reach his 93 point peak again, and will begin trending downward. So we are in effect paying for past performance, not future performance. The good 'ol days, as it were. Tis the nature of short-sighted NHL contracts. But I also realize he was a bargain at $3.5M, and he's being rewarded for it. Plus, he's being paid for more than just points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Up front, let me say I agree with you. I think that at a $8.25M cap hit ($10M actual salary) I concur that he's not "overpaid" and not a "problem" contract. Of the guys Jack mentioned, all have high higher cap hits than Giroux and that just might be reflected in that three of the four have higher points per game over the past five years (OV is virtually tied). Giroux is the kind of guy who deserves it and is the leader of this team for at least the next 8 years. But, to use the "last X number of years" argument, at this point they're shaping up to be a one playoff round team in the past three years (three in the past four). That's not at all "all on G" but I don't think the captain can be completely absolved of any responsibility, either. Certainly the GM shoulders a large portion of the "blame" as does the coach. And, of course, the season isn't over and anything can happen and they can still make the playoffs. #liedamnliesstatistics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 I think that at a $8.25M cap hit ($10M actual salary) I concur that he's not "overpaid" and not a "problem" contract. Of the guys Jack mentioned, all have high higher cap hits than Giroux and that just might be reflected in that three of the four have higher points per game over the past five years (OV is virtually tied). But, to use the "last X number of years" argument, at this point they're shaping up to be a one playoff round team in the past three years (three in the past four). That's not at all "all on G" but I don't think the captain can be completely absolved of any responsibility, either. Certainly the GM shoulders a large portion of the "blame" as does the coach. And, of course, the season isn't over and anything can happen and they can still make the playoffs. #liedamnliesstatistics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 But, to use the "last X number of years" argument, at this point they're shaping up to be a one playoff round team in the past three years (three in the past four). That's not at all "all on G" but I don't think the captain can be completely absolved of any responsibility, either. Certainly the GM shoulders a large portion of the "blame" as does the coach. But he is in the 1st year of his contract. So a playoff miss in year 1. What happened before was on his $3.5M contract. You get what you pay for, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 But he is in the 1st year of his contract. So a playoff miss in year 1. What happened before was on his $3.5M contract. You get what you pay for, right? At least Danny Briere scored in the playoffs when he was making $10M playing for the Flyers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fanaticV3.0 Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 In addition, Claude makes everyone on the ice with him better. That's hard to measure, but even when he's not scoring as much (like lately) he's making things happen that are enabling other guys to make plays of their own. Lately he has had trouble finishing for some reason but he still is the guy out there making opportunities out of bupkis regularly. He sees the ice like a chess board and can look four moves ahead better than anyone we've had in a long time. It's a rare gift.What he needs most is a coach who has any idea what to do with talent like that. Right now he's covering too much ice and helping out too much at both ends. There needs to be more balance and design in his game.Chief's gotta go. Firing Chief isn't going to do sh-t if that's your only move and it's a very debatable point that with better personnel, he's a better coach. Just look at last year vs this. And I don't even like the guy, but the biggest problem this team has is what's on the ice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Firing Chief isn't going to do sh-t if that's your only move and it's a very debatable point that with better personnel, he's a better coach. Just look at last year vs this. And I don't even like the guy, but the biggest problem this team has is what's on the ice. The only real difference in the roster is Hartnell and Timonen. Are we to conclude that they were significant glue guys that are sorely missed? I can't explain the Home/Road discrepancy, which is strongly linked to PK/PP performance. Those are equally bad on the road, and excellent at home. Laperriere is still running the PK with largely the same personnel. How can it be so bad on the road? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackStraw Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 The only real difference in the roster is Hartnell and Timonen. Are we to conclude that they were significant glue guys that are sorely missed? Well, yeah... I think they are. Not to mention that both of them would probably improve the PP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fanaticV3.0 Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 The only real difference in the roster is Hartnell and Timonen. Are we to conclude that they were significant glue guys that are sorely missed? I can't explain the Home/Road discrepancy, which is strongly linked to PK/PP performance. Those are equally bad on the road, and excellent at home. Laperriere is still running the PK with largely the same personnel. How can it be so bad on the road? Well they were not a good team last year either. What were they 2 games above .500? I think they could help us win a few more games, yeah. Are we winning anything with them in the line up? No, but we'd be a little better. It's the difference between bad and worse, not good and bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Well they were not a good team last year either. What were they 2 games above .500? I think they could help us win a few more games, yeah. Are we winning anything with them in the line up? No, but we'd be a little better. It's the difference between bad and worse, not good and bad. That's key. They've been bad for two years and aren't yet worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.