Voracek Signed

[Phillygrump]

  This is just the cost of doing business. Getting a player who is a top ten scorer, that is the end game for every GM.....so trading him, yeah...it would save cap space, but the return would never match his output. Jake had the Flyers over a barrel. Ignore him and the Flyers lose him for nothing, low ball him and the Flyers lose him for nothing....this is not a McDud kinda thing. He is a legit top 10 scorer, regardless of him only doing it once, it put him in a GREAT bargaining position. 8+ was to much, but on the bright side, we still have only seen the tip of the iceberg....he still has lots of upside, which was certainly figured into the equation.

 

This.

 

This is what I mean. We can all say "too long" or "too much" but the truth is he was going to get what he wanted. To keep a player of his caliber (the player he is in the process of becoming) it costs what it costs. You want a player like that you have to pay what it costs.

 

Its tough but if you're going to spend money may as well spend it on guys like Jake and G (instead of VLC, Umberger, and AMac)

[Phillygrump]

man, you took the words out of my mouth AJ... awesome post and agree 100%.    

 

I am not sure how to quantify it but how much of the "g factor" is related to Jake's success?  I know this goes both ways but it definitely has crossed my mind.    

 

I can see the G factor being a thing but I remember people having a problem with the terms of his contract too. One of these two guys is magic. Possibly both of them. But one of these guys (at the very least) deserves their contract. Haha. 

 

I just think some of us here are so gun-shy with contracts nowadays because Homer and Clarke scarred us forever. 

[radoran]

We can be hesitant about the length of the Voracek deal but the fact is he was getting this contract somewhere.

 

The facts are the same thing was said about VLC and AMac.  The adage that "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" certainly holds some validity , but so does "sometimes the best deal is the one you don't make."

 

(Also, FWIW, The Flyers didn't give Umburglar that deal, they dealt Hartnell's six-year deal that many were simply happy to be out of the last two years of three years before it mattered.)

 

I hope that this deal works out - and in no way am I saying "it can't" - but as you (and others) note there are obvious concerns.

 

Giroux, for example, had his best points year in 11-12 - three seasons ago - and hasn't hit 90 since (even playing with emerging superstar Jake Voracek).

 

But, honestly, I don't really care about individual point totals (no Richard winner and one Art Ross winner (Malkin) has won the Cup since the lockout).

 

The real evaluation will come in whether this team/core wins a Cup.

 

As it stands, they've committed $16.575M (almost 1/4 of the cap) to a core duo that has been to one playoff round in the past three years.

[brelic]

Giroux, for example, had his best points year in 11-12 - three seasons ago - and hasn't hit 90 since (even playing with emerging superstar Jake Voracek).

 

Getzlaf, for example, had his best point total seven years ago - 91 - when he was 24 and hasn't hit 90 since either. Statistically, it would be surprising if Voracek and Giroux surpass their career highs at any point in the next 8 years. The statistical peak for forwards is between 23 and 25.

 

That being said, Getzlaf still puts up excellent numbers and so does Perry. Incidentally, Perry hit his high five years ago when he was Jake's age and hasn't come close since.

 

So, I have no doubt that Giroux and Jake can put up top line-worthy numbers over the next 5-6-7 seasons. They play a smart game, they are fast, and they are crafty - which I hope translates into being durable. They will do other things that have great value, like lead by example on and off the ice, and be the glue that holds the team together. 

 

I have my own expectations that neither will post career highs in points from here on out, and that's ok. 

[radoran]

Getzlaf, for example, had his best point total seven years ago - 91 - when he was 24 and hasn't hit 90 since either. Statistically, it would be surprising if Voracek and Giroux surpass their career highs at any point in the next 8 years. The statistical peak for forwards is between 23 and 25.

 

That being said, Getzlaf still puts up excellent numbers and so does Perry. Incidentally, Perry hit his high five years ago when he was Jake's age and hasn't come close since.

 

So, I have no doubt that Giroux and Jake can put up top line-worthy numbers over the next 5-6-7 seasons. They play a smart game, they are fast, and they are crafty - which I hope translates into being durable. They will do other things that have great value, like lead by example on and off the ice, and be the glue that holds the team together. 

 

I have my own expectations that neither will post career highs in points from here on out, and that's ok. 

 

Agreed - which was the point of noting that no Richard and one Art Ross winner has won the Cup since the lockout.

 

I will say that both Perry and Getzlaf have scored 30+ in their careers. Both have been to the playoffs for the past three seasons (including last year's Conference Final). And both have won a Cup.

 

And, for the record, I was likewise critical of the deal Perry just signed.

 

Again, the goal is to win a Cup. If the Ducks win a Cup, they won't care what they're paying those guys. If the Hawks win a Cup, they don't care about two second rounders.

 

So, let's go out and win the damn Cup.

[brelic]

So, let's go out and win the damn Cup.

 

Exactly.

 

I believe G and Jake can be the duo to lead this team there.

 

And Hextall is doing his best to provide them with a talented supporting cast, one move and one draftee at a time.

[radoran]

I believe G and Jake can be the duo to lead this team there.

 

And I don't discount that they could be!

 

Y'all are invited to my house a block off South Broad for the parade.

 

We can all cram into my orange-and-black Flyers-themed kitchen for beers.

 

[brelic]

Y'all are invited to my house a block off South Broad for the parade.

 

I will hold you to that!

 

My buddy and I are going to try and catch a game in Philly this year. I saw them three times last year, but always in visiting rinks. Not quite the same.

[radoran]

I will hold you to that!

 

My buddy and I are going to try and catch a game in Philly this year. I saw them three times last year, but always in visiting rinks. Not quite the same.

 

Yer welcome even without the parade

[mojo1917]

I think @Phillygrump hit the nail on the head for me, tying up big $ for a long time in Jake isn't the problem.  Tying up decent $ for VLC and MacDud is.

I thought the MacDud deal was an okay deal, when he signed it then last year happened and he looks like a white collar criminal.  The future cannot be known, or we would all be rich and blah blah blah....Identifying a player who is growing into an elite player and team leader , locking that player up so that player becomes one of the core guys on the team is kind of how the league works...I am not worried about Jake, I think he's solid.  I hope he's the right guy.  The guy who should be worried about his role on the Flyers and his next contract is Brayden Schenn.  

[Digityman]

While I thought 6 years @ $7m would have got it done, I'm okay with this contract.

8 years is a long time but Jake is one of the few players that shows up for every game. 

He competes hard and is breaking through to his elite talent. 

Over the next 3-6 years, the premise is that this core (including the young dmen coming up) should be ready to challenge for the cup.

If that's the position they are in, then this signing was a good one. 

 

We are really entering an exciting time to be Flyers fans and the future is very bright.

October can't come soon enough.

[OccamsRazor]

I don't HATE the deal, but I think the Flyers bet against themselves here. They had time, but they're figuring jake goes out and does it again THIS year, only increasing his value. Sign him now, before the season, does have negotiating merits.

We could all be seeing it the same way in about 9 months.

 

 

And on the flip side of that what if he goes out and only scores 50 points.....18 goals tops.....what if this past year is the most points he ever scores again...

 

 

...then how would this contract look?

[OccamsRazor]

This is just the cost of doing business.

 

Not exactly i think. What is wrong with just a 5 year deal??? No need to sign a guy till he is 35 i think the deal is just to long hoping, praying after 3-4 year 8.25mill is a bargain...but wasn't that what they were hoping when they resigned Hartnell?

[OccamsRazor]

As it stands, they've committed $16.775M (almost 1/4 of the cap) to a core duo that has been to one playoff round in the past three years.

 

I agree...and how hard will these contract be when it comes to fixing the blueline in a couple years....especially if these kids (fab 5) don't pan out...then Mason will need resigning soon...i just don't like such a huge chunk going to two guys....God forbid one gets hurt....now if we had 3 Cups (hell maybe just one) like the Hawks i wouldn't give a shat......... 

[OccamsRazor]

I just hope this Jake deal doesn't turn to this..........

 

[jammer2]

Not exactly i think. What is wrong with just a 5 year deal??

 

 The problem was Jake was in a *great* position for these negotiations, his agent was able to dictate the years and the length. Cave or he goes elsewhere. It was basically legal blackmail. He held all the cards. If the Flyers did not meet his agents demands, all they could do was trade him as a rental, which would be substantially below his actual worth.

 

 One other thing Jake had in his back pocket...was 3 years ago, during the strike shortened season, he had 46 pts in 48 games.....so this past year was not the first time he flirted with a point per game average. He had done it before, strike shortened season or not....

[briere48]

this is what no one is seriously trying to understand, it's easy to say we spent money on this position and that position but when it comes to cap it's going difficult to sign players that are much more important like mason he wants a big payday, you lose him, it's back to square one because you spent all the money on offense,

plus what about injuries, giroux or voracek suffers a bad injury or they start declining, you cant get rid of them and what's worse is that you cant replace them because of the money they have against them, no one wants to understand the risk of big contracts, it's all about filling the positions.

 

everyone complains about prongers, mcdud, and vinny contracts and hextall signs voraeck for 8 years, seriously how is that any different if he doesnt perform that they do? have you seriously not learned anything from what homer has done and how much the big contracts were hurting this team and werent performing at a high level?

there is reason why there's a cap restriction so teams can win without breaking the bank and years on players. i dont care how great players are if they want alot of money and years get rid of them because i dont want to stuck with contracts that i cant get rid of.

 

the point i want win a cup but not at the expense of overpaying players, it didnt work for us in the past, it made this team worse when the moves couldnt be made.  im sorry but hextall is no different than homer.

 

feel free to disagree with me, but just because you overpay players doesnt mean you are going to win a cup. homer did the same thing it backfired on him, it could backfire on hextall.

[radoran]

I agree...and how hard will these contract be when it comes to fixing the blueline in a couple years....especially if these kids (fab 5) don't pan out...then Mason will need resigning soon...i just don't like such a huge chunk going to two guys....God forbid one gets hurt....now if we had 3 Cups (hell maybe just one) like the Hawks i wouldn't give a shat......... 

 

For all of the discussions we've had, I might have considered an $8M deal for a shorter term. $8M and max term to me* is a red flag. Honestly, I'm somewhat surprised Jake signed through age 35. If I was him, I would have wanted another bite at an apple before 35+ kicks in.

 

And the contracts of VLC and MacDud™ enter into the equation because they are both virtually untradeable (unlike a Pronger with big cap hit and low actual money for a cap floor team) and they are both signed for the next three years (Mac longer). That's half of the "3-6 year window" Digity mentions above.

 

Next year, 43% of the cap could be wrapped up in Giroux, Voracek, MacDud, VLC and Umburglar. Conversely, Pittsburgh (for example) has 45% wrapped up in Malkin, Crosby, Kessel and Letang. The Rangers have 43% wrapped up in Nash, Stepan, Brassard, Staal, Girardi.

 

These things aren't happening in a vaccuum. The competiton (that has been to the playoffs, Finals, etc.) isn't going away.

 

 

 

* oddly, no one has called to offer me a GM job.

[OccamsRazor]

 The problem was Jake was in a *great* position for these negotiations, his agent was able to dictate the years and the length. Cave or he goes elsewhere. It was basically legal blackmail. He held all the cards. If the Flyers did not meet his agents demands, all they could do was trade him as a rental, which would be substantially below his actual worth.

 

 

How did he have all the leverage? He was a RFA and he still would have fetched a kings haul if they traded him. No the Flyers signed the huge deal like always hoping that in 4 years it will be a bargain....but there is the chance it becomes like Hartnell and they just want to get out of it....time will tell...they could have signed a shorter deal they just didn't....

[radoran]

 The problem was Jake was in a *great* position for these negotiations, his agent was able to dictate the years and the length. Cave or he goes elsewhere. It was basically legal blackmail. He held all the cards. If the Flyers did not meet his agents demands, all they could do was trade him as a rental, which would be substantially below his actual worth.

 

 One other thing Jake had in his back pocket...was 3 years ago, during the strike shortened season, he had 46 pts in 48 games.....so this past year was not the first time he flirted with a point per game average. He had done it before, strike shortened season or not....

 

I'm just going to say two things:

 

1) Lecavalier "flirted" with a ppg average (32 in 39) that season.

 

2) it was a "lockout" not a "strike" (because the owners determined they were making ridiculously stupid deals with players and needed to make sure they could dump some players and force the others to not allow them to offer such ridiculous deals)

[OccamsRazor]

For all of the discussions we've had, I might have considered an $8M deal for a shorter term.

 

Agree i would have been happy with say a 5 year 39-40mill deal....6.5/7.5/8/8.5/8.5 would have worked for me....

 

 

I would have wanted another bite at an apple before 35+ kicks in.

 

I agree........unless he is just going for the insurance he wan't to get to his old ways of not working out and eating mom's cooking....he can...he has security now he has just got paid!!!

[mojo1917]

For all of the discussions we've had, I might have considered an $8M deal for a shorter term. $8M and max term to me* is a red flag. Honestly, I'm somewhat surprised Jake signed through age 35. If I was him, I would have wanted another bite at an apple before 35+ kicks in.

 

i thought that also.  he may have decreased his future income, 8 years from now... and 66 million $ later.  

maybe he'll be like the dead owl and won't give a hoot by then.

[murraycraven]

this is what no one is seriously trying to understand, it's easy to say we spent money on this position and that position but when it comes to cap it's going difficult to sign players that are much more important like mason he wants a big payday, you lose him, it's back to square one because you spent all the money on offense,

plus what about injuries, giroux or voracek suffers a bad injury or they start declining, you cant get rid of them and what's worse is that you cant replace them because of the money they have against them, no one wants to understand the risk of big contracts, it's all about filling the positions.

 

everyone complains about prongers, mcdud, and vinny contracts and hextall signs voraeck for 8 years, seriously how is that any different if he doesnt perform that they do? have you seriously not learned anything from what homer has done and how much the big contracts were hurting this team and werent performing at a high level?

there is reason why there's a cap restriction so teams can win without breaking the bank and years on players. i dont care how great players are if they want alot of money and years get rid of them because i dont want to stuck with contracts that i cant get rid of.

 

the point i want win a cup but not at the expense of overpaying players, it didnt work for us in the past, it made this team worse when the moves couldnt be made.  im sorry but hextall is no different than homer.

 

feel free to disagree with me, but just because you overpay players doesnt mean you are going to win a cup. homer did the same thing it backfired on him, it could backfire on hextall.

 

 

 

So you would get rid of Toews and Kane, Sid and Makenstein, Perry & Getz?   paaaaa-----lease.

[jammer2]

im sorry but hextall is no different than homer.

 

 I nominate this for worst sentence of the year.

[OccamsRazor]

So you would get rid of Toews and Kane

 

 

With 3 Cups in hand???? Man i know they are some of the best in the league.....but man it would be tempting as hell......those two would net a King's ransom...

 

 

....the good news is Jake's contract doesn't have a NTC or NMC with it........but on a negative note neither does Mcdud and the Flyers can't move him and we know they'd love to....just hope it doesn't turn out like that deal in a year or so.........