Voracek Signed

[OccamsRazor]

Just when I thought Hextall was on the right path he signs this deal.

I don't have a problem with the amount , it's the length that is bothering me.

Eight years is just to long to commit to this amount per season, Five years would have been good but eight is over the top.

Yes i agree signing someone till they are 35 is just not a great move...we all know how athletes slow down on the wrong side of 30. Just look no further than Vinny and RJ....4-5 would have been ok.

[canoli]

what am I missing? Everyone keeps saying he'll be 35 after 8 years but he's only 25.

 

[edit: even if the new contract doesn't kick in till next season he'll be 34 years old after 8 years.]

[brelic]

what am I missing? Everyone keeps saying he'll be 35 after 8 years but he's only 25.

 

[edit: even if the new contract doesn't kick in till next season he'll be 34 years old after 8 years.]

 

I think that's the right length for a core player. Somewhere between 6-8. The 12 and 11 year deals Homer gave to Richards and Carter, IMO, are way too long for any player. Even Crosby. And anything over 4 for a non-core player, to me, is just too much. Streit, MacDonald, Vinny, Bryz - those are just not smart deals. I know that's what the market probably would have given them anyway, but I would prefer it if it weren't the Flyers handing those out.

[ruxpin]

what am I missing? Everyone keeps saying he'll be 35 after 8 years but he's only 25.

[edit: even if the new contract doesn't kick in till next season he'll be 34 years old after 8 years.]

Yeah. It ends two months before his 35th birthday. It's actually odder timing for Voracek than for the Flyers.

I would have preferred 5 or 6 years, but these negotiations aren't done in a vacuum. It could prove to be an incredible discount in a few years (or a problem, admittedly). I'm okay with it.

[OccamsRazor]

what am I missing? Everyone keeps saying he'll be 35 after 8 years but he's only 25.

 

[edit: even if the new contract doesn't kick in till next season he'll be 34 years old after 8 years.]

He turns 26 in a couple days the 15th i think....so the year (next year not this coming year) he will be 27 the year he starts his 8 year contract...and in 8 years when he starts his last year be 35.

But it's after he has already helped the Flyers win 3 Cups....right?

[OccamsRazor]

Yeah. It ends two months before his 35th birthday. It's actually odder timing for Voracek than for the Flyers.

I would have preferred 5 or 6 years, but these negotiations aren't done in a vacuum. It could prove to be an incredible discount in a few years (or a problem, admittedly). I'm okay with it.

No he will be 26 in a few days,he will be 27 before he starts the first year of his new deal....therefore making him 35 during the last year of the deal.

[ruxpin]

No he will be 26 in a few days,he will be 27 before he starts the first year of his new deal....therefore making him 35 during the last year of the deal.

 

Yeah, well.....I guess you think you're special because you can look at the exact same birth date I did but do the math correctly!

[OccamsRazor]

Yeah, well.....I guess you think you're special because you can look at the exact same birth date I did but do the math correctly!

And i didn't even have to use all my toes and fingers to add the up.

Math scholar i am....

[canoli]

so the new contract doesn't supersede his current one? goofy.

 

anyway thanks for the info!

[ruxpin]

And i didn't even have to use all my toes and fingers to add them up.

Math scholar i am....

LMAO.

[Lunatic]

A good look at the impeding future with the new contracts.....

 

http://www.broadstreethockey.com/2015/8/1/9078973/sean-couturier-jakub-voracek-ron-hextall-flyers-salary-cap

 

As it currently stands, the Flyers have $61.083 million committed to the 2016-2017 roster. That number includes nine forwards, four defenseman, and both goaltenders. Which means there's a need for four forwards and three defenseman.

 

This year's salary cap is set at $71.4 million, so even if that remained the same, that would leave the Flyers with $10.317 million to spend on those seven open roster spots (which hopefully include key free-agents Brayden Schenn and Raffl).

 

This past year, the ceiling grew by 3.47 percent, a particularly small increase primarily due to the weakness of the Canadian dollar. To be conservative, let's assume that the ceiling increases by the same low rate.

 

So if we make that assumption, that would conservatively project next year's salary cap at $73.9 million. That bumps the available space to roughly $12.817 million.

 

There are two key questions that need to be answered with respect to next year's salary cap which greatly impact how troublesome next offseason could be.

 

What will it cost to re-sign Brayden Schenn and Michael Raffl?

 

 

More on the link to think about.......................

Hey OR.agreed regarding your post,  but .one other huge concern is the status of the Canadian Dollar. If oil continues to stay at the present price and minerals/metals stay low it does not bode well for the NHL>

[doom88]

so the new contract doesn't supersede his current one? goofy.

anyway thanks for the info!

Nope. Can't modify nhl contracts in any way.

[doom88]

I think that's the right length for a core player. Somewhere between 6-8. The 12 and 11 year deals Homer gave to Richards and Carter, IMO, are way too long for any player. Even Crosby. And anything over 4 for a non-core player, to me, is just too much. Streit, MacDonald, Vinny, Bryz - those are just not smart deals. I know that's what the market probably would have given them anyway, but I would prefer it if it weren't the Flyers handing those out.

Those Richards and Carter deals were cap circumvention, plain and simple. Homer worked the cap hit down, and front loaded contracts with the apparent intent to buy out the end. The only, and major, problem with his plan was the risk of early decline. See Richards, Mike.

Those were decent deals to lock up the core. Then the core rotted. That's kind of how the luck of the Flyers goes. Toews and Kane are fine, Crosby and Malkinstein, as well as Ovechkin and Backstrom. Instead, Richards declined and developed a raging drug problem, and Carter grew a ******.

Well, ****.

[AlaskaFlyerFan]

And i didn't even have to use all my toes and fingers to add the up.

Still had 4 fingers & toes left!! LOL

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

I wanted to wait awhile and digest things before I decided to comment on the Voracek contract and honestly, I don't like it. The term was going to be 8 years and nothing could be done about that, and I get it. However, Voracek is only going to make 250K per year less than Giroux. Unlike Giroux, who is the unmistaken leader in Philadelphia and has put together multiple good seasons in a row, Voracek has had one season that was really elite. I get that Voracek is 25 and is on the cusp of reaching his prime years, so it's possible he could really elevate his game to an entirely different level. I'm just not going to hold my breath for it to happen. I really feel that this is going to be a contract that's going to come back and haunt the Flyers for years to come. To sign a forward to the age of 35 and have their cap hit come out at 8.25 million is a lot of money. I don't know about this contract.

[OccamsRazor]

The term was going to be 8 years and nothing could be done about that, and I get it.

I agree with what you're saying but it had to be 8 years? I don't follow your logic.

[jammer2]

    It's hard to say what will happen points wise with Jake, but logic says his best years are awaiting him. There was a calculated gamble here, production wise....but a few things I'm pretty damn sure of, Jake will work his ass off, he will get better without the puck (and he is no slouch now) and he will put the team before personal goals etc....I'm very secure in the intangible part of this thing, but to make this contract a success, he will need to steadily get better production wise.

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

I agree with what you're saying but it had to be 8 years? I don't follow your logic.

As an unrestricted free agent, we know he would have gotten 7 years max. The Flyers had to give him the maximum years to retain him.

[radoran]

As an unrestricted free agent, we know he would have gotten 7 years max. The Flyers had to give him the maximum years to retain him.

 

Honestly, I was surprised he wanted the eight years. I would have thought he would take another bite at the FA apple at 34 before 35+ kicked in. Presuming his production was still good, I could see that as being a lucrative deal.

 

$21M in signing bonuses including $5M in Y7. I'm wondering if the Flyers weren't the ones trying to convince him into the eighth year.

 

All wudder under da bridge at this point.

[Mad Dog]

I have never been a big fan of long-term contracts, and this one is not an exception.  I like Jake.  I like his work ethic. I like his game. And his chemistry with Giroux last season was nothing short of phenomenal.  But it's still JUST ONE GREAT YEAR.  Personally, I would like to see more to feel justified to give out so much cash over such a long time. I wonder how much negotiation the two camps really had and if there was some negotiating room for the Flyers. I am glad to see no NMC/NTC, but I am still concerned with giving someone an average of $8.25 mil over 8 years.  And knowing that there is still a need to improve defense and have some space to add depth players during the season, the implication to a salary cap cannot be ignored.

 

Like many posters in this thread said, for this contract to be a success and not a failure, Jake will need to at *least* continue generating the same numbers moving forward and stay healthy.  A steady improvement over these numbers would be even better, but personally, I would be happy with consistent 85-point seasons. There is no reason to think he WON'T improve.  A jump from 62 points to 91 points is evidence enough he can.

With this said, I still would like to see perhaps one more year of this production to give him that much cash and lock him up for 8 years. 

 

My $0.02.

[jammer2]

I am glad to see no NMC/NTC,

 

 

 

 How is this happening all of a sudden.....friggin Homer would have given Rinaldo a NMC.....lol...a star like Jake, he would get NMC...NTC....FBC....(first born clause, every infant born this year would be called Jake!!...HA HA)....

 

 Yeah, it's refreshing to see Hexy not dole these things out, but it also paints an ugly picture of Homer being VERY incompetent.....which we already knew, but this kinda thing just illuminates it more.

[brelic]

@BobbyClarkeFan16

@jammer2

@Mad Dog

 

I notice that the three of you seem to hold the same opinion that Jake will be hitting his prime and improving his numbers. Just curious why that is? Statistically, that is not the case. He's already had his best season. So has Giroux. It used to be conventional wisdom that forwards hit their prime in their late 20s - 26, 27, 28 - but there are a number of studies that show that simply isn't the case anymore.

 

I *hope* that Jake can be an exception, and with a highly skilled third man on the line - i.e. a sniper - it could make a huge difference. 

 

 

 

Unlike Giroux, who is the unmistaken leader in Philadelphia and has put together multiple good seasons in a row, Voracek has had one season that was really elite.

 

I agree that Giroux is the face of the franchise, and he wears the C on his shirt. He is growing nicely into the leadership role. Last season, though, I felt that Jake was just as strong a leader on the ice, if not moreso for the way he defended his teammates, and wore his emotions on his sleeve. It is not a slight to Giroux at all - just my observation that Jake is turning into a pretty solid leader too. What do you think?

 

I have no idea what happens off the ice, though. 

[jammer2]

I notice that the three of you seem to hold the same opinion that Jake will be hitting his prime and improving his numbers. Just curious why that is? Statistically, that is not the case. He's already had his best season. So has Giroux. It used to be conventional wisdom that forwards hit their prime in their late 20s - 26, 27, 28 - but there are a number of studies that show that simply isn't the case anymore.

 

 I agree with your age theory, I just think that some guys are late bloomers, I feel Jake falls into that catagory. Part of it was making the transition from Europe to North America (it's different for almost everyone) and part of it was some very crappy Jackets teams. It also seem like Jake was lacking confidence earlly in his career....everything seemed to come together all at once for him.

[Claude Monet]

I agree with your age theory, I just think that some guys are late bloomers, I feel Jake falls into that catagory. Part of it was making the transition from Europe to North America (it's different for almost everyone) and part of it was some very crappy Jackets teams. It also seem like Jake was lacking confidence earlly in his career....everything seemed to come together all at once for him.

Yeah moving from a beautiful eastern euro region to Columbus , Ohio is going to affect your game. Unless you are a delusional football fan, that place sucks

[Mad Dog]

@brelic

 

I don't know if I am confident he is poised to improve on the last-year numbers.  What gives me a lot of hope is that after he came to Philadelphia, statistically he did show a steady and well-defined improvement:

 

49 point in 2011,

46 points in 48 games of the 2012 lockout year which projects to 78 points in a full 82-game season,

62 points in 2013, and

81 points in 2014.

 

So if you throw out the 2013-2014 as an outlier (which was still a VERY good season for him), I think the growth is evident.

 

Now... to improve on the numbers of the last year would be difficult. But I don't' know if he needs to, which  was kind of my point.  I don't need a jump from 81 points to 100 points.  I want consistent 81-85 point seasons.  And I do believe that's absolutely within his reach.   In fact, I am not very optimistic he *can* improve on these numbers.  Plus, being that Giroux is such a huge factor in Jake's performance, obviously much depends on Giroux's own production and health as well. 

 

Again, for my liking, I would like to see another 80'ish points season before I give him that much cash and sign him to 8 years. But it is what it is.