[Signing] Sharks sign Pavelski to 5yr $30mil extension

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by blankall

Too high IMO. He's a great player, but he's topped out as a 60 point 2nd line centre. He's also 29 now. In 3 years time, this contract could be pretty painful.

Yeah but he's still an important player for them and without him the team is worse. Teams are willing to pay these guys that money to keep their core intact and fill out the roster with players on entry leve deals and journeymen players making near the league minimum.

[ricardodw]

Both Pavelski and the other core guy extended for 5 years at 6M - Couture had really good playoffs....... against the Canucks: Pavelski 4 goals and 8 pts in 4 games and Couture 3 goals and 8 pts in 4 games.

But in the 7 games against LA they folded like a cheap tent:

Pavelski 4 pts in 7 Games -1 , Couture 3 pts in 7 games -5.

Perfect fit for the Sharks.... good for the regular season and against bad teams but not so good against better teams.


The padded stats makes them look like $6M players: 12 pts in 11 playoff games and 11 pts in 11 games.

[moon]

Originally Posted by dammage79

That's 6 million well spent IMO. Pavelski is one of those players you pay to keep around. This is a player I hope Monahan shapes up to be.

I hope Monahan is a hell of a lot better than Pavelski. That would be the low end/worse case scenario for me.

[Beatle17]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Both Pavelski and the other core guy extended for 5 years at 6M - Couture had really good playoffs....... against the Canucks: Pavelski 4 goals and 8 pts in 4 games and Couture 3 goals and 8 pts in 4 games.

But in the 7 games against LA they folded like a cheap tent:

Pavelski 4 pts in 7 Games -1 , Couture 3 pts in 7 games -5.

Perfect fit for the Sharks.... good for the regular season and against bad teams but not so good against better teams.


The padded stats makes them look like $6M players: 12 pts in 11 playoff games and 11 pts in 11 games.

Well if you want to cherry pick, then based on the Vancouver series they are $10M players averaging over 2 points per game. You can't look at one series and not the other without weighing their total value.

[megatron]

Pavelski has always one of my favourite players and I wanted him on the Flames to play with Iggy. Term is a bit too long but he plays in all situations and is consistent.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

I'm glad that we had the half year lock out. It really seems like they fixed a lot of things.

People seem to really like trotting this line out whenever there is a ridiculous contract handed out. The lockout's goal wasn't so individuals can't make top dollar. It is about dropping the collective amount committed to player salaries down, which it has. Whether or not Pavelski deserves that money is for the Sharks organization to decide. At the end of the day, the Sharks still have a finite amount of money the can spend on total salaries.

[TurnedTheCorner]

At least the term isn't insane.

[FAN]

Originally Posted by blankall

Too high IMO. He's a great player, but he's topped out as a 60 point 2nd line centre. He's also 29 now. In 3 years time, this contract could be pretty painful.

Saying Pavelski topped out as a 60 point 2nd line centre is like saying Patrice Bergeron topped out as a 60 point 2nd line centre. Both are very important players to their respective teams that goes beyond the scoreboard. Pavelski isn't called the swiss army knife for nothing.

[moon]

Pavelski isn't close to Bergeron in terms of defence and over all play.

Comparing Pavelski to Bergeron is a huge insult to Bergeron who is very useful outside of just scoring and a legit top level talent. Pavelski is a secondary player and decent 2nd line option.

[FAN]

Originally Posted by moon

Comparing Pavelski to Bergeron is a huge insult to Bergeron

Disagree.

[PlayfulGenius]

Originally Posted by moon

Pavelski isn't close to Bergeron in terms of defence and over all play.

Comparing Pavelski to Bergeron is a huge insult to Bergeron who is very useful outside of just scoring and a legit top level talent. Pavelski is a secondary player and decent 2nd line option.

You're right, Bergeron > Pavelski ... But you err equally the other direction when you label Pavelski a 'decent 2nd line option'... In actuality, he a decent 1st line option and has played there a lot for the Sharks...as a 2nd liner, he's amongst the top in the league.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

People seem to really like trotting this line out whenever there is a ridiculous contract handed out. The lockout's goal wasn't so individuals can't make top dollar. It is about dropping the collective amount committed to player salaries down, which it has. Whether or not Pavelski deserves that money is for the Sharks organization to decide. At the end of the day, the Sharks still have a finite amount of money the can spend on total salaries.

It only brought the "collective amount committed to player salaries down" for one year. Next year it will be at $70 million +. So again why did they have a lockout?

If they had done the lockout properly you would not see 2nd line players making $6 million. The reason 2nd line players can make $6 million is because dumb owners and greedy agents know the cap is going to keep going up and up.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

It only brought the "collective amount committed to player salaries down" for one year. Next year it will be at $70 million +. So again why did they have a lockout?

If they had done the lockout properly you would not see 2nd line players making $6 million. The reason 2nd line players can make $6 million is because dumb owners and greedy agents know the cap is going to keep going up and up.

But they lowered the % linkage. It only goes up if HRR goes up. So yes, it may go to $70M, but that means the league is making more money so they can pay the players more money. I don't really have any issues with that.

[Beatle17]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

It only brought the "collective amount committed to player salaries down" for one year. Next year it will be at $70 million +. So again why did they have a lockout?

If they had done the lockout properly you would not see 2nd line players making $6 million. The reason 2nd line players can make $6 million is because dumb owners and greedy agents know the cap is going to keep going up and up.

Not really. It brought down the amount paid to the players to 50% of HRR. The cap amount doesn't matter. If the revenue is $4B then the players share will be $2B, in the old system the players share would have been $2.28B so the owners have "saved" $280M in one year. This system is the same as the NBA where the top players will get paid then the roster will be filled out by rookies (ELC) and league minimum veterans.

San Jose is transitioning away from the Thornton/Marleau/Boyle core to the new core of Couture/Pavelski/Vlasic and the old core will either take short term lower cap deals or move on to other teams. If the Flames had done this under the old cap system you would have seen Iggy/Regher etc., moved to secondary but key players with younger players assuming the top roles. Where the Flames failed was finding and playing the young guys who would eventually replace them and instead filling the roster with older free agent signings. When Iggy and the others started to decline they still had to be played as top guys because there was nobody to replace their roles.

IMO St. Louis is doing what the Flames did and are currently doing. They kept and signed older players (Tkachuk, Weight, B. Hull, MacInnis etc.,) and didn't infuse any younger talent. They had to rebuild when those players could no longer perform at their usual level of play. They have rebuilt to a point with their current core of players but are now having to pay them all and within a few years their core will again be aging without young talent being ready to take over. I believe that teams need to look at Detroit as an example of a team that has a main core but every year seem to add one or two players who have developed in the system so those players are ready to take over from the veteran core (Yzerman/Fedorov to Datsyuk/Zetterberg). That way you don't pay our second line players $6M a season until they are actually ready to take over the heavy load, which the San Jose guys are doing.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

It only brought the "collective amount committed to player salaries down" for one year. Next year it will be at $70 million +. So again why did they have a lockout?

To cut the players' percentage of revenues. Before the lockout it was 57 percent. Now it's 50 percent. If the cap next year is $70 million, it would have been $80 million under the old CBA.

Any more questions?

[cowtown75]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Yeah but he's still an important player for them and without him the team is worse. Teams are willing to pay these guys that money to keep their core intact and fill out the roster with players on entry leve deals and journeymen players making near the league minimum.

Which is fine until until that player doesn't live up to that big contract and big expectations and the contract is a nightmare to move because no one wants to touch it with a 10 foot pole because of the cap hit/ term. He 's a good player, but I don't think he is 6 mill for 5 years good.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Both Pavelski and the other core guy extended for 5 years at 6M - Couture had really good playoffs....... against the Canucks: Pavelski 4 goals and 8 pts in 4 games and Couture 3 goals and 8 pts in 4 games.

But in the 7 games against LA they folded like a cheap tent:

Pavelski 4 pts in 7 Games -1 , Couture 3 pts in 7 games -5.

Perfect fit for the Sharks.... good for the regular season and against bad teams but not so good against better teams.


The padded stats makes them look like $6M players: 12 pts in 11 playoff games and 11 pts in 11 games.

4 points, - 1, in a 7 game low scoring playoff series is folding like a cheap tent... tough crowd.

Toews, Crosby, Kane, Malkin, Bergeron, etc all went similar stretches with the same or fewer point totals... guess they all suck too.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by moon

I hope Monahan is a hell of a lot better than Pavelski. That would be the low end/worse case scenario for me.

Optimist!

Statistically, Monahan's approximate floor is a (career average, not best season and pro-rated for injuries) 30-point guy, ceiling is 70 points, best guess roughly 50 points. Pavelski averages a 58 point season (pro-rated for injuries), so he's towards the higher end of what Monahan is likely to become.

[FAN]

Originally Posted by PlayfulGenius

You're right, Bergeron > Pavelski ... But you err equally the other direction when you label Pavelski a 'decent 2nd line option'... In actuality, he a decent 1st line option and has played there a lot for the Sharks...as a 2nd liner, he's amongst the top in the league.

Yes. Bergeron has developed into a better player than Pavelski, that's why Bergeron has won the Selke, is recognized as the better player, and makes more money. But Pavelski is no slouch. Last two years he's pretty much been a 30+ goal 60+ point guy who can play on any line and any forward position. Pavelski has also had some big playoff performances in the past. This is a great signing for the Sharks.