[Signing] Ottawa signs Jake Sanderson ( 8 x $8.05M )

[Geeoff]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Your post said "Younger Talent" it didn't mention Tkachuk specifically, and the fact is the Flames did bet on the majority of their young core - with Tkachuk being the one exclusion.

In terms of Tkachuk he also said he wanted to stay here long term...two weeks before turning down 8 x $10.5M and demanding a trade. The signals point to him not wanting to be here long term, no matter what he said. Lots of rumors out there that even "long term" only meant 6 years - similar to Marner/Rantanen - and not 8 years.

And in terms of Bennett that is a good comparison because that is exactly what is happening with Sanderson.

Sanderson shows great potential but he has 1 year on his ELC left, has only played one season, and their is risk with the $8M deal.

It wouldn't be that dissimilar from giving Bennett a huge deal coming off the 15-16 season when he had 36 points in 77 games as a rookie, with one year left on his ELC. Would people have been applauding if the Flames gave Bennett 8 x $6M or 8 x $7M that offseason - because that is what Ottawa is betting on here.

At the same time, would 8x6 for Bennett be worse than 7x7 for Kadri?

[jayswin]

It's funny the way we as fans will justify older deals vs younger deals.

29 year old contract speculation - "Well, yeah you have to understand and accept that the last 3-4 years are going to be painful, you're not going to get anywhere near value for what he brings on the back end".

Young player contract speculation - "What? You can't do this, he isn't fully known!!! Maybe you could save a bit by waiting or signing him to less years? This is madness!!!

Just kind of funny is all. It's like we're more accepting of just literally knowing that back end years will be badly overpaid than the idea of overpaying by a million or so on the front year or two for a player that will be paid through his prime, lol.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by jayswin

It's funny the way we as fans will justify older deals vs younger deals.

29 year old contract speculation - "Well, yeah you have to understand and accept that the last 3-4 years are going to be painful, you're not going to get anywhere near value for what he brings on the back end".

Young player contract speculation - "What? You can't do this, he isn't fully known!!! Maybe you could save a bit by waiting or signing him to less years? This is madness!!!

Just kind of funny is all. It's like we're more accepting of just literally knowing that back end years will be badly overpaid than the idea of overpaying by a million or so on the front year or two for a player that will be paid through his prime, lol.

Same reason why the smart play was to invest in Blockbuster over Netflix in 2009. One had a proven track record.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

At the same time, would 8x6 for Bennett be worse than 7x7 for Kadri?

Probably not - but 7 x $7 was always a mistake for Kadri too.

I'd rather not give out any long term contracts to people that aren't going to live up to it, and giving 7 years to a 32 year old center coming off a career season was always stupid.

And in terms of Sanderson this might end up being a steal...I just don't see the urgency to give him $8M right now.

Even if he goes out and is a Norris finalist this season he's probably not costing much more than $9.5M (Makar is $9.0M, Fox is $9.5M).

Just feels like this is where you should have used the time given to you and at least seen how Sanderson looks this season and then if you need to give him $8.0M you still have time to do that.

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Probably not - but 7 x $7 was always a mistake for Kadri too.

I'd rather not give out any long term contracts to people that aren't going to live up to it, and giving 7 years to a 32 year old center coming off a career season was always stupid.

And in terms of Sanderson this might end up being a steal...I just don't see the urgency to give him $8M right now.

Even if he goes out and is a Norris finalist this season he's probably not costing much more than $9.5M (Makar is $9.0M, Fox is $9.5M).

Just feels like this is where you should have used the time given to you and at least seen how Sanderson looks this season and then if you need to give him $8.0M you still have time to do that.

I think this could turn out similar to the Sanheim contract. It seems very risky especially since younger D take a while to polish the defensive side of the game.

Sanderson's HD shots against/60 supports that and was much higher than Chabot, Zub, Brannstrom, and Chycrun. I'm sure he'll get better, but similar to how it was with Hanifin, Andersson, Hamilton and so on, it will take some time.

Right now he's a ~$4.5M player. How fast will he turn into an $8M+ player? I guess we'll see.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

Ottawa is doing what Canadian markets ought to do, and what Edmonton did with Draisaitl and McDavid.

You believe in the player and they’ve shown the promise? Lock up their core years and be done with it. Paying players in their prime is better than the alternative.

Buffalo looks to be doing the same. Pay young players what they’re worth today/tomorrow, and don’t grind them.

Worst case most of these young players will slightly underperform or meet the contract. Best case, the team ends up with some big time value on the back half of the contracts.

Hopefully Conroy is someone who's willing to go that route with players like Wolf, Coronato, Pelletier and Honzek should they start to break out. Was never a fan of how Treliving did business with our own homegrown players by kicking the can down the road far too often.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Probably not - but 7 x $7 was always a mistake for Kadri too.

I'd rather not give out any long term contracts to people that aren't going to live up to it, and giving 7 years to a 32 year old center coming off a career season was always stupid.

And in terms of Sanderson this might end up being a steal...I just don't see the urgency to give him $8M right now.

Even if he goes out and is a Norris finalist this season he's probably not costing much more than $9.5M (Makar is $9.0M, Fox is $9.5M).

Just feels like this is where you should have used the time given to you and at least seen how Sanderson looks this season and then if you need to give him $8.0M you still have time to do that.

Well the GM isn't being obtuse to the fact that the young RFA players may later decide they don't want to stay and will only commit to a shorter term deal in order to walk to UFA status as soon as possible.

In most Canadian markets you do need to be aware that you might not be a primary destination and by showing commitment upfront with a larger, long-term deal the player may certainly see the plus to make the commitment to stay.

[fotze2]

Met Jake at Westside Rec many years ago when he was Bantam AA. My bud played with his dad. He was pretty much accepting he wasn't gonna be that good and was resigned to go to school. So insane how he has become so good. Genetics probably didn't hurt but he was not vectoring to be this.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

Worst case most of these young players will slightly underperform or meet the contract. Best case, the team ends up with some big time value on the back half of the contracts.

Hopefully Conroy is someone who's willing to go that route with players like Wolf, Coronato, Pelletier and Honzek should they start to break out. Was never a fan of how Treliving did business with our own homegrown players by kicking the can down the road far too often.

Worst case they heavily underperform the contract.

It’s not like young defencemen are automatic wins. Put guys like Jones or Nurse on their big contracts 6 years earlier than they got them and they would’ve brutally underperformed it the entire way through… which they’re probably going to do anyway.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

At the same time, would 8x6 for Bennett be worse than 7x7 for Kadri?

Maybe not, but since Bennett is not as good of a player as Kadri, it would probably not have been any better.

Sent from my SM-G986W using Tapatalk

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

Worst case most of these young players will slightly underperform or meet the contract. Best case, the team ends up with some big time value on the back half of the contracts.

Hopefully Conroy is someone who's willing to go that route with players like Wolf, Coronato, Pelletier and Honzek should they start to break out. Was never a fan of how Treliving did business with our own homegrown players by kicking the can down the road far too often.

That's not the worst case. Worst case you have a rookie who scores, say, at a rate of 29 goals and 53 points. So you sign him long term for a bundle (of course that contract only kicks in in his 3rd or 4th pro season). Then he gets worse and worse every year, so that by the time he's in his 5th season (which would probably be the 3rd or 4th of the long term deal) he plays only 40 games and scores 9 points.

Gentlemen, meet Nail Yakupov. Except he wasn't signed long term.

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by Eric Vail

What would have happened with Sam Bennett? Would he have been given a massive contract that he wouldn't live up to?

Well , they may have tried harder to put him in every opportunity to succeed and not punishing him to the 4th line everytime he made a mistake. Might of helped him develop more.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

That's not the worst case. Worst case you have a rookie who scores, say, at a rate of 29 goals and 53 points. So you sign him long term for a bundle (of course that contract only kicks in in his 3rd or 4th pro season). Then he gets worse and worse every year, so that by the time he's in his 5th season (which would probably be the 3rd or 4th of the long term deal) he plays only 40 games and scores 9 points.

Gentlemen, meet Nail Yakupov. Except he wasn't signed long term.

Ottawa already signed a contract like this and bought the player out before he turned 25 - Colin White.

[CalgaryFan1988]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

Well , they may have tried harder to put him in every opportunity to succeed and not punishing him to the 4th line everytime he made a mistake. Might of helped him develop more.

May have helped with confidence issues as well, knowing a team believes in you.

A lot of "what ifs", but no two players are the same.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

Well , they may have tried harder to put him in every opportunity to succeed and not punishing him to the 4th line everytime he made a mistake. Might of helped him develop more.

This is a huge overstatement. They put him, to a large extent, with another supposedly top prospect they had high hopes for, and a veteran goalscorer who'd never failed to score 20 in a season.

His issue was also that he is a C/LW. Playing on a team with Backlund and Monahan down the middle (and Lindholm also a better C) and Gaudreau and Tkachuk on the left side.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by gvitaly

I think this could turn out similar to the Sanheim contract. It seems very risky especially since younger D take a while to polish the defensive side of the game.

Sanderson's HD shots against/60 supports that and was much higher than Chabot, Zub, Brannstrom, and Chycrun. I'm sure he'll get better, but similar to how it was with Hanifin, Andersson, Hamilton and so on, it will take some time.

Right now he's a ~$4.5M player. How fast will he turn into an $8M+ player? I guess we'll see.

If you talk to Ottawa fans, they already consider Sanderson to be their best dman.

Not sure if they are right, but I commend Ottawa for this signing.

Way more upside than downside.

[WCW Nitro]

Keep in mind that he is also a top 5 pick, it's not like he came out of nowhere so there's more of a history of being a good player than it seems and less of a risk..

[activeStick]

Nobody is saying these sort of deals aren't a risk. They most definitely are a risk. But you have the first 3 years of the ELC to try and make the best decision you can through those 3 years of the player's development. At that point, every Canadian team should ask themselves if they think this player will continue their rise and if the answer is 'Yes', then they should just sign them to a 6-8 year deal and lock them in, because the alternative is they keep their pace, you sign them to one more RFA deal that gives you another few years and then they walk at the age of 26ish and another team gets a bunch of very good years that could've been yours.

These are the realities of teams in the Canadian market, so you deal with it the best way you can.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Worst case they heavily underperform the contract.

It’s not like young defencemen are automatic wins. Put guys like Jones or Nurse on their big contracts 6 years earlier than they got them and they would’ve brutally underperformed it the entire way through… which they’re probably going to do anyway.

Weird examples. Nurse in 2018 would have been $5-5.5 million with 3 years left as of today, and Jones did sign a fairly big contract coming out of his entry level deal $5.4 over 6 years. If they went $6 million over 8 he'd be in the last year of his deal. Both would be looking good.

Tyler Myers is a good example of a guy that looked like he was going to be a perennial 40 point D-man who fell off after signing a big second contract. Even still the Sabres were able to get value for him in trade. His big contract to the Canucks in his late 20s is the most regrettable deal there.

The third contract or signing a guy long term at 27+ seems to be by far the more risky route when it comes to contracts.

[Vinny01]

I remember not being a fan of the Gaudreau deal because Treliving didn’t secure the 8 years. Had it been for $8M or $8.5M that would have been worth it at the time and great value (we would still have him for another year).

Tree loved that 6 year term. Gaudreau, Hamilton, Lindholm, Hanifin, Andersson. (Also UFA’s Backlund, Giordano, Coleman)

Monahan was the longest term deal until the 8 year deals for Huberdeau and Weegar were signed.

I definitely think they should have tried to max out the term for a few of our young guys and while it is a risk for Ottawa I do think it will pay off for them