[Signing] Oilers sign Klefbom to 7 year extension ($4.167 mil AAV)

[MisterJoji]

Originally Posted by Hugh Jahrmes

Good god .. I wish

Yeah in retrospect that would've been nice, but not worth the risk. A lot of players have decent rookie years and then don't continue the trajectory upwards. Klefbom for 7 years at 4+ MIGHT end up being a good deal, and if he ends up as a solid #2, Charelli will look good. However, recent history suggests (especially with the Oilers) that there is a very real chance he may never become any better than an average middle pairing or good bottom 2 defenseman. Charelli also has a poor history playing the risk/reward game.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Robbob

You mean you are wishfully hoping that is the equivalent because the end result is known. Like I said the contract is a hailmary or lottery ticket.

Only time will tell.

I'm comparing the situations because they were both similar aged defenders coming off a around one good season, and a world championship and could have their contracts renewed.

Both played about a season in the AHL and then went straight into the NHL. Similar progression in that regard as well.

The end result of either player makes no difference to the comparison.

Comparing Klefbom to two forwards, one of whom is 25, and the other who has had a bizarre career progression is kind of a weird thing to do.

[Daradon]

Yeah, I don't know how anyone can defend this deal. As has been oft said, it COULD work out to be a good deal if he continues to progress at the rate he has been, but that's a BIG IF. Most likely, he's not going to get a bunch better.

As well, he's a good player on a bad team. The Oilers seem to consistently overrate their talent because they just compare them to other Oilers. Would he be a number four on most other teams? No. Would he get this contract on other teams? No. But they gotta pay him cause all their other contracts are rewarding players for mediocre performance.

Lastly, as has been mentioned, he's making more than Brodie. Brodie was in the Norris discussion last year (albeit, at the end of the conversation). Klefbom is nowhere near that.

This is not a good contract anyway you look at it, and there was no reason to offer him so much term anyway. So not only is it a bad contract, it's a bad contract for bad reasons!

Anyone who thinks it's a good contract is drinking the blue kool-aid, and I'm a little surprised a few Flames fans are taking other Flames fans to task for being homers on this one. There's absolutely no homerism in calling the contract, a bad contract. It is, in every single way.

[RITFW]

Originally Posted by Daradon

Yeah, I don't know how anyone can defend this deal. As has been oft said, it COULD work out to be a good deal if he continues to progress at the rate he has been, but that's a BIG IF. Most likely, he's not going to get a bunch better.

As well, he's a good player on a bad team. The Oilers seem to consistently overrate their talent because they just compare them to other Oilers. Would he be a number four on most other teams? No. Would he get this contract on other teams? No. But they gotta pay him cause all their other contracts are rewarding players for mediocre performance.

Lastly, as has been mentioned, he's making more than Brodie. Brodie was in the Norris discussion last year (albeit, at the end of the conversation). Klefbom is nowhere near that.

This is not a good contract anyway you look at it, and there was no reason to offer him so much term anyway. So not only is it a bad contract, it's a bad contract for bad reasons!

Anyone who thinks it's a good contract is drinking the blue kool-aid, and I'm a little surprised a few Flames fans are taking other Flames fans to task for being homers on this one. There's absolutely no homerism in calling the contract, a bad contract. It is, in every single way.

You say it's a bad contract in every single way after saying it COULD work out to be a good deal if... Well, as in life there are risks and the same holds true in business. In this case the calculated risk is that Klefbom will progress to the point he is worth more than his compensation. Your issue with the deal seems more to do with who Klefbom plays for than the player or the contract itself. It is not surprising even your fellow posters on this site feel the contract has the potential to at least be reasonable in a couple few years.

[Cole436]

I don't think it's that bad of a deal. Most #3 defensemen sit around that 4 million range, and I see that in Klefbom. It's a deal that can bite them in the ass, but the amount isn't enough to worry about a buy out somewhere down the line, or a trade with retention.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by RITFW

You say it's a bad contract in every single way after saying it COULD work out to be a good deal if... Well, as in life there are risks and the same holds true in business. In this case the calculated risk is that Klefbom will progress to the point he is worth more than his compensation. Your issue with the deal seems more to do with who Klefbom plays for than the player or the contract itself. It is not surprising even your fellow posters on this site feel the contract has the potential to at least be reasonable in a couple few years.

Well thats generally not how most businesses work.

Yeah, mistakes happen, but generally it isnt the mistake that you're worried about its the consequences.

If Klefbom turns into a total 7/8 Dman they're stuck with him for years and years at that cap hit.

In the modern management game you have to be very shrewd about the allocation of dollars and cap space, it isnt a matter of 'oh well, that didnt pan out, move along!'

They'd be stuck with him. So it isnt as though the downside is trivial.

[Street Pharmacist]

Philly had a team of $4M+ defensemen that didn't pan out