Jay Bouwmeester rights for a 3rd rounder

SeawaySensFan wrote:I can't see Bouwmeester being 3 million dollars better than Kuba, for instance. I'm leaning heavily towards no thanks.

I as well. Especially if we take a defenceman at #9. Then he's not really necessary for the present or the future.

Would be nice, but I think he's going to get way too much money.

asq2 wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:I can't see Bouwmeester being 3 million dollars better than Kuba, for instance. I'm leaning heavily towards no thanks.

I as well. Especially if we take a defenceman at #9. Then he's not really necessary for the present or the future.

Would be nice, but I think he's going to get way too much money.

He is going to get at least Campbell money and I am now thinking the Hawks are regretting that. I have moved into thinking that UFA signing of top tier players is really really silly. Everyone overpays and gets in bidding wars. I don't remember one good contract of a top tier UFA. Chara's was okay and is paying dividends but I wouldn't call it a 'bargain', it was fair market value... the rest aree GROSSLY inflated.

MurderOnIce wrote:

asq2 wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:I can't see Bouwmeester being 3 million dollars better than Kuba, for instance. I'm leaning heavily towards no thanks.

I as well. Especially if we take a defenceman at #9. Then he's not really necessary for the present or the future.

Would be nice, but I think he's going to get way too much money.

He is going to get at least Campbell money and I am now thinking the Hawks are regretting that. I have moved into thinking that UFA signing of top tier players is really really silly. Everyone overpays and gets in bidding wars. I don't remember one good contract of a top tier UFA. Chara's was okay and is paying dividends but I wouldn't call it a 'bargain', it was fair market value... the rest aree GROSSLY inflated.

So...what's your logic and definition for 'fair market value'?

Chara got more money than Campbell, and the Bruins went out in Round Two while the Hawks went to the Conference Finals. What evidence do you have Chicago is 'regretting that' signing?

Is Crosby's contract better than Ovechkin's because the Pens won a Cup after bouncing the Caps?

How about Hossa's contract? The Wings weren't better with him; their regular season record and final standing were worse, and they lost both the President's Trophy and Stanley.

Is Eric Staal overpaid?

How about Dan Boyle, with the Sharks getting smoked in the playoffs?

And where do you put Heatley's deal?

The points you raise aside, what are the criteria for your evaluation?

So what's Bouwmeester really 'worth', in your opinion and according to your standards, apart from what teams are ready to pay?

I dont think Campbell is the reason Chicago got into CF, or even played a big role in it. The guys who did though are all up for re-signing shortly and with that campbell contract, as of now, would be nearly impossible to sign them all.

That said I dont think Campbell would be hard to deal off in the next year or two.

MurderOnIce wrote:If we think we can sign him... Done. I don't think we can and I don't think we want to make a big cap mistake again.

Having too much money up front was our big cap mistake; not having too much money in too few players. Having one D at 7 plus one forward at 7 plus a few more in all three positions between 3.5 and 5.5 is a reasonable cap stagger.

I have to say, though, this thread is amusing. It wasn't 6 months ago that every one of you was falling over themselves to add Bouwmeester to the roster and most of you weren't even trying to subtract one of the other big contracts.

Now that Heatley is moving on, it possibly opens the reasonable possibility of signing him and no one wants him? What changed?

cas wrote:

MurderOnIce wrote:If we think we can sign him... Done. I don't think we can and I don't think we want to make a big cap mistake again.

Having too much money up front was our big cap mistake; not having too much money in too few players. Having one D at 7 plus one forward at 7 plus a few more in all three positions between 3.5 and 5.5 is a reasonable cap stagger.

I have to say, though, this thread is amusing. It wasn't 6 months ago that every one of you was falling over themselves to add Bouwmeester to the roster and most of you weren't even trying to subtract one of the other big contracts.

Now that Heatley is moving on, it possibly opens the reasonable possibility of signing him and no one wants him? What changed?

The cap situation *may* be changing, if not this year, then the next.

Also, giving up a potential 50-goal scorer is scary. You'll never replace him, which puts a bit of a cloud over things. I know on paper it looks like all we were missing was that elite puck mover, but if we add one, while subtracting a 50-goal scorer, it's not the same as adding a puck mover with all other pieces in place.

Another thing that has changed is our depth at D. We've got two potentially elite D-men coming up plus Campoli. Maybe, just maybe, that elite puck-mover is no-longer our primary concern.

davetherave wrote:

MurderOnIce wrote:

asq2 wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:I can't see Bouwmeester being 3 million dollars better than Kuba, for instance. I'm leaning heavily towards no thanks.

I as well. Especially if we take a defenceman at #9. Then he's not really necessary for the present or the future.

Would be nice, but I think he's going to get way too much money.

He is going to get at least Campbell money and I am now thinking the Hawks are regretting that. I have moved into thinking that UFA signing of top tier players is really really silly. Everyone overpays and gets in bidding wars. I don't remember one good contract of a top tier UFA. Chara's was okay and is paying dividends but I wouldn't call it a 'bargain', it was fair market value... the rest aree GROSSLY inflated.

So...what's your logic and definition for 'fair market value'?

Chara got more money than Campbell, and the Bruins went out in Round Two while the Hawks went to the Conference Finals. What evidence do you have Chicago is 'regretting that' signing?

Is Crosby's contract better than Ovechkin's because the Pens won a Cup after bouncing the Caps?

How about Hossa's contract? The Wings weren't better with him; their regular season record and final standing were worse, and they lost both the President's Trophy and Stanley.

Is Eric Staal overpaid?

How about Dan Boyle, with the Sharks getting smoked in the playoffs?

And where do you put Heatley's deal?

The points you raise aside, what are the criteria for your evaluation?

So what's Bouwmeester really 'worth', in your opinion and according to your standards, apart from what teams are ready to pay?

I agree with what Neely said on the Campbell issue, so I'll leave it at that. As for the other questions:

- Crosby and Ovechkin's contracts are precisely what they should be. They are the highest cap hits in the NHL and they are the best players. Same goes for Malkin. The question itself is nonsense,though. You're reaching...

- The Wings lost the Stanley Cup Final by one goal. The last Cup winner to make it out of round 1 was Detroit in 2002 and they lost in the 2nd round (I believe ). And who cares about the President's Cup (other than the owner's that get a nice little check)? The last Cup winning team to also win the President's Cup was Detroit last year; before then, I don't know who it was but it was a while ago.

- Eric Staal is absolutely overpaid, but his performance in the playoffs made me wonder if that would continue to be true. Imo the playoffs are all that really matters - as long as you can get in - and he gave me pause. Regardless, I still view him as overpaid and overhyped.

- Define 'fair market value'? Thats pretty tough to do when there are so many variables and different scenarios, but basically its the percentage of a team's annual cap that can reasonably attributed to a player of a specific skill set. The two most important skillsets are 1) goal scoring and 2) goal keeping.

Dany Heatley, for example, is a player who may not be one of the top players in all areas of the game, but has a skill set that is more rare and is of the highest importance. As a result of his stature in that area, his contract is more than reasonable.

wprager wrote:

cas wrote:

MurderOnIce wrote:If we think we can sign him... Done. I don't think we can and I don't think we want to make a big cap mistake again.

Having too much money up front was our big cap mistake; not having too much money in too few players. Having one D at 7 plus one forward at 7 plus a few more in all three positions between 3.5 and 5.5 is a reasonable cap stagger.

I have to say, though, this thread is amusing. It wasn't 6 months ago that every one of you was falling over themselves to add Bouwmeester to the roster and most of you weren't even trying to subtract one of the other big contracts.

Now that Heatley is moving on, it possibly opens the reasonable possibility of signing him and no one wants him? What changed?

The cap situation *may* be changing, if not this year, then the next.

Also, giving up a potential 50-goal scorer is scary. You'll never replace him, which puts a bit of a cloud over things. I know on paper it looks like all we were missing was that elite puck mover, but if we add one, while subtracting a 50-goal scorer, it's not the same as adding a puck mover with all other pieces in place.

Another thing that has changed is our depth at D. We've got two potentially elite D-men coming up plus Campoli. Maybe, just maybe, that elite puck-mover is no-longer our primary concern.

I never thought it was... Character and a willingness to battle: thats what was missing. Getting rid of Heatley will solve a big chunk of that problem; I promise you that much.

As for the Cap, the recession is hardly going to be what some have feared it to be and things will recover. By the time we get to deciding the cap for 2010-11, the economy will have recovered by a relatively significant margin (5-10%) and the effect of the cap won't be as extreme as is expected now. I would be pretty surprised if the cap dropped below $50 million at any point, going forward.

How many Cup Winners have 50 goal scorers on them in the last 10 years...? Not a lot, if any.

cas wrote:

wprager wrote:

cas wrote:

MurderOnIce wrote:If we think we can sign him... Done. I don't think we can and I don't think we want to make a big cap mistake again.

Having too much money up front was our big cap mistake; not having too much money in too few players. Having one D at 7 plus one forward at 7 plus a few more in all three positions between 3.5 and 5.5 is a reasonable cap stagger.

I have to say, though, this thread is amusing. It wasn't 6 months ago that every one of you was falling over themselves to add Bouwmeester to the roster and most of you weren't even trying to subtract one of the other big contracts.

Now that Heatley is moving on, it possibly opens the reasonable possibility of signing him and no one wants him? What changed?

The cap situation *may* be changing, if not this year, then the next.

Also, giving up a potential 50-goal scorer is scary. You'll never replace him, which puts a bit of a cloud over things. I know on paper it looks like all we were missing was that elite puck mover, but if we add one, while subtracting a 50-goal scorer, it's not the same as adding a puck mover with all other pieces in place.

Another thing that has changed is our depth at D. We've got two potentially elite D-men coming up plus Campoli. Maybe, just maybe, that elite puck-mover is no-longer our primary concern.

I never thought it was... Character and a willingness to battle: thats what was missing. Getting rid of Heatley will solve a big chunk of that problem; I promise you that much.

As for the Cap, the recession is hardly going to be what some have feared it to be and things will recover. By the time we get to deciding the cap for 2010-11, the economy will have recovered by a relatively significant margin (5-10%) and the effect of the cap won't be as extreme as is expected now. I would be pretty surprised if the cap dropped below $50 million at [b]any point, going forward[/b].

I'm not an economist (and even if I was, they've screwed up more than the weatherman). I don't have as good a feel about the economy recovering that quickly or that much. I hope you're right, I really do, I just don't think it will.

That argument isn't that strong... A lot of the past Conference winners have had a 40+ goal scorer; which is something we likely won't have at the end of this week.

wprager wrote:

cas wrote:

wprager wrote:

cas wrote:

MurderOnIce wrote:If we think we can sign him... Done. I don't think we can and I don't think we want to make a big cap mistake again.

Having too much money up front was our big cap mistake; not having too much money in too few players. Having one D at 7 plus one forward at 7 plus a few more in all three positions between 3.5 and 5.5 is a reasonable cap stagger.

I have to say, though, this thread is amusing. It wasn't 6 months ago that every one of you was falling over themselves to add Bouwmeester to the roster and most of you weren't even trying to subtract one of the other big contracts.

Now that Heatley is moving on, it possibly opens the reasonable possibility of signing him and no one wants him? What changed?

The cap situation *may* be changing, if not this year, then the next.

Also, giving up a potential 50-goal scorer is scary. You'll never replace him, which puts a bit of a cloud over things. I know on paper it looks like all we were missing was that elite puck mover, but if we add one, while subtracting a 50-goal scorer, it's not the same as adding a puck mover with all other pieces in place.

Another thing that has changed is our depth at D. We've got two potentially elite D-men coming up plus Campoli. Maybe, just maybe, that elite puck-mover is no-longer our primary concern.

I never thought it was... Character and a willingness to battle: thats what was missing. Getting rid of Heatley will solve a big chunk of that problem; I promise you that much.

As for the Cap, the recession is hardly going to be what some have feared it to be and things will recover. By the time we get to deciding the cap for 2010-11, the economy will have recovered by a relatively significant margin (5-10%) and the effect of the cap won't be as extreme as is expected now. I would be pretty surprised if the cap dropped below $50 million at [b]any point, going forward[/b].

I'm not an economist (and even if I was, they've screwed up more than the weatherman). I don't have as good a feel about the economy recovering that quickly or that much. I hope you're right, I really do, I just don't think it will.

Colour me hopeful, I guess :___:

cas wrote:

wprager wrote:

cas wrote:

MurderOnIce wrote:If we think we can sign him... Done. I don't think we can and I don't think we want to make a big cap mistake again.

Having too much money up front was our big cap mistake; not having too much money in too few players. Having one D at 7 plus one forward at 7 plus a few more in all three positions between 3.5 and 5.5 is a reasonable cap stagger.

I have to say, though, this thread is amusing. It wasn't 6 months ago that every one of you was falling over themselves to add Bouwmeester to the roster and most of you weren't even trying to subtract one of the other big contracts.

Now that Heatley is moving on, it possibly opens the reasonable possibility of signing him and no one wants him? What changed?

The cap situation *may* be changing, if not this year, then the next.

Also, giving up a potential 50-goal scorer is scary. You'll never replace him, which puts a bit of a cloud over things. I know on paper it looks like all we were missing was that elite puck mover, but if we add one, while subtracting a 50-goal scorer, it's not the same as adding a puck mover with all other pieces in place.

Another thing that has changed is our depth at D. We've got two potentially elite D-men coming up plus Campoli. Maybe, just maybe, that elite puck-mover is no-longer our primary concern.

I never thought it was... Character and a willingness to battle: thats what was missing. Getting rid of Heatley will solve a big chunk of that problem; I promise you that much.

As for the Cap, the recession is hardly going to be what some have feared it to be and things will recover. By the time we get to deciding the cap for 2010-11, the economy will have recovered by a relatively significant margin (5-10%) and the effect of the cap won't be as extreme as is expected now. I would be pretty surprised if the cap dropped below $50 million at any point, going forward.

Heatley refuses to battle in the corners any more after that injury from Draper, maybe he didn't do it that well to begin with, Alfie is the grinder on that line.

FFS I lost my response... Dave, Suffice to say...

Chara = Norris Trophy. Campbell = second pairing in Chicago and limts team's ability to keep their young core together. The rest of the guys aren't UFA signings other than Hossa and his signing was an anomoly. 1 year for the most sought after UFA, come on.

As for Bouwmeester worth, it depends on the team. To me as a Senator I would go as high as $6M over 5 Years. His agent would quickly slam down the phone on me and I would start to get back to finding a home for Heatley. He will likely sign out west for a monster deal. My guess being 8 year $64M.. guess...

Eklund is making up 'reporting' a rumour that Bouwmeester is set to go to Vancouver E4+ for what it is worth