Stoll signs a 4 year/3.1 per year average package - Confirmed!

Acrobat wrote:

That's my point, though. Don't you think he could have signed Vermette now for long-term for less than 4-5? In effect, he did well for the team now, knowing that he may have handcuffed himself later.

It's a gamble - but Murray's one of the best, so let's see what plays out.

Personally, with Vermette, I would have liked to see a longer deal, and that inevitably would have been for a few more dollars.

I look at what Detroit did with Fillpula and Kronwall. Holland didn't wait for those two guys to put up the great numbers and then sign them long-term. Instead, he evaluated them, determined that they would continue to progress, and offered them longer deals worth a little more money than their history suggested they were worth at the time. Was Kronwall a $3 mil defenceman this time last year? No. But he is now, and that deal of his looks like a steal for the next 3 years. Is Fillpula a $3 mil centre right now? Hell no. But I'm quite sure he will be before the end of this year or the next, and once again Detroit will have another deal on their hands that looks like a fantastic steal for another 3-4 years.

If there's one knock on Murray, it's that he's too shrewd, too stingy with his young players. Signing a young guy on a long-term contract for slightly more than what he's worth at the time, a year or two before he hits his stride, can be a really great move. Vermette at $3-3.5 mil / 5 yrs wouldn't have looked quite as good as $2.76 mil does right now, but in a year or two we would have been laughing. We're gonig to find out in a few years, too, if the same could be said about Meszaros. I worry that, by saving ourselves a few $100,000s here and there in the short term, we're sacrificing our best youth in the long run. Better to have your most talented youth locked up for years rather than spend that money on a renter.

It's certainly a factor to contemplate as we assess Murray's skills as a GM.

rooneypoo wrote:

Acrobat wrote:

That's my point, though. Don't you think he could have signed Vermette now for long-term for less than 4-5? In effect, he did well for the team now, knowing that he may have handcuffed himself later.

It's a gamble - but Murray's one of the best, so let's see what plays out.

Personally, with Vermette, I would have liked to see a longer deal, and that inevitably would have been for a few more dollars.

I look at what Detroit did with Fillpula and Kronwall. Holland didn't wait for those two guys to put up the great numbers and then sign them long-term. Instead, he evaluated them, determined that they would continue to progress, and offered them longer deals worth a little more money than their history suggested they were worth at the time. Was Kronwall a $3 mil defenceman this time last year? No. But he is now, and that deal of his looks like a steal for the next 3 years. Is Fillpula a $3 mil centre right now? Hell no. But I'm quite sure he will be before the end of this year or the next, and once again Detroit will have another deal on their hands that looks like a fantastic steal for another 3-4 years.

If there's one knock on Murray, it's that he's too shrewd, too stingy with his young players. Signing a young guy on a long-term contract for slightly more than what he's worth at the time, a year or two before he hits his stride, can be a really great move. Vermette at $3-3.5 mil / 5 yrs wouldn't have looked quite as good as $2.76 mil does right now, but in a year or two we would have been laughing. We're gonig to find out in a few years, too, if the same could be said about Meszaros. I worry that, by saving ourselves a few $100,000s here and there in the short term, we're sacrificing our best youth in the long run. Better to have your most talented youth locked up for years rather than spend that money on a renter.

It's certainly a factor to contemplate as we assess Murray's skills as a GM.

In regards to the bolded sentence, I suppose it really depends on whow woul you rather keep: most talented or best players? Daigle was talented; so was Yashin and Havlat and Hossa. Redden, Chara and Meszaros as well. With the exception of Daigle that simply lost all interest in hockey (it seems) the others all have shown (whether explicitly or implicitly) that their choice was influenced more by money than other parameters.

Sure, I would have preferred to keep Meszaros as a committed young player, bent on improving himself and, by extension, his team. If he were that type of player I would pay him what he deserves and not worry too much about an extra $500K. But, clearly, he was not that kind of player.

I said in another post/thread that the reason Murray did not give him $4M was that he simply did not think he was worth that much. I'm actually surprised that he admitted offering him $3.5M, but that might have been because of some pressure (e.g. Melnyk?) But just like Kean-Luc Picard in First Contact, $3.5M may have been "This far and no further" for Murray.

One problem I see is with the details of the cap situation. First, I think they need to (really need to) drop the max percentage of the cap that a single player can earn, from 20% to 15%, if not lower. To compensate for that (in terms of real money earned by the players) raise the cap ceiling. And to offset that, drop the cap floor.

Sure, you would have a greater disparity between the haves and have-nots, but as the Rangers and Sabres of a few years ago showed us, a huge payroll does not guarantee success, just as a small one does not guarantee failure.

Dropping the floor would allow some teams with a legitimate need to control their spending, to be able to get players who are really worth their cap hit (as opposed to trading aging veterans whose cap hit has more to do with front-end-loading than it does with their current performance). The teams that used to overspend are still overspending (look at the payroll, not the cap hit). Certainly not as much as before. but it's still there.

By widening that floor-to-ceiling gap they could drop the salary max as a percentage of total cap, allowing a team to hold on to more than just 2-3 superstars.

I like what Murray has done so far to date with his signings. Vermette has shown a lot of skill and will continue to grow to be a very good player. He may make 5 million at some point.

I present this question to everyone. I do believe that the CBA expires in about 3 years (after 2010/2011 season). If Murray signed Vermette to a long term deal how would that affect the team and all the other long term contracts we have when the CBA expires. What will happen to all those teams that have signed players to long term expensive contracts. With the way things have gone with salaries I really do believe that something has to happen to stop these inflated contracts and hopefully its not another lock out. I like Vermettes contract because of the flexibility it provides us know while giving us the opportunity to gain further assets in a trade in a years time.

Phoenix30 wrote:I like what Murray has done so far to date with his signings. Vermette has shown a lot of skill and will continue to grow to be a very good player. He may make 5 million at some point.

I present this question to everyone. I do believe that the CBA expires in about 3 years (after 2010/2011 season). If Murray signed Vermette to a long term deal how would that affect the team and all the other long term contracts we have when the CBA expires. What will happen to all those teams that have signed players to long term expensive contracts. With the way things have gone with salaries I really do believe that something has to happen to stop these inflated contracts and hopefully its not another lock out. I like Vermettes contract because of the flexibility it provides us know while giving us the opportunity to gain further assets in a trade in a years time.

I don't believe the CBA expiring has any effect on contracts other than any provisions they put in it that directly affect or relate to player contracts. Also, I'm fairly certain, if another lock-out were to occur, players' contracts would still be in effect. So anyone who's contract was expiring the year of the lockout, if the lockout ended that year, their contract would expire as well.

PKC wrote:

Phoenix30 wrote:I like what Murray has done so far to date with his signings. Vermette has shown a lot of skill and will continue to grow to be a very good player. He may make 5 million at some point.

I present this question to everyone. I do believe that the CBA expires in about 3 years (after 2010/2011 season). If Murray signed Vermette to a long term deal how would that affect the team and all the other long term contracts we have when the CBA expires. What will happen to all those teams that have signed players to long term expensive contracts. With the way things have gone with salaries I really do believe that something has to happen to stop these inflated contracts and hopefully its not another lock out. I like Vermettes contract because of the flexibility it provides us know while giving us the opportunity to gain further assets in a trade in a years time.

I don't believe the CBA expiring has any effect on contracts other than any provisions they put in it that directly affect or relate to player contracts. Also, I'm fairly certain, if another lock-out were to occur, players' contracts would still be in effect. So anyone who's contract was expiring the year of the lockout, if the lockout ended that year, their contract would expire as well.

My concern would be more along the lines of having to many large large contracts to carry over into a new CBA, and who knows what the guidelines would be from a salary structure. At the moment the Sens have Spezza, Heater, Fish, and Alfie carrying large contracts into an expired CBA. If you add any more long term contracts at the forward ranks and the salary structure changed and was dropped in a new CBA then you would have very little wiggle room. without giving up your core players. I suspect that we may not see another large long term contract offered that goes beyond the expired CBA unless its for a young quality D-man or goalie to build the team around.