Player Discussion: Adam Pelech

[Kevin27NYI]

Pelech is 26 and an established shut down defensemen in the prime of his career, I'm not sure I see the comp. If Pelech signs a deal longer than 1 year, then it's basically a UFA deal anyway.

It’s not basically, outside of an offer sheet which is incredibly rare, you’re not competing against other teams

 

[IslesRock4]

It’s hard finding an exact comp for Pelech. His agent is doing his job, but Trouba is not a comp. Closest comp is Carlo but Pelech is better and doesn’t have quite the injury history. I still agree with $5m, maybe up to $5.5m as the tops for Adam.

Side note, the Trouba contract is absolutely brutal. Thanks NYR.

 

[seabass45]

The high I would go with him is 5 x 8 years. 5.5 for 6 years. Pelech doesn't have the offensive stats to support 7M. I have to wonder if Staple is right here? Or is the Agent being an agent if that is where he heard this from. Lou would never leak any negotiations we know this.

I don’t see any reason why Staple would be wrong on this one, 7 mil is a fair ask.

 

[Duanesutter12]

The problem with our last two successful runs is that Pelech got a lot of pub. Can't see him getting under $6M.

 

[seabass45]

It’s hard finding an exact comp for Pelech. His agent is doing his job, but Trouba is not a comp. Closest comp is Carlo but Pelech is better and doesn’t have quite the injury history. I still agree with $5m, maybe up to $5.5m as the tops for Adam.

Side note, the Trouba contract is absolutely brutal. Thanks NYR.

Slavin is the comparison I keep seeing.

 

[Wanderson]

I’d like to see him sign a similar contract to Pulock.

 

[Glorydays22]

Islanders are in problem. 7M is a ridiculous asking price.....I know it's a negotiation tactic but that means he's looking to really get 6M which is way too high for a Defenseman who's high point total is 21 for a single year. He should not get more than 5M. To me, he should get exactly the same amount as Pullock but more years, say 6-7 (7 years-5M=35M).....If this becomes an issue and he and his agent won't more from that 7M-6.5M number. I hate to say it, you have to think about moving him.

 

[YearlyLottery]

I am still stunned people don't think he gets more than $5.5. I think Pelech makes in the 6-6.5 area to be honest. Maybe I am crazy.

 

[YearlyLottery]

Islanders are in problem. 7M is a ridiculous asking price.....I know it's a negotiation tactic but that means he's looking to really get 6M which is way too high for a Defenseman who's high point total is 21 for a single year. He should not get more than 5M. To me, he should get exactly the same amount as Pullock but more years, say 6-7 (7 years-5M=35M).....If this becomes an issue and he and his agent won't more from that 7M-6.5M number. I hate to say it, you have to think about moving him.

I just do not think that $6 million is way too high for Pelech. He is a top pairing defenseman who completely shuts down the opposition. In this league I think we are underestimating just how good Pelech is.

 

[PK Cronin]

I am still stunned people don't think he gets more than $5.5. I think Pelech makes in the 6-6.5 area to be honest. Maybe I am crazy.

The $7M ask was for a 7 or 8 year deal, which makes more sense. If he goes shorter in length I don't think he'll get as much. The problem is paying him that much now doesn't really fit into the cap plans for the season.

 

[CupHolders]

Speaking of Trouba as a comparable, there might be another Ranger who serves as a better comparable… Marc Staal. Similar players at the time of the deal.

Signed his deal in 2015, 6 years at 5.7m.

This was six years ago, but also pre flat cap. It was also entirely UFA years that were bought.

 

[Islander Prophet]

Arbitrations tend to edge on the lower end of the spectrum of what is fair value so I honestly doubt he gets as much as he deserves if it goes there (which is good for us)

 

[The Real JT]

I am still stunned people don't think he gets more than $5.5. I think Pelech makes in the 6-6.5 area to be honest. Maybe I am crazy.

If the Isles want a long term deal using some of his UFA years I agree he gets $6+M.

Shorter deal and he comes in at $5+M.

 

[Quickdraw2828]

The $7M ask was for a 7 or 8 year deal, which makes more sense. If he goes shorter in length I don't think he'll get as much. The problem is paying him that much now doesn't really fit into the cap plans for the season.

Someone would pay seven and I think he's worth it. Right now the main priorities are Pelech and Sorokin. We can't lose either.

 

[PK Cronin]

Someone would pay seven and I think he's worth it. Right now the main priorities are Pelech and Sorokin. We can't lose either.

Pelech can't go anywhere, he's an RFA so what others might pay is irrelevant unless they plan on offer sheeting him (they won't).

 

[Seph]

I just do not think that $6 million is way too high for Pelech. He is a top pairing defenseman who completely shuts down the opposition. In this league I think we are underestimating just how good Pelech is.

I don't see the issue with 6m/year either. We all agree he is our best defenseman, I don't understand the reticence on paying him like it.

 

[Quickdraw2828]

Someone would pay seven and I think he's worth it. Right now the main priorities are Pelech and Sorokin. We can't lose either.

Why should he make the same as Pulock.? If there was a poll asking if we had to lose Pullock or Pelech who would you choose, I'd think the overwhelming majority would choose to lose Pullock.

 

[PK Cronin]

Why should he make the same as Pulock.? If there was a poll asking if we had to lose Pullock or Pelech who would you choose, I'd think the overwhelming majority would choose to lose Pullock.

Because offensive production is the biggest statistical measurement used to determine salary, Pelech doesn't have good offensive numbers and so he shouldn't be paid like he does.

 

[buud]

Why should he make the same as Pulock.? If there was a poll asking if we had to lose Pullock or Pelech who would you choose, I'd think the overwhelming majority would choose to lose Pulock.

not me.

i think that Pulock came into his own this year, with respect to his defensive play. not on par with Pelech, but then again, Pelech is not on par with Pulock, offensively.

i think their individual values are very close. remember, Pulock plays both PK and PP.

 

[Seph]

Because offensive production is the biggest statistical measurement used to determine salary, Pelech doesn't have good offensive numbers and so he shouldn't be paid like he does.

That is true when it comes to fan evaluations, but it hasn't been the only metric by GMs for quite some time now. Most GMs recognize that a player's value to the team is more than just offensive numbers.

 

[beach]

Pelech is a much better defender than Pulock, although Pulock has improved significantly. The number of hairy situations that Pelech uses his smarts, instinct and creativity to wriggle out of far surpasses anything Pulock would be able to do.

 

[dlawong]

I would do $6M and hopefully able to retain him for 6 years +.

Seems like offensive dman either move on as UFA chasing for big money or get traded more often than stay home defensive d. Offensive dman's game also seem to deteriorate much faster may be due to the extra ice time/skating style (the more you push off on your skate the more stress you put on your knees). The faster you skate the more likely you can also get rocked by a big impact hits in open ice). They are also ranked higher on the must hit list by opposing team in playoff.

Lou will need to figure out how the money will be spread between Pelech, Pulock and Dobson over the next 3 years. One of them probably has to be underpaid slightly in order to keep all 3. He has to decide who is more valuable to the team and easier to be resigned.

 

[SDIsles34]

Because offensive production is the biggest statistical measurement used to determine salary, Pelech doesn't have good offensive numbers and so he shouldn't be paid like he does.

I couldn't disagree more with this statement.

 

[PK Cronin]

That is true when it comes to fan evaluations, but it hasn't been the only metric by GMs for quite some time now. Most GMs recognize that a player's value to the team is more than just offensive numbers.

Look at RFAs and then tell me what the biggest factor in their paycheck is based on. Spoiler alert, it's their offensive production.

I couldn't disagree more with this statement.

Show me an RFA defender who had low offensive output and was rewarded with a big salary.

 

[Seph]

Look at RFAs and then tell me what the biggest factor in their paycheck is based on. Spoiler alert, it's their offensive production.

It's certainly a major factor, as offense also provides a lot of value to the team, and it is easy to quantify. But when you look at most top teams, you see guys getting paid for more than just their offensive numbers. Because if you aren't willing to pay people to do something, you tend to end up with fewer guys who will do it. Toronto is a pretty good example of what happens when you are only willing to pay guys based on offensive stats.

And Lou has always believed in paying guys based on their value to the team, not on their stats or their supposed role, so he's another good example of what I'm talking about, and makes me not too worried he won't value Pelech appropriately. Because I'll be honest, if I was Pelech and you told me you were only going to pay me based on my offensive stats, I would file for arbitration and walk as a UFA as soon as possible to find a team that appreciates defensive players.