Confirmed with Link: Ferland 3.5M, 2 years - Avoids arbitration

DCDM

Da Rink Cats
Mar 24, 2008
38,094
6,426
Calgary
I read that as 3.5 AAV and I almost had a heart attack. But 1.75 is fantastic

Yeah, this is what I thought too and then I came into the thread seeing people happy about it. Felt like I missed something. :laugh:

Great deal for a great player.
 

Tkachuk Norris

Registered User
Jun 22, 2012
15,602
6,639
Should have given him term :(

Owell. Love this guy. Hopefully he consistently plays like a top six winger.
 

Bounces R Way

Registered User
Nov 18, 2013
33,503
52,709
Weegartown
Good AAV and the right term IMO. As tempting as it would be to try and lock a player like Ferland up for longer, he's still a complimentary player on this team. 2 years is longer than it sounds.

If he solidifies himself as a top 6, you can give him a bigger contract when it's up. If his play plateaus at it's current level, it's still pretty good value.
 

Lunatik

Normal is an illusion.
Oct 12, 2012
56,182
8,337
Padded Room
Good AAV and the right term IMO. As tempting as it would be to try and lock a player like Ferland up for longer, he's still a complimentary player on this team. 2 years is longer than it sounds.

If he solidifies himself as a top 6, you can give him a bigger contract when it's up. If his play plateaus at it's current level, it's still pretty good value.
you nailed it
 

Janks

Pope Janks
Jan 7, 2010
7,728
1,700
Calgary
Good AAV and the right term IMO. As tempting as it would be to try and lock a player like Ferland up for longer, he's still a complimentary player on this team. 2 years is longer than it sounds.

If he solidifies himself as a top 6, you can give him a bigger contract when it's up. If his play plateaus at it's current level, it's still pretty good value.

Agreed on this completely. He's signed to good value right now; and the term is manageable. We don't want an anchor contract down the road (not likely, but still possible).
 

GAMO1992

#ThankYouIggy
Dec 9, 2011
7,943
572
Ontario, Canada
Good AAV and the right term IMO. As tempting as it would be to try and lock a player like Ferland up for longer, he's still a complimentary player on this team. 2 years is longer than it sounds.

If he solidifies himself as a top 6, you can give him a bigger contract when it's up. If his play plateaus at it's current level, it's still pretty good value.

100% agreed. best deal we could have given him
 

StreakingRed

....................
Jan 4, 2007
12,062
47
Calgary, Alberta
Good AAV and the right term IMO. As tempting as it would be to try and lock a player like Ferland up for longer, he's still a complimentary player on this team. 2 years is longer than it sounds.

If he solidifies himself as a top 6, you can give him a bigger contract when it's up. If his play plateaus at it's current level, it's still pretty good value.



Couldn't agree more.
 

Snazu

I contribute nothing
Feb 2, 2007
632
128
Depending on what Bennett signs for, this will leave quite a bit of wiggle room to add a +/- $3mill contract in quite easily and still fill out our whole lineup. I like this signing quite a bit. Low risk, potentially medium to high reward
 

Johnny Hoxville

The Return of a Legend
Jul 15, 2006
37,549
9,343
Calgary
Honestly though, I probably wouldn't deal Ferland for Lucic. Not at this point in their careers and considering what they make.
 

Volica

Papa Shango
May 15, 2012
21,391
11,074
Aside from the many games he played there last season too?

The "we'll see" means that it's not in stone either.

They're going to give him a chance up there. I hope he sticks because he's got the skill package to put it together and be a really effective piece.

I like the sound of him having an awesome summer. :yo:
 

InfinityIggy

Zagidulin's Dad
Jan 30, 2011
36,068
12,852
59.6097709,16.5425901
He is going to play on the top line with JG and Monahan because he is the best option we have. Not because he is a 'top 6' player. He could get there though if he has a strong season.

Personally I still see him as a 3rd line guy, who has a lot of facets to his game.
 

Skobel24

#Ignited
May 23, 2008
16,789
920
Winnipeg
He is going to play on the top line with JG and Monahan because he is the best option we have. Not because he is a 'top 6' player. He could get there though if he has a strong season.

Personally I still see him as a 3rd line guy, who has a lot of facets to his game.

Yup. 15 goal/15 assist guy. Gritty 3rd line winger who can contribute a bit offensively. Playing on the top line, he could probably get 20/20.
 

Volica

Papa Shango
May 15, 2012
21,391
11,074
Yup. 15 goal/15 assist guy. Gritty 3rd line winger who can contribute a bit offensively. Playing on the top line, he could probably get 20/20.

Strikes me as a guy who could play up the lineup.
Think of a guy like Conroy. Was he a 1st line C? No; but he had a connection with Iggy and got that role a lot. Was he more of a 3C for most teams? Yes, of course.

Same as Ferland. Really solid bottom 6 winger with skill, speed and physicality, but can play with the really good players. If this kid hits 20/20 or 25 goals; I really wouldn't be overly surprised.
 

Tkachuk Norris

Registered User
Jun 22, 2012
15,602
6,639
I think you guys are underselling him. His points were basically all 5 on 5 and that was with scrubs and minimal time on the ice.
 

Lunatik

Normal is an illusion.
Oct 12, 2012
56,182
8,337
Padded Room
I think you guys are underselling him. His points were basically all 5 on 5 and that was with scrubs and minimal time on the ice.
most of his points were on the top line (the majority of which were in a 9-10 game stretch), he scored very little with "scrubs". In fact, he scored very little at all outside his initial stretch with the top line. Expecting a player to do what they have done previously is not underselling him, it's simply not projecting for a large increase which rarely happens.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->