Confirmed with Link: Hughes extension official (8 years, $64 million)

[My3Sons]

Term and the number of UFA years involved are important here. Hughes' is signed for 8 years and gives up 4 UFA years and at that price that's isn't a superstar deal, it's a step down.

I added some players to the list, no one earlier than 2017-18 (so no MacKinnon) and edited out a few older ones. The last part shows the percentage of the cap on the date they signed (from Cap Friendly). For some deals that dropped quickly, such as when the cap jumped from 75m in 2017-18 to 79.5m in 2018-19, but obvious the later deals are stuck in frozen capville.

The global pandemic is, you know, kind of unprecedented and not foreseeable. That's why it's not "analytical" to quote raw point totals and whine like a baby about Nico's contract, it's less sexy because he signed in October 2019 and shit got real different soon after that. The cap should be much higher, not only was there a new national TV deal coming, the cap made that 4.5m jump I mentioned from Vegas' first season, so Seattle coming in was going to do the same thing. Instead the pandemic threw a lot of gasoline in the escrow grease fire.

I still have no real problem with Nico's deal. Yes, I would like more goals and I do expect more. You literally have to ignore how hockey works to undersell the value of centers though, they're incredibly valuable.

I'm actually not counting on Hughes deal being some amazing steal anytime soon but he's being paid as a lower tier star here. I don't care who says "Super Star", he took less money then Brady f***ing Tkackuk, while giving up an extra UFA year. FYI, you can't compare anyone to McDrais, they actually breaks the cap system, the Oilers can't pay them what they're worth under a cap system. (Basketball particularly suffers from this problem where the elite guys are grossly underpaid for production and a large group of vets below them are grossly overpaid.)

Some of these deals below are clearly better, based on production. This is kind of cheap though, if his agent thought he was 90-100 player he wouldn't have let him sign this contact. The length is critical because the predictions I hear is that, assuming we don't fall into a Mad Max style-dystopia, is the cap will go up slightly, or not at all in the very near future, while the escrow mess continues and then it will have a big bounce after. (The CBA end in 2025-26, but that's larger discussion.) 8m will be the new 6.5m soon enough. I don't actually think that highly of Brady Tkachuk and I had no problem with his deal either, except they only got 7 years out of him. I'm also on team @My3Sons here* and question of how fandom is served by gloomy concern trolling of our young players. Talk about wet blankets.

RFAs are doing short three deals or big money deals that are pricey no matter the length. And bridge deals blow. It's not like we need one of the main benefits of a short bridge deal in the next year or two: cap space. It's the same reason I don't understand bemoaning not getting value from Hughes while he was on his ELC in terms of cap or contracts. Of course I would have liked more production, because that's fun and stuff, but not particularly for the contract efficiency of all things, we had plenty of cap space, so it wouldn't have helped us much there. The point is to make him cheaper later. It's not like Lou didn't want to commit to Barzal, he just didn't have the cap space to buy more years.


McDavid makes $12.5/ 8 years (4 UFA years)/ 2018-19/ 16.67% (July 5, 2017)
Matthews makes $11.6/ 5 years (1 UFA year)/ 2019-20/ 14.64% (Feb 5, 2019)
Marner makes $10.9/ 6 years (2 UFA years)/ 2019-20/13.38% (Sept 13, 2019)
Eichel makes $10.0/ 8 years (4 UFA years)/ 2018-19/ 13.33% (Oct 3, 2017)
McAvoy makes $9.5/ 8 years (6 UFA years)/ 2022-23/ 11.66% (Oct 15 2021)
Fox makes $9.5/ 7 years (4 UFA years)/2022-23/ 11.66% (Nov 1 2021)
Rantanen makes $9.25/6 years (2 UFA years)/2019-20/ 11.35% (Sept 28, 2019)
Makar makes $9/ 6 years (1 UFA year)/2021-22/ 11.04% (July 24, 2021)
Kaprizov makes $9/ 5 years (2 UFA years)/ 2021-22/ 11.04% (Sept 21, 2021)
Draisaitl makes $8.5/ 8 years (3 UFA years)/ 2017-18/ 11.33% (August 16, 2017)
Aho makes $8.46/ 5 years (1 UFA year)/ 2019-20/ 10.38% (July 1, 2019)
Heiskanen makes $8.45/ 8 years (4 years)/ 2021-22/ 10.37% (July 17, 2021)
B. Tkachuk makes $8.2/ 7 years (3 years)/ 2021-22/ 10.07% (Oct 14 2021)
Chabot makes $8.0/ 8 years (4 years)/ 2020-21/ 9.82% (Sept 19 2019)
Hughes makes $8/ 8 years (4 years)/2023-24/ 9.82% (Nov 30, 2021)
Kuznetsov makes $7.8/ 8 years (6 UFA years)/ 2017-18/ 10.40% (July 2, 2017)
Q. Hughes makes $7.85/ 6 years (1 UFA year)/ 2021-22/ 9.63% (Oct 1 2021)
Svechnikov makes $7.75/ 8 years (4 UFA years)/2021-22/ 9.51% (Aug 26 2021)
Suzuki makes $7.85/ 8 years (4 UFA years)/ 2022-23/ 9.33% (Oct 12. 2021)
Ekblad makes $7.5/ 8 years (4 UFA years)/2017-18/ 10.27% (July 1 2016)
Pettersson makes $7.35/ 3 years (0 UFA years)/ 2021-22/9.02% (Oct 1 2021)
Hischier makes $7.25/ 7 years (3 UFA years)/2020-21/ 8.90% (Oct 18 2019)
Clayton Keller makes $7.15/ 8 years (4 UFA years)/ 2020-21/8.77% (Sept 4 2019)
Kyle Connor makes $7.14/ 7 years (2 UFA years)/ 2019-20/ 8.76% (Sept 28 2019)
Barzal makes $7/ 3 years (0 UFA years)/2021-22/ 8.59% (Jan 9 2021)
M. Tkachuk makes $7/ 3 years (0 UFA years)/2019-20/ 8.59% (Sept 25 2019)
Pastrnak makes $6.67/ 6 years (2 UFA years)/2017-18/ 8.89% (Sept 14 2017)

*who am I kidding, I'm always on Team @My3Sons

Is my team against the cap or can I swing a nice RFA extension in the offseason?

 

[JimEIV]

I'm actually not counting on Hughes deal being some amazing steal anytime soon but he's being paid as a lower tier star here. I don't care who says "Super Star", he took less money then Brady f***ing Tkackuk, while giving up an extra UFA year.

Brady Tkachuk Finished 5th in Calder voting his rookie year had 45 points in 71 games -- Jack has 55 in 120
Brady Tkachuk Finished his ELC with 60 goals and 125 points....Jack has 55 POINTS
Brady Tkachuk finished his ELC with 125 points in 198 games for .63 PPG - Jack has 55 points in 120 games for .45 PPG

Jack should get less money than Brady f***ing Tkachuk....A lot less f***ing money. Brady had 5 more GOALS than Jack has points when each got their respective deals.

 

[SteveCangialosi123]

Brady Tkachuk Finished 5th in Calder voting his rookie year had 45 points in 71 games -- Jack has 55 in 120
Brady Tkachuk Finished his ELC with 60 goals and 125 points....Jack has 55 POINTS
Brady Tkachuk finished his ELC with 125 points in 198 games for .63 PPG - Jack has 55 points in 120 games for .45 PPG

Jack should get less money than Brady f***ing Tkachuk....A lot less f***ing money. Brady had 5 more GOALS than Jack has points when each got their respective deals.

You can make these useless comparisons all day

 

[JimEIV]

You can make these useless comparisons all day

Have you not made the correlation that each name I used was in response to someone else comparing Hughes contract?

I have not made a single comparision........I have simply added context to the comparisons that have already been made to justify Jack's deal.

The point is there is no comparison. No player has performed as bad as Jack and got a deal remotely similar .

 

[NjDevsRR]

Stop responding to nonsense, it only feeds it.

 

[Eggtimer]

If you go strictly off of what Jack has done up until now , then I can somewhat see an argument that his new contract is too much $$. However you have to have a very negative projection on what Jack is capable of to think he will not eventually earn his 8 mil per.
He has had an unlucky start to his NHL career so looking at his point totals and thats it , is a unfair way to look at his worth and value...

 

[Buck Dancer]

Have you not made the correlation that each name I used was in response to someone else comparing Hughes contract?

I have not made a single comparision........I have simply added context to the comparisons that have already been made to justify Jack's deal.

The point is there is no comparison. No player has performed as bad as Jack and got a deal remotely similar .

The thing is that the majority are seeing his elite skating and dangles, as well as his draft position and they're buying all the hype that is being sold to them from the experts and all those metrics that is advanced stats.

The problem is that all those things that are used to pump his tires are not a direct reflexion of his production and that's where things get a little scary. It's either you have faith in analytics and are convinced he'll be the player he's labeled to be, you're concerned that his point production is alarming for what we've seen of him so far or youre ridding both sides of the fence.

For myself, I'm stuck in the middle because I can't believe he has all those skills and won't be able to get it together but I'm not impressed by his point total so far and the numbers you've pulled are a clear indication that being worried is justified.

 

[Buck Dancer]

Stop responding to nonsense, it only feeds it.

I don't get these kind of posts. If someone is bringing up legit stats/arguments to reflect his poor production, because it is poor production let's not try and deny that, I don't see why someone has to be called out because it's not fitting the mindset of the majority.

 

[NjDevsRR]

I don't get these kind of posts. If someone is bringing up legit stats/arguments to reflect his poor production, because it is poor production let's not try and deny that, I don't see why someone has to be called out because it's not fitting the mindset of the majority.

Lol, the naivety of this post tickles me. We all know his schticks on here, we all know it. The dishonest arguments from him are ad nauseam. Also add in tbe simple fact like how what GM drafted who also dictates what he has to say.

Enough is enough.

 

[Buck Dancer]

Lol, the naivety of this post tickles me. We all know his schticks on here, we all know it. The dishonest arguments from him are ad nauseam. Also add in tbe simple fact like how what GM drafted who also dictates what he has to say.

Enough is enough.

Let me ask you this... are you happy with the production we've been getting with Nico or Jack? Are we getting more from an 18th overall pick this year then we did from both 1st overall picks?

I'm certain that if Jack or Nico were rolling close to a PPG clip, that said poster wouldn't be saying anything but they're giving us some of the worst stats we've seen from player picked at the head of the pack.

He has every right to doubt the contract or this notion that he'll turn out to be PPG player one day.

 

[NjDevsRR]

Let me ask you this... are you happy with the production we've been getting with Nico or Jack? Are we getting more from an 18th overall pick this year then we did from both 1st overall picks?

I'm certain that if Jack or Nico were rolling close to a PPG clip, that said poster wouldn't be saying anything but they're posting up some of the worst stats we've seen from player picked at the head of the pack.

He has every right to doubt the contract or this notion that he'll turn out to be PPG player one day.

I’m not here to debate you on Nico or Jack, that’s you changing the subject.

We all know the vendetta that poster has and will always ignore logic or context for said vendettas. Thats my point. At this rate you may be a burner account for him lmao. Wouldn’t be surprised.

 

[JimEIV]

The thing is that the majority are seeing his elite skating and dangles, as well as his draft position and they're buying all the hype that is being sold to them from the experts and all those metrics that is advanced stats.

The problem is that all those things that are used to pump his tires are not a direct reflexion of his production and that's where things get a little scary. It's either you have faith in analytics and are convinced he'll be the player he's labeled to be, you're concerned that his point production is alarming for what we've seen of him so far or youre ridding both sides of the fence.

For myself, I'm stuck in the middle because I can't believe he has all those skills and won't be able to get it together but I'm not impressed by his point total so far and the numbers you've pulled are a clear indication that being worried is justified.

The thing about that is we have seen players that have been supremely skilled that have tuned to nothing...Who could forget Robbie Shremp? Slava Chistov(2001 #5 overall), Nikita Filatov(2008 #6 overall) Jonathan Drouin(2013 #3 overall) come to mind immediately...but there have been a ton of highly skilled forwards that haven't put it together in the NHL.

I believe this very site had Chistov as the #1 prospect in the league back in 2001-2002.

 

[NjDevsRR]

“I have not made a single comparison..”

*Brings up ROBBIE SCHREMP”

 

[devilsblood]

The thing is that the majority are seeing his elite skating and dangles, as well as his draft position and they're buying all the hype that is being sold to them from the experts and all those metrics that is advanced stats.

The problem is that all those things that are used to pump his tires are not a direct reflexion of his production and that's where things get a little scary. It's either you have faith in analytics and are convinced he'll be the player he's labeled to be, you're concerned that his point production is alarming for what we've seen of him so far or youre ridding both sides of the fence.

For myself, I'm stuck in the middle because I can't believe he has all those skills and won't be able to get it together but I'm not impressed by his point total so far and the numbers you've pulled are a clear indication that being worried is justified.

Hughes does need to produce more, but more then almost any player, I think the advanced stats are blatantly obvious when you watch Hughes play. He always has the puck. Maybe too much as it leaves his linemates out of the play, but I think a guy who has the ability to dominate the puck the way he does, and has all these other very evident skills, will figure out how to get linemates more involved and to put points on the board.

 

[Buck Dancer]

I’m not here to debate you on Nico or Jack, that’s you changing the subject.

We all know the vendetta that poster has and will always ignore logic or context for said vendettas. Thats my point. At this rate you may be a burner account for him lmao. Wouldn’t be surprised.

Choosing not to see his pov, which is that we are getting garbage production from a guy who got rewarded as if he's lighting the league on fire, is your choice and that's fine because everyone is intitled to it's own opinion but to suggest he's out to lunch because analytics make him out to seem like he's the next McDavid, is also flawed.

 

[Buck Dancer]

Hughes does need to produce more, but more then almost any player, I think the advanced stats are blatantly obvious when you watch Hughes play. He always has the puck. Maybe too much as it leaves his linemates out of the play, but I think a guy who has the ability to dominate the puck the way he does, and has all these other very evident skills, will figure out how to get linemates more involved and to put points on the board.

Yeah, that's how I see it as well but I got to say that I would like to see some type of progression, eventually and sooner rather then later.

 

[devilsblood]

Yeah, that's how I see it as well but I got to say that I would like to see some type of progression, eventually and sooner rather then later.

We did see progression year one to year two.

He's played 3 games thus far in year 3.

 

[Triumph]

Let me ask you this... are you happy with the production we've been getting with Nico or Jack? Are we getting more from an 18th overall pick this year then we did from both 1st overall picks?

I'm certain that if Jack or Nico were rolling close to a PPG clip, that said poster wouldn't be saying anything but they're giving us some of the worst stats we've seen from player picked at the head of the pack.

He has every right to doubt the contract or this notion that he'll turn out to be PPG player one day.

Jack is at a PPG clip.

 

[My3Sons]

Choosing not to see his pov, which is that we are getting garbage production from a guy who got rewarded as if he's lighting the league on fire, is your choice and that's fine because everyone is intitled to it's own opinion but to suggest he's out to lunch because analytics make him out to seem like he's the next McDavid, is also flawed.

It's a philosophical issue. Saying that Hughes has not produced enough to earn the deal they gave him - to me - suggests that the contract should pay him for past performance. There are always comments when a guy gets his UFA deal that he is being paid for past performance rather than what he will do. On some level, what Hughes has done to date is irrelevant if you believe he will be the player they are paying him to be. If you see his counting stats to date as indicative of the player he can be in two or three years then sure, it's relevant and for that person a bridge deal would make sense. I think maybe on a better team that would have been considered. For NJ, if Nico and Jack don't achieve something close to their potential the contract likely won't matter. If those two fail the team will have to rebuild a third time and create a new core again which takes time. No question it's a calculated risk but I imagine the team actually thought about it and also has a good idea of what Hughes is capable of. Most small market teams have to roll the dice this way and hope the player lives up to it. Heck, TOR had to do it with Marner and Matthews and I'm still not convinced either will stay with TOR when they hit UFA.

 

[NjDevsRR]

Its just the dishonest tropes by many on here that is beyond annoying.

 

[My3Sons]

Its just the dishonest tropes by many on here that is beyond annoying.

My tropes are all honest. Nonetheless, I am quite beyond annoying.

 

[JimEIV]

to me - suggests that the contract should pay him for past performance.

No not really...Not at all in fact...

How do chart an arch? You have to start at Point A is the answer. Point A. at this moment is 55 points in 120 games. Whether you like that fact or not that is point A. Where a player is today is not where they will be in 8 years but after 200 games, it should be about 180 in Jack's case, the angle of the trajectory is already deeply set.

I would submit to you that there is not a worse Point A. in the league for a forward with an 8 year deal. I would venture to guess that there has never in the history of league been a forward with a worst starting point to get an 8 year deal...Maybe prelockout when checking centers like LaPointe and pretty much Primeau were getting massive contracts...Perhaps?

So it is not about past performance per se, It is about the starting point of the arch and the past value we got out of the ELC .

This is a bad deal. because we got nothing out the ELC and the starting point is so low

 

[My3Sons]

No not really...Not at all in fact...

How do chart an arch? You have to start at Point A is the answer. Point A. at this moment is 55 points in 120 games. Whether you like that fact or not that is point A. Where a player is today is not where they will be in 8 years but after 200 games, it should be about 180 in Jack's case, the angle of the trajectory is already deeply set.

I would submit to you that there is not a worse Point A. in the league for a forward with an 8 year deal. I would venture to guess that there has never in the history of league been a forward with a worst starting point to get an 8 year deal...Maybe prelockout when checking centers like LaPointe and pretty much Primeau were getting massive contracts...Perhaps?

So it is not about past performance per se, It is about the starting point of the arch and the past value we got out of the ELC .

This is a bad deal. because we got nothing out the ELC and the starting point is so low

All I'm saying is that if he lives up to the contract to a reasonable degree it doesn't matter what he did before the contract. You can suggest that his past performance defines his future and therefore the contract, but the future is unwritten. If Jack scored a PPG the rest of the way this season would that justify the contract? If he had scored over a PPG the past two seasons would that have made the contract ok?

 

[JimEIV]

All I'm saying is that if he lives up to the contract to a reasonable degree it doesn't matter what he did before the contract. You can suggest that his past performance defines his future and therefore the contract, but the future is unwritten. If Jack scored a PPG the rest of the way this season would that justify the contract? If he had scored over a PPG the past two seasons would that have made the contract ok?

If Jack scored a PPG the rest of the way this season it would CERTAINLY make me more comfortable about his deal.

I don't know that it would completely justify it...But it would give me much more to rationalize that the potential could be realized...Right now the track record isn't good though.

 

[Buck Dancer]

If Jack scored a PPG the rest of the way this season it would CERTAINLY make me more comfortable about his deal.

I don't know that it would completely justify it...But it would give me much more to rationalize that the potential could be realized...Right now the track record isn't good though.

Basically this.

I don't know what the rush was to be honest with you. If he set the league on fire this year and because of that, Jack would've asked for 9M$ per, so be it. But as of right now, he got 8X8 with very little to back it up outside of analytics. Having a full season, or close to it, of what is now his 3rd season would've gave us a much better idea of what to expect down the line. I'm just not a fan of giving that type of deal without any justifications outside of "trust me, this will be a steal in the next couple of years".

I mean, there's no way he would've gotten a 10M$ deal at the end of the year, if he would've scored at a PPG clip this year. So is 1M$, give or take, that big a deal when asking him to prove it before getting paid?