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

[JimEIV]

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?

The timing was just strange...I imagine that this might have been in the works since the beginning of the season and since Jack wasn't playing they could use the time to work on a deal that might be otherwise a distraction is he was playing?

But still, with Jack's first two seasons being shortened by the pandemic coupled with his lackluster performance, If I were a manager I would have wanted to see every single potential game before I made a long-term commitment.

 

[ninetyeight]

If a 20 year old, 1oa selection, all time usdp leader puts up a ppg season, I really doubt 8m is gonna be enough.

Saying that you'd be just a little bit more comfortable if Jack goes ppg this season is crazy. How many 20 year olds have been ppg in this league in recent years?

 

[Stephen Gionta]

The timing was just strange...I imagine that this might have been in the works since the beginning of the season and since Jack wasn't playing they could use the time to work on a deal that might be otherwise a distraction is he was playing?

But still, with Jack's first two seasons being shortened by the pandemic coupled with his lackluster performance, If I were a manager I would have wanted to see every single potential game before I made a long-term commitment.

I think at this point we have all seen enough of Jack Hughes to know that he is going to be worth every penny of this contract extension. Most likely worth well over it.

 

[Triumph]

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?

The funniest part of all of this stuff is that the people who are the most rah-rah Lou people on the board are now obsessed with points, as if the Devils didn't win 3 Stanley Cups with nobody in the top 10 in points. Now that that's all over and done with, it's just all about tallying offense and seeing who is best with that method. Jack Hughes was a + player on a dismal Devils team last year. The Devils, despite Jack's poor shooting and the subpar goaltending behind him, still put up more goals than the opposition 5v5. And Hughes was only 19 when that happened. We can all see the electric skills he has, what player has had these skills and not become a star? It's just a good bet.

I don't like people talking about how 'if these contracts don't work out, the Devils will just rebuild again'. With Nico and Jack as they've been this is basically a .500 team moving forward. There's 4 1st round picks who aren't on the NHL team right now. There's no coming rebuild on the horizon. The Devils are here and they're only going to get better.

 

[JimEIV]

If a 20 year old, 1oa selection, all time usdp leader puts up a ppg season, I really doubt 8m is gonna be enough.

Saying that you'd be just a little bit more comfortable if Jack goes ppg this season is crazy. How many 20 year olds have been ppg in this league in recent years?

It would be a partial ppg, right? Not a full season ppg... He's already missed 20% of the season so were are talking 62 games maximum...And if you go back a few pages what I said was if he scored 45 points in his remaining 62 (.725) that would make me much more comfortable - @My3Sons brought up the PPG and that was my response to his post.

 

[JimEIV]

I think at this point we have all seen enough of Jack Hughes to know that he is going to be worth every penny of this contract extension. Most likely worth well over it.

I guess it depends the expectations.

Edit:
But I suspect everyone here will just redefine the expectations as deemed necessary...

Like has already been done with Nico's deal....We went from waiting for the McKinnon breakout, to a 70 points regularly #1 center, to 60 point regularly#2 center, to a good two way 50 point regularly that helps a team win...He's now on 8 goal pace for the year an you're an idiot if you bring that up because you don't understand High danger scoring chances and xGF. It's a strange world we live in.

 

[Buck Dancer]

The funniest part of all of this stuff is that the people who are the most rah-rah Lou people on the board are now obsessed with points, as if the Devils didn't win 3 Stanley Cups with nobody in the top 10 in points. Now that that's all over and done with, it's just all about tallying offense and seeing who is best with that method. Jack Hughes was a + player on a dismal Devils team last year. The Devils, despite Jack's poor shooting and the subpar goaltending behind him, still put up more goals than the opposition 5v5. And Hughes was only 19 when that happened. We can all see the electric skills he has, what player has had these skills and not become a star? It's just a good bet.

I don't like people talking about how 'if these contracts don't work out, the Devils will just rebuild again'. With Nico and Jack as they've been this is basically a .500 team moving forward. There's 4 1st round picks who aren't on the NHL team right now. There's no coming rebuild on the horizon. The Devils are here and they're only going to get better.

There is a difference between analyzing our past teams under Lou and our current situation. For starters, we had a HOF'er between the pipes to save our butts when things weren't going our way. We also built a team up front that was well balanced and the need to get a true "superstar" wasn't necessary. Fast forward to today and we kind of have to rely on Nico and Jack because the depth isn't there and the balance isn't either. We are getting there in terms of talent and I don't have to tell you that I would like for us to add more balance to our top #9 and that will take a couple of years to do that.

I just think this extension could've waited during the offseason, so we can get a clearer picture of what we really have in Jack Hughes. What it does as well is set the bar for future contracts, so we absolutely have to have these two guys live up to their deal because if for whatever reason, Dawson Mercer or even Jesper Bratt turn out to be the best players out of the bunch, they'll be asking upwards of 9M$. It's nothing major but I just didn't see the rush in doing this in December when it could've been done in July since the framework of the contract looked like it was definitly there.

 

[Oneiro]

No one's redefining expectations. It's simply that they understand context and can wait for more than five minutes to see something play out before whining.

Nico is on game 250. Jack is on game 120. One is barely past your self-stated threshold for knowing what kind of player he will be - and that's if I even entertain the silliness of using a pandemic year and a shortened season with management and coaching turnover as an accurate read on anything. And by the way, I've made my disappointment in Nico clear on many occasions.

 

[ninetyeight]

It would be a partial ppg, right? Not a full season ppg... He's already missed 20% of the season so were are talking 62 games maximum...And if you go back a few pages what I said was if he scored 45 points in his remaining 62 (.725) that would make me much more comfortable - @My3Sons brought up the PPG and that was my response to his post.

Sure, but 60 in 60 would be almost as impressive. Sorry I missed the 0.725ppg part, I think that's definitely possible if he finds chemistry with someone (Sharangovich, Holtz..), but we'll see.

Like has already been done with Nico's deal....We went from waiting for the McKinnon breakout, to a 70 points regularly #1 center, to 60 point regularly#2 center, to a good two way 50 point regularly that helps a team win...

I don't think you'll find many that are happy with Nico scoring 50 or less, I'm sure most people hoped he'd become at least a 60-70ppg with selke votes. But it is what it is, I think it's mostly just acceptance of the situation and though disappointing he's still a good and valuable player.

 

[Triumph]

There is a difference between analyzing our past teams under Lou and our current situation. For starters, we had a HOF'er between the pipes to save our butts when things weren't going our way. We also built a team up front that was well balanced and the need to get a true "superstar" wasn't necessary. Fast forward to today and we kind of have to rely on Nico and Jack because the depth isn't there and the balance isn't either. We are getting there in terms of talent and I don't have to tell you that I would like for us to add more balance to our top #9 and that will take a couple of years to do that.

The balance is here right now, what you want is better players, and that's fine, but the Devils can have a balanced top 9 once they move Jack Hughes to center. I really hate words like balance because they obfuscate rather than explain. The Devils of those years had a lot of forward depth but they typically had a mediocre to poor power play that also got fewer opportunities than other teams. That's likely what you'd have with this Devils lineup this season - a team that scores middle of the pack, mediocre/bad on PP, better at ES, nobody above 65 points, but several players above 40 and a middle of the pack team in total scoring. Obviously this season's Devils don't have that defense and they're nowhere close to as good as those teams.

I just think this extension could've waited during the offseason, so we can get a clearer picture of what we really have in Jack Hughes. What it does as well is set the bar for future contracts, so we absolutely have to have these two guys live up to their deal because if for whatever reason, Dawson Mercer or even Jesper Bratt turn out to be the best players out of the bunch, they'll be asking upwards of 9M$. It's nothing major but I just didn't see the rush in doing this in December when it could've been done in July since the framework of the contract looked like it was definitly there.

Just don't even mention Jesper Bratt. If Mercer's better then maybe he gets a deal for similar AAV but fewer years. That's fine. It's fine to have lots of great players. I agree that the biggest downside of this move are the egos of the other people in the locker room, but I suspect they more than anyone know what a special player Hughes is going to be.

 

[Buck Dancer]

The balance is here right now, what you want is better players, and that's fine, but the Devils can have a balanced top 9 once they move Jack Hughes to center. I really hate words like balance because they obfuscate rather than explain. The Devils of those years had a lot of forward depth but they typically had a mediocre to poor power play that also got fewer opportunities than other teams. That's likely what you'd have with this Devils lineup this season - a team that scores middle of the pack, mediocre/bad on PP, better at ES, nobody above 65 points, but several players above 40 and a middle of the pack team in total scoring. Obviously this season's Devils don't have that defense and they're nowhere close to as good as those teams. Just don't even mention Jesper Bratt. If Mercer's better then maybe he gets a deal for similar AAV but fewer years. That's fine. It's fine to have lots of great players. I agree that the biggest downside of this move are the egos of the other people in the locker room, but I suspect they more than anyone know what a special player Hughes is going to be.

To me, the meaning of having a balanced hockey team is that you can play whichever type of game you need to get the win. At the moment, we're a very quick team but extremely soft and easy to push over when playing against a team that decides to out physical us or simply have us play on the perimeter. We have very little net front presence forwards to screen goalies or jam in loose pucks around the crease and that's also an element that would open up some space on the PP. We have a couple of guys who aren't afraid to get their noses dirty but we need at least two more wingers to have that balance IMO. We don't necessarily need a hulking guy like Tom Wilson per say but someone that will have opposing defenders on their toes when we'll have to play a dump and chase game, when the neutral zone will get clogged up, since that's where we generate most of our offense.

 

[Guttersniped]

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.

Jack's also making less and gave up an extra UFA year, it's a worse deal than Brady's. I'm not really interested in endless internet debating, I consider it a pretty worthless pursuit. It involves people cheapening their own argument and devaluing the argument of others while putting aside what's most important, intellectual honesty and actual conversation. I literally said other contracts on that lists are clearly better because of those other player's history of production. There's definite risk here because he hasn't produced yet, no one is denying that.

LeBrun reported this;

Obviously, Fitzgerald wasn’t going to get into the specifics of the negotiation, but I believe the Devils started things closer to $7.25 million a year (which is what Hischier makes), while Brisson and his CAA team were north of $8 million a year; eventually the two sides found that $8 million number to seal the deal.

That meant the team was pitching something lower than Suzuki and Svechnikov deals. The Svechnikov deal is f***ing sweet, I was shocked he signed for so low, that is a very team friendly deal. This deal feels about market value if you wanted Hughes signed long term now (I wasn't shocked by this number), it would have been nice if it was down little lower with those two deals but I can see how Brisson squeezed out 8M. (And, please, I beg of you, don't bother telling me how much more these two players previously scored than Hughes, we all know.)

I get why Fitz, said "f*** it, let's go a little higher and sign him long term". There's a theory that star contracts are going to make another sizable jump when the cap makes it next jump, that's why teams are signing young stars to long term deals despite the flat cap constraints. Plus the owners have the nuclear options in 2025-26 when the CBA ends if things go the other way. I don't think we'll be desperate for cap space in the first few years and then cap goes up. A bridge wouldn't have been that much cheaper and we would gain cap space we don't really need in the short term (a major reason for many bridge deals). I don't have a future point predictions, I assume he will do better then you're gloomily suggesting.

Honestly I've been under a lot of stress in the last weeks and the holidays are typically stressful and my tone was veering towards excess testiness and snideness yesterday. You don't like Hughes, think he he has zero hockey sense and will never produce much, plus he crushed your 1oA dreams. I get it. Expressing that over and over is a bit much for me but we all have our takes and annoyances. This contract doesn't start until next year though and it's 8 years long. He doesn't have to earn it immediately.

 

[JimEIV]

One is barely past your self-stated threshold for knowing what kind of player he will be

I think you are conflating conversations that were specifically related to Defensemen with this statement.

Judging the progress of Dman is not remotely similar to a forward in my opinion.

 

[devilsblood]

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 arc 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

Why would point A include 2 seasons with significantly different results?

Point A should be his rookie year.

Point B should be his 2nd year.

Clear progression. Grouping them together is no way to draw and career arc.

 

[JimEIV]

Why would point A include 2 seasons with significantly different results?

Point A should be his rookie year.

Point B should be his 2nd year.

Clear progression. Grouping them together is no way to draw and career arc.

Well if you're talking about his First contract Point A. Is everything before....so the end of his ELC is the begining.

I see what you are trying to do...but this is a serious question...Do you honestly believe going from 28 point pace to 45 point pace is progression? I mean it's all still crap from someone that supposed to be on a superstar path.

 

[MVP Zacha]

Here is my take on this deal. Jack is an electrifying talent and he showed that he wants to be here in Jersey. I am so happy that he signed here long term and I can only imagine that this shows other players that are coming up to free agency that Jersey may be a destination to really consider.

 

[MadDevil]

Well if you're talking about his First contract Point A. Is everything before....so the end of his ELC is the begining.

I see what you are trying to do...but this is a serious question...Do you honestly believe going from 28 point pace to 45 point pace is progression? I mean it's all still crap from someone that supposed to be on a superstar path.

.34 PPG
.55 PPG
1.00 PPG

Seems like progress to me.

 

[Jersey Fan 12]

Am I the only one who feels like they've seen this before? Young prospect paid more than their production would seem to merit based on "potential"?

 

[My3Sons]

Am I the only one who feels like they've seen this before? Young prospect paid more than their production would seem to merit based on "potential"?

No, of course not. That's the gamble for the small market team. Pay your guys before they decide they want to play in the big markets and hope you are correct. Or go the VAN route and have one of your core guys say they don't want to sign long term because if the team isn't up to their standards they want to leave (somewhat ignoring said player's role in making them better or worse).

 

[MartyOwns]

Am I the only one who feels like they've seen this before? Young prospect paid more than their production would seem to merit based on "potential"?

it’s one of those damned if you do damned if you don’t situations.

 

[NJDevs26]

Am I the only one who feels like they've seen this before? Young prospect paid more than their production would seem to merit based on "potential"?

You’re only about the fourth or fifth already in this thread.

They were backed into a corner with Jack a lot more than with Nico given he had two full seasons with more tangible production than Jack’s first two seasons, partly because of the discombobulated nature of last season.

There’s nothing that could be done about it really, one of the few things I don’t miss about the Lou days is the foot dragging toward extending younger players. It either bites you on the ice when they walk or on the cap when you gotta pay prime FA market value to keep them.

 

[Buck Dancer]

I think we'll definitly have a better understanding of who Jack is at the end of the year. He's 20 years old now and it's time for him to prove to the world what he's capable of. I'm not saying that he has to post 100 pts in order to get some clarification on who he'll be moving forward but we can't have him post up another season of .45 pts either.

Having good wingers wouldn't hurt as well.

 

[tailfins]

You can't overpay for middling talent in a hard cap environment. And, really, term is a bigger issue than actual dollars. At some level, I'd have preferred $10 million a season for 3 years and still have some chance to re-sign him as an RFA.

I'm not clear that anyone has a lock on projecting how potential will pan out.As we see with KK in Carolina - teams can find a way to deal with a short term cap issue. It's the long term contracts that handcuff.

ETA: that said, I do like that Fitz went all in with his bet. If you're going to commit - do it in the most advantageous way possible. If Hughes pans out, this deal will be a home run. I just didn't see the need to push all the chips in right now.

 

[Triumph]

You can't overpay for middling talent in a hard cap environment. And, really, term is a bigger issue than actual dollars. At some level, I'd have preferred $10 million a season for 3 years and still have some chance to re-sign him as an RFA.

At some level? At the level of being a fan of a division rival is about the only level I can think of on which this makes any sense. Hughes's RFA tender in 2025 would come in at $10M in that case, we'd know where inflation stands, we'd know where the league's salary cap is at (has it jumped to $90M after the players repaid the owners and Seattle + new TV money are accounted for?). If Hughes is better than that salary, he will demand more than $10M. It's hard to imagine him signing $8M for 5 more years in that contingency. It's also hard to imagine him having significant trade value given that RFA tender - even if you could take him to team-elected arbitration to knock that down, I don't think it can be knocked down more than a prescribed amount (25%? 10%? Can't remember).

I'm not clear that anyone has a lock on projecting how potential will pan out.As we see with KK in Carolina - teams can find a way to deal with a short term cap issue. It's the long term contracts that handcuff.

I'm not sure what KK has to do with this.

ETA: that said, I do like that Fitz went all in with his bet. If you're going to commit - do it in the most advantageous way possible. If Hughes pans out, this deal will be a home run. I just didn't see the need to push all the chips in right now.

You've just written out a big contradiction here. You recognize that if Hughes becomes the star a lot of people think he will be, this will be a great deal. The only time to sign a deal where there's enough ignorance on either side is right now. Let's say Hughes can't get it together this year and finishes this season like last season. Now there's no way he will take an 8 year deal unless it's this one, and I'm skeptical the Devils would want to offer that now that it's 3 seasons in a row where his point totals have underwhelmed.

I think one thing the deal skeptics don't see is how great it is to have a player signed from age 21 to age 29. Age 29! This is a player's entire prime. It makes 2030 difficult but it sure makes the intervening years easy.

 

[Spirits]

Main board saying we should have bridged him is crazy talk to me.

The main board is brimming with jealousy, pay no mind.