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

[HBK27]

What if Mercer turns into a legit top line guy? He might be a rare player to get, but we got him.

What if Bratt(another rare player) turns into Kucherov? Luke, and Shak. Zacha. Nico.

I agree Hughes is a huge part of what we are trying to do, but if he were to flop there would be other ways to go about it. But with this contract we'd be stuck to the flop.

Not that I think he will flop. But we can't say "without Hughes we won't win, so might as well sign him to whatever contract".

I get that - and you don't just sign him to whatever contract. I think the chances of him flopping are rare enough that it's worth taking the risk of signing this long-term deal to have a lower cap hit the supposed upcoming "contender" years in exchange for a higher hit the next 2-3 seasons when the team can more easily absorb it.

In the thread on the main boards, I was looking at how Hughes compares to Draisaitl and his contract, which was also controversial at the time (remember it was a lot rarer to sign guys coming off ELC's to a massive 8-year deal at the time 4 years ago). LD was certainly more proven at the time, but he signed after his 21-year old season at a cap hit that was more than 15% higher in terms of the percentage of the salary cap. He only played 37 games as a teenager in the NHL, putting up 2 goals and 9 points - rates that are significantly lower than either of Hughes' first two seasons as a teenager. Of course, he's taken massive leaps in his game since then while we still have to wait and see on Hughes, but there's certainly a lot of reason for optimism (to go along with some reason for pessimism). I'm going to do my best to sit back and "eNJoy the ride".

 

[MadDevil]

There's definitely some risk, but it's a risk I'm willing to take. By just about every metric and just watching him play he seems poised for a breakout. Obviously I would like to have seen at least one really productive season first, but a global pandemic and being tossed into the boards awkwardly kind of affected the chances of that. I think in a couple years we'll look at this as an at least fair, if not a steal, of a contract.

 

[Hockey Sports Fan]

i came to the board to see the results of last night’s disaster but now i’m just excited! Exactly the right move to make with Jack.

yes this is me admitting i didn’t even know about the signing last night

 

[Buck Dancer]

I get that - and you don't just sign him to whatever contract. I think the chances of him flopping are rare enough that it's worth taking the risk of signing this long-term deal to have a lower cap hit the supposed upcoming "contender" years in exchange for a higher hit the next 2-3 seasons when the team can more easily absorb it.

In the thread on the main boards, I was looking at how Hughes compares to Draisaitl and his contract, which was also controversial at the time (remember it was a lot rarer to sign guys coming off ELC's to a massive 8-year deal at the time 4 years ago). LD was certainly more proven at the time, but he signed after his 21-year old season at a cap hit that was more than 15% higher in terms of the percentage of the salary cap. He only played 37 games as a teenager in the NHL, putting up 2 goals and 9 points - rates that are significantly lower than either of Hughes' first two seasons as a teenager. Of course, he's taken massive leaps in his game since then while we still have to wait and see on Hughes, but there's certainly a lot of reason for optimism (to go along with some reason for pessimism). I'm going to do my best to sit back and "eNJoy the ride".

This isn't meant to reply to you personnaly but I've seen this comparision before with Zacha and Couturier. It's great that we expect our main guys to bust out and turn into compared stars but I wouldn't hold my breath. I'm not saying Jack Hughes won't be able to turn into the player we want him to be but he has to produce in order to possibly have me think he can be called a star, let alone a superstar.

 

[ninetyeight]

I'm just glad I get to watch this amazing player for another 8 years. So I'm definitely behind this deal. After all it's not my money and if Jack doesn't pan out we'll be right back into rebuilding anyway.

But I completely understand everyone who is against it, majority of people outside the devils fans think it's crazy too. It's all about potential and flashes of greatestness he's displayed. None about the points scored so far.

If they believe Jack will be a ppg+ player you ride or die with it. It's extremely hard to get a competitive team if you don't bank on potential and take risks like this. I guess the injury earned him a little bit of rope this season, but he should still hit at least 50 point pace this year and at least 60+ next year or we can start worrying.

 

[Buck Dancer]

55 / 120 = . 458 * 82 = 37.5 pace = $64 Million?

If Jack scores 45/50 points in his next 62 games this season, I would feel a lot better about this.

But right now?

Honestly doesn't make sense to me. Please don't tell me about what a steal this will be in the future...Jack is already significant behind on his payments where points are concerned...55 points/37 point pace so far on his ELC, that is dog ass shitty... Jack still owes for his lack of production on his ELC. So how the hell is there going to be a "steal" in the future?

Assuming Jack plays the remainder of the games this season he'll finish this year with a career 182 games.

He needs 45 points to get to 100 career points.

100 in 182 is still only .55 ppg/45 point pace but it would be a significant improvement over the ultra-shitty 37 point pace he's currently on. I don't even think 45 point pace justifies his contract but at least it would be a sign of possibilities for the future which we have seen absolutely none of in term of production.

I don't think this was a smart move...when I saw the deal I chuckled because I remembered the 6*8 Parise was supposedly seeking as reported by the Post in 2010 before everything went to hell with the circus sideshow and subsequent league ruling during that summer.

Parise essentially begged for $50 million after he scored 45 goals in 94 points in 2009 and had 4 consecutive 30+ goals seasons. Now we Oprah contracts...you get 50 million and you get 50 million...

I knew there was inflation over the last decade but I didn't know it was this bad.

I just don't know how anyone can not like this post and I would if I could. Gambling on a 64M$ deal over 8 years is massive. We did so with Nico and it's not paying off like we would've hoped. Having some take the same approach with Bratt will have us sit on 3 major contracts to players who haven't proved much as of now and we'd be banking on potential more then anything. That would be around 20M$+ invested in potential.

With that said, I hope we start seeing Jack produce sooner rather then later and yes, he had a great start to the season... against a Hawks team that were complete garbage to start off the year and the Kraken, an expantion team who isn't Vegas.

 

[HBK27]

This isn't meant to reply to you personnaly but I've seen this comparision before with Zacha and Couturier. It's great that we expect our main guys to bust out and turn into compared stars but I wouldn't hold my breath. I'm not saying Jack Hughes won't be able to turn into the player we want him to be but he has to produce in order to possibly have me think he can be called a star, let alone a superstar.

I've seen the Zacha and Couturier comparison as well, which I think is much more fair - both players are the same size and were picked around the same spot in the draft. Couturier is a best-case example of a player breaking out after being merely OK early in his career, as he never put up more than 15 goals in a season before exploding for 31 his D+7 season and 33 the season after. Zacha topped out at 13 goals his first 4 years in the league before scoring at a 28-goal pace last year and is currently at a 33-goal pace this season (his D+7 season).

I wasn't trying to compare Hughes' trajectory to Draisaitl, as they are very different players - Draisaitl's contract was just being mentioned in the other thread and I thought it was interesting to see how the two players compared at similar spots on their careers thus far. As "disappointing" as Jack has been, he put up much better numbers than LD did as a 19-year old. Of course, LD also had one of the more spectacular rises in performance after that.

 

[JimEIV]

This isn't meant to reply to you personnaly but I've seen this comparision before with Zacha and Couturier. It's great that we expect our main guys to bust out and turn into compared stars but I wouldn't hold my breath. I'm not saying Jack Hughes won't be able to turn into the player we want him to be but he has to produce in order to possibly have me think he can be called a star, let alone a superstar.

I think the "Superstar" ship has already sailed personally...

terms like "Superstar" are so damn ambiguous, I think that they are made for the sole purpose of debate. To me a Superstar is a regular top 10/20 player in the league who is legitimately in the discussion for the best in the league (Norris/Hart /Art Ross/Vezina)...That is a superstar to me. With that Martin Brodeur is the only thing remotely close to a Superstar this organization has ever seen.

Has there ever been a "superstar" forward that started the first 200 games of their career at a 1/2 per game? Jack is not even at a half a point per game at 120 played... I haven't looked for examples but I highly doubt that scenario has ever existed. That is why I think that ship has sailed.

 

[My3Sons]

Yes, I agree. Holtz may become a star or bust altogether, it shouldn't affect perception of Hughes at all. If Hughes becomes a franchise C, then it's not unreasonable to expect him to carry mediocre wingers a'la Kuokkanen or Sharangovich.

Main boards rip apart this deal, I think it's risky but this risk isn't that huge. Avoiding bridge deals means that they will pay more in the next years but will pay less in the prime years of Nico and Jack.

Main boards consist of 31 fan bases that wish ill on the team and player that is being discussed. I take anything said there with a grain of salt. Hughes is also polarizing to a fair number of main boards posters and that always plays a role in it. On the main boards there is no good contract except MacKinnon.

 

[AfroThunder396]

I think the "Superstar" ship has already sailed personally...

terms like "Superstar" are so damn ambiguous, I think that they are made for the sole purpose of debate. To me a Superstar is a regular top 10/20 player in the league who is legitimately in the discussion for the best in the league (Norris/Hart /Art Ross/Vezina)...That is a superstar to me. With that Martin Brodeur is the only thing remotely close to a Superstar this organization has ever seen.

Has there ever been a "superstar" forward that started the first 200 games of their career at a 1/2 per game? Jack is not even at a half a point per game at 120 played... I haven't looked for examples but I highly doubt that scenario has ever existed. That is why I think that ship has sailed.

Do you consider Joe Thornton a super star? At the end of his 3rd season he had 108 points in his first 217 career games, just a tick under 0.5 P/G.

 

[WetWholphin]

this contract is obviously a gamble. fitz acknowledged it and that is okay. jack has underwhelmed so far, this is not a debatable topic. i remember when he was drafted and everybody was pegging him for a clayton kelleresque 60+ point season. i think these projections were OBVIOUSLY a bit too high in hindsight. he was coming out of the USHL, first ever player to make the jump straight to NHL from USHL, and he was extremely physically underdeveloped. he played a very junior style game.

i would be lying if i said that i havent been disappointed with the early returns, however with jack i do believe he will make the contract worth it. in order for this contract to be considered OK jack should become a 20 goal, 60 point center perennially. i think that is a conservative projection for jack. i believe jack will end up a consistent ppg player so i think the deal will end up looking good.

every game he plays, even if in totality its not his best game, he shows me flashes of what could be and that is more than what anybody other than bratt does on a semi consistent-consistent basis.

 

[JimEIV]

Do you consider Joe Thornton a super star? At the end of his 3rd season he had 108 points in his first 217 career games, just a tick under 0.5 P/G.

Thornton is on the cusp...I think an argument can be made either way. As an argument for: He won an Art Ross and had some amazing assist year. But I still think it is borderline? What about you?

EDIT: I change my mind I would give the nod to Thornton as a Superstar. I forgot how good he was.

 

[devilsblood]

I think the "Superstar" ship has already sailed personally...

terms like "Superstar" are so damn ambiguous, I think that they are made for the sole purpose of debate. To me a Superstar is a regular top 10/20 player in the league who is legitimately in the discussion for the best in the league (Norris/Hart /Art Ross/Vezina)...That is a superstar to me. With that Martin Brodeur is the only thing remotely close to a Superstar this organization has ever seen.

Has there ever been a "superstar" forward that started the first 200 games of their career at a 1/2 per game? Jack is not even at a half a point per game at 120 played... I haven't looked for examples but I highly doubt that scenario has ever existed. That is why I think that ship has sailed.

At first I was going to argue against this, but you are right, Hughes is not likely going to be a superstar. McDavid is a superstar. Ovie, Sid.

But Hughes didn't get a superstar contract here. He got a really good player level contract.

 

[TBF1972]

i hope the doom'n'gloomers don't expect him to be suddenly a completely different player, just because he signed a long term contract.

 

[devilsblood]

Thornton is on the cusp...I think an argument can be made either way. As an argument for: He won an Art Ross and had some amazing assist year. But I still think it is borderline? What about you?

EDIT: I change my mind I would give the nod to Thornton as a Superstar. I forgot how good he was.

I agree the term is ambiguous. But I wouldn't put Thornton at the superstar level.

 

[ChicksDigTheTrap]

wonder how the cap will look in 8 yrs

Part of the risk both sides take in a long term deal

 

[Poppy Whoa Sonnet]

Not surprised some fans don't like it. Not surprised the main board doesn't like it or at least considers it a crazy risky deal. 4 years ago it would be truly shocking, before teams started paying RFAs. Hughes for 8 more years is the main win here, and he plays a position that is impossible to find in UFA (top 6 center). If he's overpaid by 1-2 million (unlikely imo but the worst case scenario baring injury) it sucks but is not a huge deal even. Having a top 6 center for 8.75 years is a foundational piece to build around and really a win for the organization.

 

[HBK27]

I don't believe this was posted yet - Elliotte Friedman's thoughts on the contract from yesterday's 32 thoughts:

11. The biggest criticism of Jack Hughes’ extension is that he hasn’t played much: 55 points in just 119 games due to injury, with no arbitration rights. The only others at ages 20-24 to reach $8M in fewer games are Kirill Kaprizov (55, but five years in the KHL) and Cale Makar (101, with 35 more in the playoffs). The others: Zach Werenski (335 games), Sebastian Aho (242), Mitch Marner (241), Charlie McAvoy (235), Miro Heiskanen (205), Brady Tkachuk (198), Auston Matthews (196), Thomas Chabot & Adam Fox (134), Connor McDavid (127, and it’s ludicrous to use him as any kind of comparison).

I look at it this way: New Jersey knows him better than anyone else. He’s a cornerstone for their franchise. If you really believe in Hughes, sign him for as long as you can, because, chances are his price isn’t going down. Let’s see where we are in three years. I’d bet the Devils will be thanking God they didn’t go bridge.

32 Thoughts: Canadiens commit to foundational change, Olympic optimism dims

 

[Desert Devil]

I agree the term is ambiguous. But I wouldn't put Thornton at the superstar level.

Joe Thornton is one of the greatest passers to ever play the game. He absolutely WAS a superstar. Not anymore but he’s old now. He is 7th all time in assists and 13th in points. Come on guys. He’s a sure fire first ballot hall of famer.

 

[ChicksDigTheTrap]

Avoiding bridge deals means that they will pay more in the next years but will pay less in the prime years of Nico and Jack.

Exactly. The Devils appear to be targeting 2-3 years down the road to be contenders. They can afford to have them underproducing now hoping they outproduce them during their prime producing years.

 

[Jersey Fresh]

I agree the term is ambiguous. But I wouldn't put Thornton at the superstar level.

The term is ambiguous, and also irrelevant. He isn't being paid with the expectation of being a top 10 player in the league. That isn't the barometer for whether this deal will be worth it or not.

 

[ChicksDigTheTrap]

I get that - and you don't just sign him to whatever contract. I think the chances of him flopping are rare enough that it's worth taking the risk of signing this long-term deal to have a lower cap hit the supposed upcoming "contender" years in exchange for a higher hit the next 2-3 seasons when the team can more easily absorb it.

In the thread on the main boards, I was looking at how Hughes compares to Draisaitl and his contract, which was also controversial at the time (remember it was a lot rarer to sign guys coming off ELC's to a massive 8-year deal at the time 4 years ago). LD was certainly more proven at the time, but he signed after his 21-year old season at a cap hit that was more than 15% higher in terms of the percentage of the salary cap. He only played 37 games as a teenager in the NHL, putting up 2 goals and 9 points - rates that are significantly lower than either of Hughes' first two seasons as a teenager. Of course, he's taken massive leaps in his game since then while we still have to wait and see on Hughes, but there's certainly a lot of reason for optimism (to go along with some reason for pessimism). I'm going to do my best to sit back and "eNJoy the ride".

Good post. I believe it was Drai and Eichel that started the trend toward the long term contracts for high end players off their ELCs.

 

[devilsblood]

The term is ambiguous, and also irrelevant. He isn't being paid with the expectation of being a top 10 player in the league. That isn't the barometer for whether this deal will be worth it or not.

I've said all these things.

Aside from the irrelevant part. Which I might disagree with. Comparing the contract to the contract of a superstar like McDavid does allow for context.

 

[JimEIV]

I agree the term is ambiguous. But I wouldn't put Thornton at the superstar level.

That was my first thought...Then I looked at his Hart and Art Ross trophy and his Hart voting from 2006 to 2010 and his 100+ point seasons...He was a superstar.


2001-02 22 AS-10
2002-03 23 AS-2,Hart-4
2003-04 24 AS-3,Hart-14
2005-06 26 AS-1,Byng-15,Hart-1,Ross-1,Selke-19
2006-07 27 AS-3,Byng-14,Hart-5,Selke-21
2007-08 28 AS-2,Byng-11,Hart-6,Selke-58
2008-09 29 AS-5,Byng-33,Hart-9,Selke-28
2009-10 30 AS-5,Byng-27,Hart-12,Selke-32
2010-11 31 Selke-36
2011-12 32 Selke-31
2012-13 33 Selke-45
2013-14 34 AS-9,Hart-22
2014-15 35 Byng-46,Selke-14
2015-16 36 AS-2,AS-9,Byng-20,Hart-5,Selke-5

Joe Thornton Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

 

[HBK27]

Good post. I believe it was Drai and Eichel that started the trend toward the long term contracts for high end players off their ELCs.

Thanks. Good call on Eichel also being the other player to really start this trend, as he signed his deal about 6 weeks after Draisaitl. Eichel's deal, however, didn't kick in until the following season, similar to Hughes'.