Confirmed with Link: Jets sign Hellebuyck to 1 year $2.25M contract

[Shazzam]

The thing I do like is the term. Not sure if the intention was to light a fire under Helle's butt, but....(butt but lol), with the recent signing of Mason and the clear indication that he will be the starter and the one year, show me, contract, this creates a much more competitive environment and indicates that we're not just going to hand the starter role to Connor like we did last year.

 

[jetsforever]

Good to sign him although 2 years might have been better. Still a RFA though so we should be fine.

 

[Gm0ney]

??

Mason the last two years has posted a .912 in 30 more games whereas Helle posted a .910.

That's an insignificant margin of difference. Hellebuyck would've needed to make 4 additional saves over the last two years to hit .912.

Hellebuyck's win% is better. Philly finished ahead of the Jets in both of the last two years, so you could argue that Hellebuyck played better with a worse team in front of him.

I'm just saying Hellebuyck had a statistical case. The Jets literally just gave a guy who did about the same (or worse) over the past two years $4.1M x 2.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

If it is an overpay, it's a pretty irrelevant one. Since it's a 1 year deal on a year we're not facing cap pressure.

If I had to take a wild guess (which is something we all like to do around here), I'd say Hellebuyck ain't too pleased with being booted out of the starter role. Regardless of whether it was deserved or not. So an extra fraction of a million, plus a 1 year deal to allow Hellebuyck to renegotiate a year down the road, may be what it took to keep Helle sorta happy. The message being, "Listen man, our goaltending wasn't good enough last year, so we're trying something new. If you can fight back and steal the starter role, that's super cool with us. You'll get the opportunity. But you gotta prove it if you want to be the starter, and get paid like one."

A multi-year deal would have been Hellebuyck accepting he ain't the starter, and it's gonna stay that way for a while.

If this deal does signal that Helle is pissed and wants to prove himself a starter, that's exactly what I want out of him.

I don't think it is cut and dried but there is an element of that here. This is clearly above backup pay level though. Career backups get half that.

I don't think it is clear which party wanted the 1 year deal more, but I can see Bucky wanting to prove himself.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Slight overpay to avoid arbitration. I'm ok with that. Apparently you have to really criticize your own player during negotiations. Goalies are an emotional bunch and I don't want Helly hearing how bad he is lol

I was wondering why overpay to avoid arb?

I'm not sure 750k, or 50% is a slight overpay but if it helps Bucky reach his potential it is money well spent.

 

[Gm0ney]

“IÂ’m excited for it,†Hellebuyck said. “IÂ’m happy to be with the Winnipeg organization again. I think the team is very good and has a very bright future. IÂ’m excited to be a part of that future.Ââ€

“IÂ’m going to give every ounce of effort I can on the ice to prove that I belong here and show them that last year was a fluke,†Hellebuyck said. “I know I have more to give and IÂ’m going to do that this year and prove it.Ââ€

http://www.winnipegsun.com/2017/07/24/jets-sign-hellebuyck-to-one-year-contract

Fun fact(s): Last year's fluke was the 2nd best SV% ever posted by a Jets starter (since 2011). Eclipsed only by Pavelec's fluke .920. In terms of points percentage, Hellebuyck's .571 last season is the 2nd highest by any starter in Atlanta-Winnipeg franchise history (second only to Lehtonen's .575 in 2006-07).

 

[ps241]

Last year was a fluke, not the norm. His numbers every other year shows that. He will bounce back nicely, this tandem was a year too late or we would've made playoffs last year. Hutch sunk us early on as we had no one to turn to. Put Hutchs early start on a playoff team and they wouldn't be one.

Good post.

Onward and upward.

 

[Lempo]

Add 3 to 4 million in bonuses and we are sitting around $72 million

It'll be 2 x $850.000 in Schedule A bonuses for Ehlers and Laine, because with projected top six ice-time and the 20G / 35A / 60P / 0.73PpG targets they will hardly miss any.

JoMo is good for his full $500k. That's $2.2M.

Connor, Poolman will be good for some of combined potential $1.7M.

It pretty much hinges on if Laine hits his $1.8M worth of Sched B's by finishing in league top 10 in G/A/P/PpG or securing a trophy finalist position.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

It seems that pretty much every team goes into the season wondering if their goaltending will be good enough. Last year we saw Bishop, Schneider and Mason have characteristically low sv%'s. The year before Price missed most of the season.

Some very few know that if one goalie can't get the job done their #2 man will. A similarly few teams can be pretty sure their goalies can't do it. In recent years those have been Winnipeg and Carolina. Everybody else is in the doubtful group, some more so and some less but all unsure because goalies are hoodoos.

This year we finally get to play with the big boys, that large group who know that their goalies might be good enough. With a strong #2 man we might even be in the upper half of that group, or at least near the middle.



The fact that most other teams fans and most media pundits haven't noticed really doesn't matter. They don't realize how small an improvement in goal we need to see a big jump in the standings. They are either unaware or have forgotten just how bad our injuries were last year and our schedule was last year. They are not bothering to account for the incremental improvement from our young players.

With even a small improvement in goal + any 1 of those other things we are easily a playoff team. We underachieved last year - by a lot. That means that we have a lot of potential improvement this year.

 

[Jets4Life]

Second, the "Winnipeg Tax" is the most overblown thing IMO. Who really wants to live in Detroit of all places? No one. Yet they got many good deals because they had good teams. Winnipeg is paying a bad team tax and have since they returned. This will change drastically if they ever become a good team.

The "Winnipeg Tax" is real, myu friend. If you were to have access to every players contract with teams on the NMC or NTC, they will say "Winnipeg" guaranteed. Poor Chevy has to deal from a huge disadvantage. If the Jets ever become a good team, it will help, but the organizations refusal to bring in a reliable goalie for 6 years, and stick with Pavelec has cost us dearly.

 

[Holden Caulfield]

The "Winnipeg Tax" is real, myu friend. If you were to have access to every players contract with teams on the NMC or NTC, they will say "Winnipeg" guaranteed. Poor Chevy has to deal from a huge disadvantage. If the Jets ever become a good team, it will help, but the organizations refusal to bring in a reliable goalie for 6 years, and stick with Pavelec has cost us dearly.

You're going to see all teams that are as terrible as Winnipeg on that list. It's bad teams that are penalized, not Winnipeg. It's not about Winnipeg, it's about 6 (well really 18) years of complete incompetence. Notice that the talk about "Edmonton Tax" or Edmonton being on all NMC/NTC only started when they sucked for years and years. Now that they are getting good again there's no talk of that. Hmm wonder what changed? There has never been talk of a "Detroit Tax" despite Detroit being one of the worst 3 cities in USA/Canada to live in. Wonder why that would be?

 

[surixon]

You're going to see all teams that are as terrible as Winnipeg on that list. It's bad teams that are penalized, not Winnipeg. It's not about Winnipeg, it's about 6 (well really 18) years of complete incompetence. Notice that the talk about "Edmonton Tax" or Edmonton being on all NMC/NTC only started when they sucked for years and years. Now that they are getting good again there's no talk of that. Hmm wonder what changed? There has never been talk of a "Detroit Tax" despite Detroit being one of the worst 3 cities in USA/Canada to live in. Wonder why that would be?

While I agree that how competitive a team is has an impact your kidding if you think it's the only reason that WPG is on so many NTC's the market has something to do with it as well. How else do you explain a highly respected player who is used to team success in Hjalmarson not having that joke of a franchise Arizona on his NT list. Cities in certain markets have different advantages and disadvantages based on the actual city.

You are correct that the best thing the Jets can do now is to start winning and winning constantly to curve some of outside sentiment on the market.

 

[garret9]

You're going to see all teams that are as terrible as Winnipeg on that list. It's bad teams that are penalized, not Winnipeg. It's not about Winnipeg, it's about 6 (well really 18) years of complete incompetence. Notice that the talk about "Edmonton Tax" or Edmonton being on all NMC/NTC only started when they sucked for years and years. Now that they are getting good again there's no talk of that. Hmm wonder what changed? There has never been talk of a "Detroit Tax" despite Detroit being one of the worst 3 cities in USA/Canada to live in. Wonder why that would be?

As I've mentioned many times, there are many variables that factor in:
* city
* salary
* term
* role
* opportunity to win
* miscellaneous smaller factors (familiarity, friends, etc)

Some cities will be considered superior than others, so lost value must be replaced in one (or multiple) of the other variables.
WPG tax is making up with salary and/or term.
People have pointed out here before that for the right role a player may select a less desirable city without extra salary or term.
You have merely pointed out an additional area of value, with opportunity to win.

I should also state that WPG is not going to be inferior for all players. Some may prefer the city. This was merely a general sense.

 

[Holden Caulfield]

As I've mentioned many times, there are many variables that factor in:
* city
* salary
* term
* role
* opportunity to win
* miscellaneous smaller factors (familiarity, friends, etc)

Some cities will be considered superior than others, so lost value must be replaced in one (or multiple) of the other variables.
WPG tax is making up with salary and/or term.
People have pointed out here before that for the right role a player may select a less desirable city without extra salary or term.
You have merely pointed out an additional area of value, with opportunity to win.

I should also state that WPG is not going to be inferior for all players. Some may prefer the city. This was merely a general sense.

The point I was arguing is the idea of a "Winnipeg tax". A "Winnipeg tax" implies that Winnipeg will have to overpay for each and every player they wish to bring in. I don't buy it, I don't buy that for a second. There are certainly a multitude of reasons why players choose what they do, but looking back on history we can clearly see that in general winning organizations have the easiest time recruiting players, losing teams have the toughest. This is independent of city factors, look at teams like Detroit for example. And Winnipeg has the sorriest of sorriest excuses of a track record of the franchise history, that's the tax they are paying, "A Loser Tax" not a "Winnipeg tax" right now.

 

[garret9]

The point I was arguing is the idea of a "Winnipeg tax". A "Winnipeg tax" implies that Winnipeg will have to overpay for each and every player they wish to bring in. I don't buy it, I don't buy that for a second. There are certainly a multitude of reasons why players choose what they do, but looking back on history we can clearly see that in general winning organizations have the easiest time recruiting players, losing teams have the toughest. This is independent of city factors, look at teams like Detroit for example. And Winnipeg has the sorriest of sorriest excuses of a track record of the franchise history, that's the tax they are paying, "A Loser Tax" not a "Winnipeg tax" right now.

In theory, they overpay for every player, when accounting for winning and such.

To use continue Detroit as an example, change nothing but the city to somewhere players tend to prefer ceteris paribus and maybe they'd have even better deals.

My point is the WPG tax always exists, in the general sense, even if it means the player signs below market value because other factors are over compensating for that.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I'm a little confused by the bonus situation. We had to pay bonuses last year. We had the cap space to cover them. Do any of last year's bonuses carry over to this year? Or is that what happens only if bonuses push us over the cap? If there was carry over, how much?

If the bonus counts against the year it was earned we should have no trouble covering the bonus this year, although it will leave us close to the cap. Next year it could be a problem.

 

[surixon]

I'm a little confused by the bonus situation. We had to pay bonuses last year. We had the cap space to cover them. Do any of last year's bonuses carry over to this year? Or is that what happens only if bonuses push us over the cap? If there was carry over, how much?

If the bonus counts against the year it was earned we should have no trouble covering the bonus this year, although it will leave us close to the cap. Next year it could be a problem.

You are eligible to carry them over if you don't have space. If you have space it would be foolish to carry any of them over.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

The point I was arguing is the idea of a "Winnipeg tax". A "Winnipeg tax" implies that Winnipeg will have to overpay for each and every player they wish to bring in. I don't buy it, I don't buy that for a second. There are certainly a multitude of reasons why players choose what they do, but looking back on history we can clearly see that in general winning organizations have the easiest time recruiting players, losing teams have the toughest. This is independent of city factors, look at teams like Detroit for example. And Winnipeg has the sorriest of sorriest excuses of a track record of the franchise history, that's the tax they are paying, "A Loser Tax" not a "Winnipeg tax" right now.

I agree - emphatically. A winning team is not the only factor but it is the biggest one. All of the other factors tend to vary by individual. Not everyone likes the bright lights. Not everyone likes plying his trade somewhere were no one gives a rat's patoot. Etc, etc.

 

[KurtG8]

In theory, they overpay for every player, when accounting for winning and such.

To use continue Detroit as an example, change nothing but the city to somewhere players tend to prefer ceteris paribus and maybe they'd have even better deals.

My point is the WPG tax always exists, in the general sense, even if it means the player signs below market value because other factors are over compensating for that.

Ceteris Paribus? Cmon man!!! Normal words for us stupid people please. I'll have to google that now.... but cmon, who uses those words? lol

 

[Zhamnov5GoalGame]

If it is an overpay, it's a pretty irrelevant one. Since it's a 1 year deal on a year we're not facing cap pressure.

If I had to take a wild guess (which is something we all like to do around here), I'd say Hellebuyck ain't too pleased with being booted out of the starter role. Regardless of whether it was deserved or not. So an extra fraction of a million, plus a 1 year deal to allow Hellebuyck to renegotiate a year down the road, may be what it took to keep Helle sorta happy. The message being, "Listen man, our goaltending wasn't good enough last year, so we're trying something new. If you can fight back and steal the starter role, that's super cool with us. You'll get the opportunity. But you gotta prove it if you want to be the starter, and get paid like one."

A multi-year deal would have been Hellebuyck accepting he ain't the starter, and it's gonna stay that way for a while.

If this deal does signal that Helle is pissed and wants to prove himself a starter, that's exactly what I want out of him.

I think it could be that they do still believe in Helle and want to keep a positive relationship with their future starter. With Mason here it would be possible for the relationship to get strained.

Most people thought he'd get 1 to 1.5 so this is more but not enough in this season to be an issue.

One more way to look at is that until Trouba is resolved next summer (assuming he doesn't sign before) the Jets aren't sure of their direction. The one year contract buys them a year to watch their two goalies and make this decision when they know more about their other roster decisions.

 

[Eyeseeing]

Wow I'm getting tired of that meme. Not every player is a prima donna needing to play in LA to satiate their ego.



m.

Agree and when I get back from the Dominican I'll post more on that meme also

 

[Guffman]

That's an insignificant margin of difference. Hellebuyck would've needed to make 4 additional saves over the last two years to hit .912.

Hellebuyck's win% is better. Philly finished ahead of the Jets in both of the last two years, so you could argue that Hellebuyck played better with a worse team in front of him.

I'm just saying Hellebuyck had a statistical case. The Jets literally just gave a guy who did about the same (or worse) over the past two years $4.1M x 2.

Pointless to compare an RFA to a UFA contract. If it went to arbitration, they do not compare to UFA contracts when deciding on the amount.

 

[KingBogo]

If it is an overpay, it's a pretty irrelevant one. Since it's a 1 year deal on a year we're not facing cap pressure.

If I had to take a wild guess (which is something we all like to do around here), I'd say Hellebuyck ain't too pleased with being booted out of the starter role. Regardless of whether it was deserved or not. So an extra fraction of a million, plus a 1 year deal to allow Hellebuyck to renegotiate a year down the road, may be what it took to keep Helle sorta happy. The message being, "Listen man, our goaltending wasn't good enough last year, so we're trying something new. If you can fight back and steal the starter role, that's super cool with us. You'll get the opportunity. But you gotta prove it if you want to be the starter, and get paid like one."

A multi-year deal would have been Hellebuyck accepting he ain't the starter, and it's gonna stay that way for a while.

If this deal does signal that Helle is pissed and wants to prove himself a starter, that's exactly what I want out of him.

I'll go along with something along these lines. I see the deal as a bit of a carrot to Helly that can easily fit within the cap. A bit higher than could have been ground out going to the last minute, but a sign of support to a guy who remains the leading candidate as the long term solution in net. Now Helly has to earn his next contract.

 

[Hobby Bull]

I can't see Bucky proving himself this year to be anything but a backup if he is only playing backup minutes. The only way he plays starting minutes is if Mason gets injured or is doodoo. If the latter, we are in trouble.

In reading the tea leaves and entrails, I think this is both sides way of saying they want to move on after this year. The Jets see Comrie as their new hope for the future, but he needs at least another year on the Moose. I think Bucky is unhappy going into the season as the backup. He realizes that Mason is not getting that contract with the intent that he has to compete for the #1 job. The overpayment is the Jets way of getting his nose somewhat back in joint while they wait for Comrie.

If Comrie doesn't progress as hoped, I see the Jets turning to trade or free agency to get a veteran backup. Bucky will be moved if there is a decent deal to be had, or allowed to walk.

Mark my words, or fire up the crow pot.

I'm extremely curious about how this could mean the Jets and Hellebuyck have decided they're done with each other. I've heard the idea that the Jets are tiring of Hellebuyck elsewhere on this board, and it sounds more to me as if someone is reading what's inside those entrails.

Overpaying for a one year contract indicates the opposite intent. If the team had arbitrated this, they would have paid less. The history of those arbitration processes indicates that players who go through that process have limited careers with the teams that go through arbitration with them. My opinion is that the Jets avoided this, and paid the player generously to retain a good long term relationship with their player. Why give away more money than otherwise necessary???

I think it is accurate for you to use the term "hope" in association with Comrie. I would be shocked if any professional assessment of his future would rise beyond the term "hope" to any level of "expectation".

 

[angrymnky]

Last year was a fluke, not the norm. His numbers every other year shows that.

What every other year? He had .907 in 56 games and .918 in 26 games the year before that. Maybe he'll be like Mason who had a .916 his first year and never equalled that for years.