Speculation: Justin Schultz's contract

[Insta]

This is a ridiculous overpayment based on what he's done so far (not a lot).

 

[McGlassbangers]

About 675K too much. It's only 1-year contract though so who cares. That term forces him to develop his defensive game. He isn't going to get a payday before he hits 60+ points or improves his defensive side of the game.

 

[Jimmi McJenkins]

This is a ridiculous overpayment based on what he's done so far (not a lot).

Geez, that's a bit much. He's been a solid offensive player from the blueline in the NHL, that's what guys get paid for.

It's one year, and now it's on him to get better.

 

[nally]

Geez, that's a bit much. He's been a solid offensive player from the blueline in the NHL, that's what guys get paid for.

It's one year, and now it's on him to get better.

This

 

[Moose Coleman]

This is a ridiculous overpayment based on what he's done so far (not a lot).

That's overstating things quite a bit. It's a slight overpayment and a year short of a truly good deal, but I can live with it.

 

[Insta]

Solid? He's been far from solid. We overpay every player based on hope.

33 Points -22 offensive defenseman, we open the coffers. How about actually making guys prove they're any good before dishing out the big bucks.

 

[Moose Coleman]

Solid? He's been far from solid. We overpay every player based on hope.

33 Points -22 offensive defenseman, we open the coffers. How about actually making guys prove they're any good before dishing out the big bucks.

Except that's not "big bucks" in today's NHL.

 

[Insta]

It is for an unproven d-man. This means his next contract will need to go up from here, for a guy who's probably bottom pairing on most decent defenses.

 

[Moose Coleman]

It is for an unproven d-man. This means his next contract will need to go up from here, for a guy who's probably bottom pairing on most decent defenses.

OK, then: what would have been a reasonable signing number on a short term deal?

 

[Insta]

OK, then: what would have been a reasonable signing number on a short term deal?

$2.75m max. Could do a deal like Subban had before.

 

[PaPaDee]

$2.75m max. Could do a deal like Subban had before.

Except Subban's deal was signed when the cap was much lower, can't use it as a comparable.

 

[Insta]

Except Subban's deal was signed when the cap was much lower, can't use it as a comparable.

It wasn't much different and Subban was already a more impactful player. Schultz had 1 PPG all season, and it came in March. How you can give him 3.65 for that is beyond me.

 

[Jimmi McJenkins]

$2.75m max. Could do a deal like Subban had before.

Because Subban's ELC was the same as Schultz correct?

 

[Moose Coleman]

$2.75m max. Could do a deal like Subban had before.

There's no way Schultz would sign that deal. he was always going to get something in the $3-3.5M range based on cap inflation and comparable RFA deals. So it's an overpay on the top end, but hardly crippling.

 

[Insta]

There's no way Schultz would sign that deal. he was always going to get something in the $3-3.5M range based on cap inflation and comparable RFA deals. So it's an overpay on the top end, but hardly crippling.

He has to sit if he won't take less. Now if he improves slightly, he's wanting like $5m, it's ridiculous.

 

[Jimmi McJenkins]

He has to sit if he won't take less. Now if he improves slightly, he's wanting like $5m, it's ridiculous.

Then they trade him. This feel personal, and I don't understand why. It's a slight over pay, on par with the money he earned last year, but it's hardly a "hey kid you're great, here's money relax and settle in", he still clearly needs to work to be better and earn more.

 

[PaPaDee]

Will say tho, when you compare his contract with Gardiner's, it doesn't look good.

 

[McGlassbangers]

Will say tho, when you compare his contract with Gardiner's, it doesn't look good.

Gardiner has played one more season in the NHL, not really fair comparison.

 

[Moose Coleman]

He has to sit if he won't take less.

Always a great approach to take with your players.

Now if he improves slightly, he's wanting like $5m, it's ridiculous

He'd be getting at least $4M on a long term deal anyway as is. If he improves his defensive game and his offensive output, $5M wouldn't be unreasonable at all.

 

[Insta]

Then they trade him. This feel personal, and I don't understand why. It's a slight over pay, on par with the money he earned last year, but it's hardly a "hey kid you're great, here's money relax and settle in", he still clearly needs to work to be better and earn more.

Why personal? I watch every game and see how bad he's been defensively and how little impact offensively he had for much of last season and it boggles the mind the Oilers would give him this much. They do that with so many players and it just makes you a cap team filled with a bunch of mediocre players on overpriced contracts that never wins.

You need to get some value on guys, especially when they're younger. You give a guy this much on a 1 year deal, there's 0 value there. If he has a decent season, the raise has a much higher starting point and you lose a second time as well.

 

[Mr Sakich]

last year, JS played 1287 ES minutes. His top 4 minute partners were

464 with Ference
262 with N Schultz
215 with Belov
126 with Klefbom

He still finished in top 40 for ES and total scoring by defencemen despite playing only 72 games. Fayne said that his best performances were when he was paired with a puck moving partner.

 

[Moose Coleman]

Why personal? I watch every game and see how bad he's been defensively and how little impact offensively he had for much of last season and it boggles the mind the Oilers would give him this much. They do that with so many players and it just makes you a cap team filled with a bunch of mediocre players on overpriced contracts that never wins.

You need to get some value on guys, especially when they're younger. You give a guy this much on a 1 year deal, there's 0 value there. If he has a decent season, the raise has a much higher starting point and you lose a second time as well.

They were never going to get value deals from this guy, that much should have been obvious from Day 1.

 

[Jimmi McJenkins]

Why personal? I watch every game and see how bad he's been defensively and how little impact offensively he had for much of last season and it boggles the mind the Oilers would give him this much.

Yes he struggled defensively, little offensively? Geez, just trying to build a case to convince us or yourself? "This much" is pretty much on par with what he made last year and on par with what you need to pay a young developing offensive defenseman.

They do that with so many players and it just makes you a cap team filled with a bunch of mediocre players on overpriced contracts that never wins.

True, I mean look at Taylor Hall or Jordan Eberle, so overpaid and mediocre. I guess the reality I see in this statement is the blind assumption that "well you could just do this instead" without a single hint of reality behind it. The Oilers went with "cheap guys" it didn't go well.

You need to get some value on guys, especially when they're younger. You give a guy this much on a 1 year deal, there's 0 value there. If he has a decent season, the raise has a much higher starting point and you lose a second time as well.

0 value based on what exactly? This is a $6.3M contract, it's a $3.6M contract, that's less then $4M, it is 5.3% of the Salary Cap. Think about that for a second. The contract that you seem to assume is some kind of millstone is 5.3% of the total salary cap.

At some point you can't just squeeze all these guys because they get "sick of this ****" and will leave. Whether you want that or not is your call, but Justin Schultz was the best offensive defenseman and one for top minutes defensemen on the Oilers. This is slight overpay, but the world isn't honestly ending.

If you think he's as "bad" of a player as you're trying to paint, then you're just going to have to deal with having a problem with it.

 

[Crobby]

You need to get some value on guys, especially when they're younger. You give a guy this much on a 1 year deal, there's 0 value there. If he has a decent season, the raise has a much higher starting point and you lose a second time as well.

Speaking of getting value, you said 2.75M would be an acceptable amount. So its best to hardball the guy for 92K, piss him off and risk him sitting out/demanding a trade?

That should increase his value.

 

[Insta]

Speaking of getting value, you said 2.75M would be an acceptable amount. So its best to hardball the guy for 92K, piss him off and risk him sitting out/demanding a trade?

That should increase his value.

How interesting the same argument is made on pretty much every signing the Oilers make. When you have a whole team of guys making a million too much, your team tends to suck.

It's made worse by this being a 1-year deal on a young guy, because overpayments now tend to inflate further over the next contract or two and they aren't getting any value here. If it was that amount for 3 years, then it would be much more justified, because you hope and expect the last year (or hopefully 2), he's at least worth that and more. The 1 year deal is suppose to be a cheap "show me" deal, where if he performs he can get a nice chunk of change next contract. He's getting a 1-year show me deal, AND it's overpriced.