Rumor: Sharks talking with Couture on extension

[Broiler19]

doesnt SJ not sign players to contracts longer than 5 years as per team rule?

 

[Led Zappa]

doesnt SJ not sign players to contracts longer than 5 years as per team rule?

Doug has done 6. There is a rich majority owner now so who knows.

 

[sr228]

doesnt SJ not sign players to contracts longer than 5 years as per team rule?

It's not a team rule, it's DW's preference. Given Couture's age I'd imagine he'll likely get more then 5 years.

 

[magic school bus]

8 years 80 million

^ DW's opening offer

 

[Episkey]

I agree we need to lock him up for at least 5 years. 5.25 mil would be my guess. Probably will take a discount.

 

[hockeyball]

It's not a team rule, it's DW's preference. Given Couture's age I'd imagine he'll likely get more then 5 years.

I imagine that was partially ownership too, Plattner likely wants his star locked up as long as possible.

 

[Arrch]

You think so? Even with the new cap? Wouldn't players who are signing and re-signing have to adjust accordingly?

It has also been widely speculated that he took a discount for these last two years so that he could cash in when DW has more flexibility with the cap.

 

[Audio Outlaw]

Good to hear. Gotta wonder if it means a vet could be on the way out though.

Hopefully Boyle while he still has value. Trade Boyle for a RW and send Burns back to Defense.

 

[SoftDumpInTheCorner]

looks like DW saw kurz list and started at no. 1

No because Havlat might be bought out before the free agency period starts. I'm pretty sure Couture cant sign any new deal until free agency begins.

 

[SCinSJ]

My guess.

5 years 30m

 

[OrrNumber4]

No because Havlat might be bought out before the free agency period starts. I'm pretty sure Couture cant sign any new deal until free agency begins.

Malkin signed his deal...

 

[Juxtaposer]

Malkin signed his deal...

He hasn't officially signed it, but he's "agreed to terms" with Pittsburgh, so it's as good as signing. It's all in name as of this moment. That usually doesn't happen, only is so with Malkin because he's Malkin.

 

[sr228]

I imagine that was partially ownership too, Plattner likely wants his star locked up as long as possible.

I don't. DW's reasons for signing players to reasonable term are very good ones. Had he every gone to the BOG and said he wanted to lock up a player for 7, 8, 9 years I'd bet they would've said OK but it's just not how he does things.

I also don't at all agree with the sentiment arund here (by some) about Plattner...if he's as good of a business man as everyone seems to believe, he'll keep his nose outta the day to day hockey ops of the team. He either has complete trust in DW to do his job or he doesn't and considering DW is still the GM (and Platter has said he trusts him) he's going to let him do his job the way he's always done his job.

Couture getting locked up for 5+ years is simply a smart move - the last time (under DW) that they had a player around his age and talent level that was going to be an RFA was Michalek and DW signed him for 6 years.

Other players that have maybe deserved more term were older like Vlasic, Burns. I bet DW is kicking himself for not giving Pavelski a longer term deal.

 

[LeeIFBB]

I'd think the negotiations are starting around a 5.5 cap hit, maybe higher.

 

[do0glas]

I don't. DW's reasons for signing players to reasonable term are very good ones. Had he every gone to the BOG and said he wanted to lock up a player for 7, 8, 9 years I'd bet they would've said OK but it's just not how he does things.

I also don't at all agree with the sentiment arund here (by some) about Plattner...if he's as good of a business man as everyone seems to believe, he'll keep his nose outta the day to day hockey ops of the team. He either has complete trust in DW to do his job or he doesn't and considering DW is still the GM (and Platter has said he trusts him) he's going to let him do his job the way he's always done his job.

Couture getting locked up for 5+ years is simply a smart move - the last time (under DW) that they had a player around his age and talent level that was going to be an RFA was Michalek and DW signed him for 6 years.

Other players that have maybe deserved more term were older like Vlasic, Burns. I bet DW is kicking himself for not giving Pavelski a longer term deal.

yup, the conjecture around how the owner will act is astounding.

 

[Mister Wedge]

Not sure why Juicy would sign for anything less than 6 per, unless it was a shortened, 3 yr deal which would lead him to a huge paycheck as a 27 year old FA. My instincts tell me he's asking in the ballpark of 6.5 mil per season. Pretty surprised some people are thinking he signs south of 5.5 per.

 

[FeedingFrenzy]

yup, the conjecture around how the owner will act is astounding.

+2..

 

[FeedingFrenzy]

Not sure why Juicy would sign for anything less than 6 per, unless it was a shortened, 3 yr deal which would lead him to a huge paycheck as a 27 year old FA. My instincts tell me he's asking in the ballpark of 6.5 mil per season. Pretty surprised some people are thinking he signs south of 5.5 per.

he only gets north of 6mil if he signs for max years, maybe 8yrs/52mil.. 5-5.5mil for 5 years seems about right for this contract and DW's propensity for not giving out lonnnng deals..

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

Not sure why Juicy would sign for anything less than 6 per, unless it was a shortened, 3 yr deal which would lead him to a huge paycheck as a 27 year old FA. My instincts tell me he's asking in the ballpark of 6.5 mil per season. Pretty surprised some people are thinking he signs south of 5.5 per.

I see him making around Eberle/Hall money (6M AAV) but would not be surprised if he gets 6.5M. He is not as flashy as those two but he is more rounded player and smarter too.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

I expect around 5 years 25 million. He's a team playa.

 

[hockeyball]

yup, the conjecture around how the owner will act is astounding.

Either way you are making an assumption. You either assume he will change nothing, or he will change something. Either way you are assuming something. I think it's more likely he changes things simply because he decided to buy out the other owners all of the sudden, and it seems like in a fairly aggressive fashion. He didn't do that just to say he owned a hockey team, he did that because he clearly didn't like something about how the team was being operated and wanted more control.

Mostly I'm making conclusions based upon what I would do in that situation. If I just bought a franchise that is aging and I had billions of dollars I would want to lock up the most critical young piece on the team as long as possible.

I expect a $5.5-6m 7-8 year deal.

 

[HOOCH2173]

I expect around 5 years 25 million. He's a team playa.

He's a Ping Pong Playa!

 

[do0glas]

Either way you are making an assumption. You either assume he will change nothing, or he will change something. Either way you are assuming something. I think it's more likely he changes things simply because he decided to buy out the other owners all of the sudden, and it seems like in a fairly aggressive fashion. He didn't do that just to say he owned a hockey team, he did that because he clearly didn't like something about how the team was being operated and wanted more control.
Mostly I'm making conclusions based upon what I would do in that situation. If I just bought a franchise that is aging and I had billions of dollars I would want to lock up the most critical young piece on the team as long as possible.

I expect a $5.5-6m 7-8 year deal.

WOW. huge jump here. this is what im talking about. you could argue hes already re-organized the front office and kept the coaching staff on. so hockey decisions will probably be left to hockey people. (see, i can do it too)

i do agree that there is assumptions on both sides, but when i say "conjecture" im talking about statements like the one i bolded.

 

[Gilligans Island]

WOW. huge jump here. this is what im talking about. you could argue hes already re-organized the front office and kept the coaching staff on. so hockey decisions will probably be left to hockey people. (see, i can do it too)

i do agree that there is assumptions on both sides, but when i say "conjecture" im talking about statements like the one i bolded.

Agree... It'd be nice if there was less mind reading going. I love to speculate about the Sharks as much as you all but sometimes, some posters take it to the extreme.

 

[hockeyball]

WOW. huge jump here. this is what im talking about. you could argue hes already re-organized the front office and kept the coaching staff on. so hockey decisions will probably be left to hockey people. (see, i can do it too)

i do agree that there is assumptions on both sides, but when i say "conjecture" im talking about statements like the one i bolded.

I don't see either one as more or less of an assumption, mine is just specific and I laid out my logic, you did not. If all he wanted to do was re-organize the front office... well let's just say that seems kind of an underwhelming privilege to spend 10's or 100's of millions of dollars on... but I guess it's possible, I just see it as pretty unlikely. A jump as you might say.

Point is, what you see as a huge assumption I see as a logical deduction based on available evidence.

He bought the team, he did so in an aggressive manner (it seems as if several of the owners were not looking to sell... though we don't know how it all unfolded). He made statements that he does not see the team ever making money. Those things to me, plus basic human psychology, equal he has plans for the team that involve significant changes that he could not make while the team had multiple owners.