Confirmed with Link: C. Giroux: 8-year contract extension (ESPN: $66.2m, $8.275m AAV, NMC) upds in post #1

flyershockey

Registered User
Oct 10, 2006
13,460
6,547
I hope he is going forward. Over the course of their careers so far it's extremely even. Getzlaf scored 49 points in 44 games this season (and is at 0.94 PPG for his career) and finished 18th in Selke voting.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/jonathan-toews-won-2013-selke-award-211740617.html

His Selke votes mean nothing, as the Selke has turned into one of the biggest jokes in the NHL. Getzlaf also gets to play with Perry. I'd say that is a big upgrade compared to Giroux's linemates. Voracek is great, but he's not Perry.
 

XDevilBoiX

Registered User
Jan 29, 2011
370
168
For me it's not the money but the years I'm not crazy about. 5-6 years max would have been more palatable for me but Flyers don't have much choice..Giroux is their current franchise player although that title will pass to another Flyer within a few years IMO...

The term is where this league is heading. These type of players are wanting the longterm security contracts now, if his current team don't want to give it to him then another team will. I also don't like it but have to deal with it. What I hate the most is Homer putting himself into a corner with these NMC, we have alot of guys with them.

What will hurt most is guys in their mid to late 30s with the NMC and not producing so we can't trade them anywhere. Perfect example was Briere this past season. I'm sure Homer can negotiate a LTC in there but he hands them out NMC like candy.
 

MsMeow

Registered User
Nov 4, 2005
16,431
1,097
Giving the team a little more room to sign other good players is the reason.

But Giroux demanded and got a richer deal than Getzlaf got as a UFA. Now he has to show he was worth being paid that much.

Kimmo also didn't give any kind of discount for next year. Why should either of them do management a favour when they were locked out earlier this season? We, as fans, may have mostly forgotten but they didn't get paid for several months because their owners locked them out. There is no reason for any player to give their owner a break.
 

Random Forest

Registered User
May 12, 2010
14,441
950
Kimmo also didn't give any kind of discount for next year. Why should either of them do management a favour when they were locked out earlier this season? We, as fans, may have mostly forgotten but they didn't get paid for several months because their owners locked them out. There is no reason for any player to give their owner a break.

You know both sides were responsible for the lockout, right?
 

Curufinwe

Registered User
Feb 28, 2013
55,502
42,244
Kimmo was getting what might be his last ever NHL contract and it was for one year. Giroux got an eight year deal with most of the money in the first five years.

Kimmo also didn't give any kind of discount for next year. Why should either of them do management a favour when they were locked out earlier this season? We, as fans, may have mostly forgotten but they didn't get paid for several months because their owners locked them out. There is no reason for any player to give their owner a break.

I think Malkin did because he could have got 10m as a free agent, but took less so there was more cap room to fill out the rest of the team.
 
Last edited:

Curufinwe

Registered User
Feb 28, 2013
55,502
42,244
His Selke votes mean nothing, as the Selke has turned into one of the biggest jokes in the NHL. Getzlaf also gets to play with Perry. I'd say that is a big upgrade compared to Giroux's linemates. Voracek is great, but he's not Perry.

Voracek handily outscored Perry this year.
 

MsMeow

Registered User
Nov 4, 2005
16,431
1,097
You know both sides were responsible for the lockout, right?

Hardly, and owners just proved that they didn't learn a thing by handing out these crazy deals over the past couple of weeks.

That & it's not like these guys were sitting on their *** at home not doing anything. Most of them were making big bucks playing in these European leagues during the lockout.

Most of them weren't playing in Europe and I doubt the money was very good considering they were playing at the AHL level or below. Many of them were in leagues where they took buses to and from other cities.
 

LegionOfDoom91

Registered User
Jan 25, 2013
81,647
138,659
Philadelphia, PA
Most of them weren't playing in Europe and I doubt the money was very good considering they were playing at the AHL level or below. Many of them were in leagues where they took buses to and from other cities.

Uhm no most of them did the only ones that didn't were either hurt, role players, or eligible for the AHL.

The KHL was throwing money around like it was nothing during the lockout.
 

Random Forest

Registered User
May 12, 2010
14,441
950
Hardly, and owners just proved that they didn't learn a thing by handing out these crazy deals over the past couple of weeks.
You're saying the players had nothing to do with the lockout? That the owners just locked the players out to save a buck? Both sides are responsible for the lockout. One of the most divisive issue was the fact that the players didn't want to give up their 57% share of HRR. Don't try to pin it on one side. They both were at fault.
 

StevensCakeBakerBacker

Registered User
Nov 11, 2009
1,528
0
You're saying the players had nothing to do with the lockout? That the owners just locked the players out to save a buck? Both sides are responsible for the lockout. One of the most divisive issue was the fact that the players didn't want to give up their 57% share of HRR. Don't try to pin it on one side. They both were at fault.

But, like.... The players so totally cute and stuff.
 

BillDineen

Former Flyer / Extinct Dinosaur Advisor
Aug 9, 2009
9,354
8,049
But if Giroux wasn't expected to sign cheaper, why not wait to sign him?
 

Mjoedgaard

Registered User
Jul 4, 2013
110
0
But if Giroux wasn't expected to sign cheaper, why not wait to sign him?

It makes it easier to make long terms plans for Homer. I mean once the season begins, he will begin to look at the numbers for next season and begin to calculate what players will get and see if their are potential FA etc.

and for Giroux, this means that he dont have to play with fear of getting career ending injury, because he is guaranteed to collect all the money if he chooses too.
 

Beef Invictus

Revolutionary Positivity
Dec 21, 2009
127,494
164,354
Armored Train
You're saying the players had nothing to do with the lockout? That the owners just locked the players out to save a buck? Both sides are responsible for the lockout. One of the most divisive issue was the fact that the players didn't want to give up their 57% share of HRR. Don't try to pin it on one side. They both were at fault.

If we get another lockout when this CBA ends it's definitely all on the owners. At this point the revenue is balanced and the issue is crappy revenue sharing; that crap sharing was arguably one of the big issues to begin with...for all I know they fixed that though, I've yet to see any figures about it yet and nobody I've asked over in BoH seems to know.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->