How different is that team going to be in Oct? What about Oct 2019 ?? There's a few key players who need new contracts between now and then. LV needs to be careful about what sort of contracts they give out until they have a better idea as to what things will look like in 13 months.
Rumor: David Perron wants to return with Vegas
- Thread starter caley
- Start date
How different is that team going to be in Oct? What about Oct 2019 ?? There's a few key players who need new contracts between now and then. LV needs to be careful about what sort of contracts they give out until they have a better idea as to what things will look like in 13 months.
Vancouver Canucks
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2015
- 14,591
- 2,587
It's not going to be close to that. He's closer to the T.J. Oshie territory, except teams would much rather have a player with Oshie's skillset than Perron's. Perron has a reputation of being somewhat of a one-dimensional floater, which is why he's bounced around 5 teams in 4 years. I'll be surprised if he makes over a 5x5 contract.
Fire Sweeney
Registered User
Oh I'm not saying Vegas wants them back, just that the current players probably all want to come back (Perron included). Actually, they might be better served letting him go and picking up a better playoff performer. Even when the whole team was doing great, he wasn't really scoring
Quid Pro Clowe
Registered User
DudeWhereIsMakar
Bergevin sent me an offer sheet
From watching Kane closely for four years, I can tell you right now he's the most overrated player in the league right now. I mean I do think it's doable he gets fifty goals if he plays with the absolutely right centre, right wing, defensemen, and coach, which he has in San Jose. Absolutely amazing skater, but isn't a smart player at all and comes with attitude. If anything he has that's good after his skating it's his shot.
If I were to have him on another team (I'd say the Jets, the Jets would rather sign Ilya Bryzgalov as a back-up) I'd offer him no more the four-million. There's a chance Sharks fans complain about his contract.
As for Perron now, I would keep him if I were Vegas, but at a low contract. If I were to be fair I'd offer him five years at $5M AAV. James Neal is a guy I would think twice, because this season sort of proved Vegas doesn't really need James Neal as Perron provided more to the team than he did, same with many other players. You also have Alex Tuch coming up the ranks, who I believe will be a long-time stud for Vegas. It was a smart idea to keep Neal for the run and when Vegas took him they practically used him as their superstar/veteran forward, still needed him, but I say now they don't. I see a team giving Neal a dumb contract anyway. Same case-scenario for Cody Eakin, as to which I believe when his contract is up that Vegas lets him walk, or he's part of a blockbuster trade as to which lands Erik Karlsson/John Tavares as he's a very valuable player to have on your roster for the same reasons as James Neal (maybe throw in Tatar and Subban in a trade too). But I think as for the salary, they're going to have to move Clarkson's contract to a team like Vancouver.
This is how I'd have Vegas look next year if I were in Gerard Gallant and George McPhee's shoes. For now I'll have it as their team looks going forward.
Smith 'A'-Karlsson-Marchessault 'A'
Tuch-Haula-Perron 'A'
Tatar-Lindberg-Nosek
Carpenter-Bellemaire-Reaves
Carrier
McNabb-Schmidt
Theodore-Engelland
Miller-Merrill
Hunt
Fleury
Dansk
San Jose overpaid for Kane and will get bad value for at least four years of that contract, even if not terrible it would be money better spent elsewhere. Vegas needs to avoid this to allow for better flexibility.
You can offer 5 million a year for 5 years to one of Perron or Neal. If they don't accept you move on. That's the type of deal you can get real value from and can move with only 1 something million retained for 1-2 years if you need to get out of the end of it.
You can offer 5 million a year for 5 years to one of Perron or Neal. If they don't accept you move on. That's the type of deal you can get real value from and can move with only 1 something million retained for 1-2 years if you need to get out of the end of it.
Quid Pro Clowe
Registered User
You do realize Kane is 26 and not 36, right?
He's coming off a 29 goal year where 3/4 of his season were spent on an offensive black hole of a team and he still produced really well at 5 on 5.
People keep saying its a bad deal because 7 years scares them. His aav is only a slight raise over his last contract wrt the total percentage of the cap. He's also a better player now than either Perron or Neal are.
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
- Apr 6, 2006
- 32,360
- 11,195
I wouldn't give Neal or Perron, both age 30, more than a 3 year deal if I were the Vegas GM. You have several 19 year olds taken in the first round last year. Those are the players Vegas should be counting on in three seasons.
I am sure, like most 30-year old players, these two guys think they are worth a retirement contract. Don't waste your money Vegas. I want to see how the plan works for this franchise if they stick to it.
I am sure, like most 30-year old players, these two guys think they are worth a retirement contract. Don't waste your money Vegas. I want to see how the plan works for this franchise if they stick to it.
I don't think you can say he's better than Neal or Perron are now. He hasn't proved that with his play, just this recurring idea of what he could be.
The percentage of the cap stuff is a reasonable attempt to justify it and it's valid to a certain degree but I still think the deal is just too much and will not look great in the last 3-4 years. I'm not saying it would be really, really bad but it I think it will be one SJ would rather not have if they had the choice.
Then again, in two years a penalty free compliance buyout will probably be back and give SJ an opportunity to get out after year 3 if they see it as an opportunity they want to take then. But I would rather Vegas keep that compliance buyout earmarked for a Bobby Ryan if they take his anchor contract to get an EK trade, because we need help on defense.
TomasHertlsRooster
Don’t say eye test when you mean points
Quid Pro Clowe
Registered User
Kane had 26 g and 19 a at even or shorthanded. Neal had 25 and 19 overall. Mind you he played 7 less games, but Kane was much more effective at even strength. Add the fact he's going to be 31 next season vs 27 for Kane.
Perron had 15 and 33 in 8 less games, so I'd say he was better this season, but he's such an enigmatic player overall. One season he'll put up decent points then the next he'll be slightly above .5 ppg.
I personally feel much more comfortable giving a long term deal to Kane than either of the Vegas two, but a lot of that has to do with prime years and Perron and Neal are probably on the back 9.
DudeWhereIsMakar
Bergevin sent me an offer sheet
Must be a Sharks fan. But a true Sharks fan would know who Jonathan Cheechoo was. I rest my case on Evander Kane.
My biggest issue with Perron is he disappears in the playoffs. Not just this year with us, he has history before this too. And, like you said, he's 30 now so it's enough evidence that you wouldn't be unreasonable to confidently expect him to struggle in the playoffs going forward.
He can be a good puck possession monster, though, and had a great year with us. I would need to be comfortable with the price and term of the contract to bring him back, if I am Vegas.
- Jun 10, 2014
- 57,393
- 29,209
Nice place to visit but I wouldn't want to live there. Seriously, why?
+ Great weather during hockey season
+ Vibrant city with lots of stuff to do
+ Good balance between anonymity and notoriety right now
Add in the success the Knights have had so far and the low pressure environment the team will continue to enjoy and I see them as an attractive location for even the best UFAs.
EDIT: No state income tax in NV as well.
+ Vibrant city with lots of stuff to do
+ Good balance between anonymity and notoriety right now
Add in the success the Knights have had so far and the low pressure environment the team will continue to enjoy and I see them as an attractive location for even the best UFAs.
EDIT: No state income tax in NV as well.
Last edited:
- Jun 10, 2014
- 57,393
- 29,209
There is no connection between bad contracts and the next lockout. The players get 50% of HRR regardless of how well or how badly the GM's allocate it.
wingsfan17
Registered User
- Jan 20, 2008
- 1,264
- 482
How did Kane get brought up in this conversation? Even if you want to compare contracts, Sharks had to give up a 1st to re-sign him, so that off the bat that doesn’t make this apples to apples.
Surprised Perron wants back, as he was a healthy scratch in the playoffs a few times. Although he was great in the regular reason, do you want to give a big contract to a guy you just benched over William Carrier?
If I’m Vegas, 4 years would be fair for Neal. But if he’d do 5x5 then great. But in reality I think he’s gone. I think he wants to go to a place where he gets paired with a top line center (and make more money.)
Kinda sucks because Perron and Neal had great chemistry (in the regular season) and there’s practically no chance Vegas brings back both unless Perron takes a paycut. If Vegas seriously plans on going for Karlsson/Tavares, I doubt neither are re-signed.
Surprised Perron wants back, as he was a healthy scratch in the playoffs a few times. Although he was great in the regular reason, do you want to give a big contract to a guy you just benched over William Carrier?
If I’m Vegas, 4 years would be fair for Neal. But if he’d do 5x5 then great. But in reality I think he’s gone. I think he wants to go to a place where he gets paired with a top line center (and make more money.)
Kinda sucks because Perron and Neal had great chemistry (in the regular season) and there’s practically no chance Vegas brings back both unless Perron takes a paycut. If Vegas seriously plans on going for Karlsson/Tavares, I doubt neither are re-signed.
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
- Apr 6, 2006
- 32,360
- 11,195
In terms of the revenue split this is true. In terms of the product on the ice, I doubt the owners are happy about paying players big money over a long term. I expect length of contract, or whether the contracts should be guaranteed for the entire term to be the next big issue.
- Jun 10, 2014
- 57,393
- 29,209
You could be right, IDK. But 1 GM signing 1 bad contract isn't going to contribute in any way to the next lockout. Every GM signing 1 bad contract isn't going to contribute either. Hypothetically even every contract being a bad contract wouldn't have that effect, because they would still need to fit within the cap and within the 50/50 split in HRR. Of course it would be impossible to sign that many bad contracts but that is beside the point. No number of bad contracts will lead to another lockout. Some other issues may - or there may not be another lockout.
