Player Discussion Devan Dubnyk II

[LordFletcher]

Not sure why everyone is so hung up on the years of this contract. It was the only way to make the deal happen. Wild do not have the luxury of offering him a high cap short term contract and Dubs wanted security, his agent said it the whole time.

The two options sounded like 4 years at a cap the Wild can't afford or 6 years at what we know.

You either sign him at the deal agreed or he walks and pray something miraculously works out in net on a a roster that's capable of winning a lot of games

Edit. I'll add I'm not doing jumping jacks over signing a 40 game proven goalie to 6 years but there are no other options without trading valuable picks or prospects which the Wild can't do. So, I'm happy but like how my grandpa gets happy when the Twins win an ugly game after he complains for 3 hours

 

[Wild48]

per /u/therealhankhill on reddit:

This buyout chart should calm some people down. yellow is cap savings by buying him out.

 

[Wild11MN]

Okay, now I'm confused again. CapFriendly has the same chart. How can we save more in cap space as time goes on? Say we buy him out after year 3. How are we saving so much in cap space in year 6 compared to year 4? Cap hit remains constant and buyout amount per year remains constant.

How does salary play into all of this?

 

[Sharppi]

Okay, now I'm confused again. CapFriendly has the same chart. How can we save more in cap space as time goes on? Say we buy him out after year 3. How are we saving so much in cap space in year 6 compared to year 4? Cap hit remains constant and buyout amount per year remains constant.

How does salary play into all of this?

http://www.generalfanager.com/buyouts

Here you go friend, that should explain it nicely

 

[Wild11MN]

http://www.generalfanager.com/buyouts

Here you go friend, that should explain it nicely

Thanks, the website didn't explain this part, but from what I gather, the formula is.

(Salary for that year) - (buyout cap hit / year) = Total saved for the year in cap hit.

So in that case backloading contracts is the way to go if you were to buy someone out. Unless you thought they would still be tradeable, in which case you would want to frontload it. But I don't know how many GMs plan contracts planning to buy someone out later on.

 

[Bruce Granville]

You guys are awesome.
We just signed a No. 1 goalie long term with a decent cap hit (compared to other starters) and you already plan on buying him out.
Great support, really.

 

[Wild11MN]

You guys are awesome.
We just signed a No. 1 goalie long term with a decent cap hit (compared to other starters) and you already plan on buying him out.
Great support, really.

Haha, I'm not. I've just never understood buyouts correctly and the chart was just posted above.

 

[W75]

You guys are awesome.
We just signed a No. 1 goalie long term with a decent cap hit (compared to other starters) and you already plan on buying him out.
Great support, really.

It's called practicality

 

[grN1g]

You guys are awesome.
We just signed a No. 1 goalie long term with a decent cap hit (compared to other starters) and you already plan on buying him out.
Great support, really.

Noone wants to buy him out yet, they are just discussing how it works and that chart basically shows that if he sucks by year 4 we basically can buy him out and still save some good money on it, practically making him a 4 year deal anyway.

Not to mention he would be pretty cheap his last 2 years in actually salary which in turn could make him a possibility to trade away, say we sign or develop a #1 couple years down the road.

 

[Wild48]

You guys are awesome.
We just signed a No. 1 goalie long term with a decent cap hit (compared to other starters) and you already plan on buying him out.
Great support, really.

Not what I intend at all by putting that chart up. Basically the biggest criticism of the Dubnyk deal has been it's too long. The chart I posted shows that the term really isn't that big of a deal and with how cheap the buyout would be, it's really like a 4 year deal, which is closer to what people wanted.

 

[Kari Takko]

A buyout chart? Where's the excitement that we locked up a terrific goaltender for 6 years?

Hypothetically, how does Dubnyk's contract look, in 3 years, when he plays like he did when he was traded to the Wild?

 

[Slick Willy*]

You guys are awesome.
We just signed a No. 1 goalie long term with a decent cap hit (compared to other starters) and you already plan on buying him out.
Great support, really.

POTY.

 

[Sharppi]

You guys are awesome.
We just signed a No. 1 goalie long term with a decent cap hit (compared to other starters) and you already plan on buying him out.
Great support, really.

You are clearly not bitter and unreasonable enough, get on our level. Everything is bad, trade everything and fire everything.

 

[Victorious Secret]

A buyout chart? Where's the excitement that we locked up a terrific goaltender for 6 years?

Hypothetically, how does Dubnyk's contract look, in 3 years, when he plays like he did when he was traded to the Wild?

Terrific? Mmk.

 

[Sharppi]

Terrific? Mmk.

I, personally, do think that Vezina-nominated goaltenders are terrific.

 

[Jarick]

It's an okay deal. It is about 1-2 years longer than I would like to see, but it's a little lower money than I expected.

Dubnyk has been an average, maybe slightly above average starter over his career. He had one awful year and one amazing year. He's been about 20th in adjusted save percentage over the last five years. I think he will likely be worse than he was last year, but maybe a little better than his career average before that. I would guess he plays somewhere between 10-15 in the league, and the $4.3m is actually pretty fair for that kind of performance. The term, maybe not so much.

I'm worried about the limited NTC, but hopefully it expires for the last 2-3 years when his salary drops and he becomes more trade-able.

 

[Avder]

Considering he spent most of his career in front of the Oilers, I'm willing to give him a lot of credit for being able to look like an average goaltender.

Next year is going to be a big indicator of what kind of value we got with this signing. If he can perform at least half way between his career average and what he put up last year, we'll ave ourselves a steal.

 

[Jesus comma Brodin]

Niemi's deal with Dallas is 3/$13.5M AAV $4.5M... Just to put it into perspective a little. Since so many of us were talking about Niemi being a possibility the question of would you rather have Dubs for 6/$26 or Niemi for 3/$13.5 is in play

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

Dubnyk, pretty easily.

 

[Jesus comma Brodin]

Dubnyk, pretty easily.

X2. Easy for me as well

 

[Sharppi]

Dubnyk, every time.

 

[Nsjohnson]

Yeah, two very good games out of 10 is very promising. Dubnyk was decent against the Blues, but he was a trainwreck agains Chicago.

News Flash: Everyone was a trainwreck against the Champs.

 

[W75]

About Niemi / Dubs.. Hard to say. Niemi is past his prime, Dub's hopefully not. But it's a long contract and a lot can happen.

Value is reasonable and hope that Dub's still hungry. Would prefer shorter contract with Dubs or something like Rämö kind of option. But as some have already explained, this won't tie their hands if things go South again. Like they've gone in the past.

 

[Granlund 64]

Dallas currently paying $10+ million for two goalies and we are paying around $8.5M for three.

 

[thestonedkoala]

Value is reasonable and hope that Dub's still hungry.

That's a real good point; now that Dub's has stability and doesn't have to worry, will that motivate him more to play as well as he has or will he not be as focused?