KevinRedkey
12/18/23 and beyond!
- Jan 22, 2010
- 9,855
- 4,803
1) Let him walk at the end of the contractYeah, what exactly is the alternative there? Don't sign him because of that $2M and then...what exactly?
Oh, so continue to suck in the hope you end up with someone half as good as Hall is now. Sounds great. At some point, you actually need to start winning, not this perpetual plan for the future.1) Let him walk at the end of the contract
2) Trade him before the deadline
A) Build around Hischier/Hughes
B) Use gained cap space for UFA signings
C) Use gained cap space in trades like for Subban or Gusev
10.500 seems to be about right IMO
Why are you so mad? I just answered your questions with the obvious. I am not advocating one or the other.Oh, so continue to suck in the hope you end up with someone half as good as Hall is now. Sounds great. At some point, you actually need to start winning, not this perpetual plan for the future.
Listen, if Hall leaves you me-too and build around your young guys. It'll take some time and they'll continue to get better. But Plan A better damn well be sign your best player.
Would think he asks for the Panarin deal. 7x11.7 frontloaded with bonuses, lockout protection, and a full NMC. Maybe Jersey finds some of those things unreasonable such as frontloading and lockout protection, but that should then push him above 12m over 7, and maybe with the frontloaded bonuses, full NMC, and lockout protection they can get him between 11 to 10.5. We will see how committed the relatively new ownership is with this negotiation. As a UFA, someone will give him that contract structure.
I'm not worried about years 6-8 of a potential longterm contract. In today's NHL, its relatively easy to "Get out" of a contract if you really need to.
Basically, if we want Hall for the next 3-4 years we need to give him a 7-8 year contract. There is no way around it.
Wasn't meant to be mad, more exasperated than anything.Why are you so mad? I just answered your questions with the obvious. I am not advocating one or the other.
But as stated by others, the worst case scenario is not letting Hall walk for nothing. It's signing him long term with a significant overpay. Looking back Chicago would rather not have signed Seabrook to his long term contract.
In before Hall says he doesn't want to deal with it during the regular season and just wants to focus on hockey until the season is over.
Maybe a team goes all in for him because they know they're going to get lots of first overall picks
Might as well call him First OverHall.
You think Hall is taking what Skinner took, 2 million less than Marner and 2.6M less than Panarin? Haha. He will get 11+One of the few stars on that team. Been a bit uneven in his career. 9M in AAV?
He certainly won't. They're the same age and Hall is the better, more accomplished player.Sure. Panarin has the second highest AAV in the whole NHL. The only team, who might had paid more total money over the life time of the contract would have been CBJ on a eight year deal.
With the Cap not expected to raise significantly Hall almost certainly will sign for less than Panarin.
Maybe he does not want to be locked up by a team with a room disrupting dominant personia for years.
He certainly won't. They're the same age and Hall is the better, more accomplished player.
In what world? Panarin has been in the league for 4 years.
Panarin: 324 points in 325 games(26pts in 27gp PO)
Hall: 251 points in 268 games(6pts in 5gp PO)
Panarin clearly showed he wasn't a product of Kane when he carried colombus on his back. So I'm not sure how hall is more accomplished. One good year doesn't make a player.
One of those guys have a Hart though.
One of those guys have a Hart though.
Looking back? At the time it was a WTF contract. But that's Scotty's little boy for you.Why are you so mad? I just answered your questions with the obvious. I am not advocating one or the other.
But as stated by others, the worst case scenario is not letting Hall walk for nothing. It's signing him long term with a significant overpay. Looking back Chicago would rather not have signed Seabrook to his long term contract.