Confirmed with Link: Jimmy Howard re-signed for 6 years 5.3m per year

[GT500x]

If it is the trend do you think that Howard or his agent are going to sign a deal without one?

I'm sure another team would be willing if he chose to go to free agency.

I wouldn't have a problem with him making that choice if our only other option was signing him to a six year contract with a NTC. We'd have to rely on Gus and whoever else we could find on the scrap heap, and forget about "rebuilding on the fly."

 

[sarcastro]

Just because its the league trend doesn't make it right and shouldn't give KH an excuse IMO.

Choose your own adventure:

To give in and give Howard a fair market long term contract with a NTC, go to page 74.

To stand your ground and roll with a Gustavsson/Mrazek/LaBarbera combination in goal for 2013-14, go to page 26.

Those are the only two options - what page do you turn to?

I'd prefer the Wings to have zero contracts with NTCs, but that's the way it is.

 

[GoAwayDanCleary]

Choose your own adventure:

To give in and give Howard a fair market long term contract with a NTC, go to page 74.

To stand your ground and roll with a Gustavsson/Mrazek/LaBarbera combination in goal for 2013-14, go to page 26.

Those are the only two options - what page do you turn to?

I'd prefer the Wings to have zero contracts with NTCs, but that's the way it is.

I guess your right since its goalies on different teams, but I don't think the amount of NTC Holland has handed out to guys on the Wings affected Howard's contract.

I'm fine with the contract since its our only logical choice, just hope he will still be tradeable in a few years. I guess we'll have to see what the terms are on his NTC.

 

[RedWingsNow*]

Fans making excuses for the GM once again.

Tiresome.

People acting like Kenny Holland has NO CHOICE but to give an above average goalie the world on a platter.

Ridiculous.

 

[PullHard]

I can't believe Howard got term, money and the NT/MC.

If I'm Kenny, I tell him that he gets 2/3.

 

[Heaton]

I can't believe Howard got term, money and the NT/MC.

If I'm Kenny, I tell him that he gets 2/3.

I think Holland would rather he get all 3. He probably feels like it gives the team stability considering so many teams have been looking for a #1 goalie for years. The problem is there are so many other goalies out there that if you build your team the right way can be just as good.

This Howard signing is a change in philosophy, I don't see the Wings going for a top pairing defensemen anymore.

 

[PullHard]

I think Holland would rather he get all 3. He probably feels like it gives the team stability considering so many teams have been looking for a #1 goalie for years. The problem is there are so many other goalies out there that if you build your team the right way can be just as good.

This Howard signing is a change in philosophy, I don't see the Wings going for a top pairing defensemen anymore.

You're right about the philosophy,

I guess we now wait and see how it goes. And what/if other parts of the philosophy change.

 

[GT500x]

I think Holland would rather he get all 3. He probably feels like it gives the team stability considering so many teams have been looking for a #1 goalie for years. The problem is there are so many other goalies out there that if you build your team the right way can be just as good.

This Howard signing is a change in philosophy, I don't see the Wings going for a top pairing defensemen anymore.

b-b-but... Holland promised. He said he would! D:

 

[RedWingsNow*]

I think Holland would rather he get all 3. He probably feels like it gives the team stability considering so many teams have been looking for a #1 goalie for years. The problem is there are so many other goalies out there that if you build your team the right way can be just as good.

This Howard signing is a change in philosophy, I don't see the Wings going for a top pairing defensemen anymore.

Holland likes to keep his players in the fold.

There is NO CHANGE here. This is a GM who drafts players and likes to keep them. When they get away, he brings them back.

Holland spent like a drunken sailor because he didn't really have any pressure on his cap. Had he gone out and gotten Suter and Parise, he would have been forced to try to get Jimmy to take less.

Holland is a ruddlerless GM who makes the easy, comfortable moves.
The last time Holland acted with any decisiveness was 2007, when he let Schneider and Lang walk and signed Rafalski (and then traded for Stuart).

It took a certain amount of guts for Holland to let those guys walk, knowing how he is.

If he can't afford to keep Filppula, expect Cleary to be back.

 

[joe89]

I don't see it as confirmed on capgeek, only that he has those clauses in some capacity. I would be very surprised if his isn't built up the same as Datsyuk's, Kronwall's, Bertuzzi's, Ericsson's and Gustavsson's. Full protection early in the contract at most, then a partial NTC at the end. Has Kenny ever done a full NMC, all years of the contract? I don't think he has and I don't think he did. Howard will probably be moveable year 5 and 6 of the contract.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

If he can't afford to keep Filppula, expect Cleary to be back.

And if neither come back, will your whole perspective on Holland come crashing down?

I find these constant predictions by Wings fans to be more tiresome than people actually defending or criticizing a deal Holland made.

 

[RedWingsNow*]

And if neither come back, will your whole perspective on Holland come crashing down?

I find these constant predictions by Wings fans to be more tiresome than people actually defending or criticizing a deal Holland made.

Really.
So do you find it tiresome when someone says "I think the Wings will win the Central?"
Or "I think Tatar will be a 30 goal scorer?"

Why is it tiresome for you when someone says they think Holland might bring back a player?

Is it because you don't want Cleary back? Or is it tiresome because you do want Cleary back?

Or is it tiresome because it's a critique of Holland, and you're tired of critiques of Holland?

 

[ArGarBarGar]

Really.
So do you find it tiresome when someone says "I think the Wings will win the Central?"
Or "I think Tatar will be a 30 goal scorer?"

Why is it tiresome for you when someone says they think Holland might bring back a player?

Is it because you don't want Cleary back? Or is it tiresome because you do want Cleary back?

Or is it tiresome because it's a critique of Holland, and you're tired of critiques of Holland?

It's tiresome because they are constant, many over the top, and just annoying in their meaning. Mainly just used as reasoning to bash Holland for something he hasn't done yet. Notice how I take no issue with people criticizing Holland for what he has done, and the moves (or lack thereof) he has made. It's more about "I bet Holland will sign Lilja and sign Cleary to a long term deal!" and Ekllund "e5" posts such as yours.

As for the bolded, did you read the second part of my post, or did that conflict with the line of strange questions you wanted to put on me?

Keep fighting to good fight, though.

 

[Heaton]

Holland likes to keep his players in the fold.

There is NO CHANGE here. This is a GM who drafts players and likes to keep them. When they get away, he brings them back.

Holland spent like a drunken sailor because he didn't really have any pressure on his cap. Had he gone out and gotten Suter and Parise, he would have been forced to try to get Jimmy to take less.

Holland is a ruddlerless GM who makes the easy, comfortable moves.
The last time Holland acted with any decisiveness was 2007, when he let Schneider and Lang walk and signed Rafalski (and then traded for Stuart).

It took a certain amount of guts for Holland to let those guys walk, knowing how he is.

If he can't afford to keep Filppula, expect Cleary to be back.

In that respect there isn't a change, but Holland hasn't paid a goalie more than 3m a year for the past decade.

 

[sarcastro]

Choose your own adventure:

To give in and give Howard a fair market long term contract with a NTC, go to page 74.

To stand your ground and roll with a Gustavsson/Mrazek/LaBarbera combination in goal for 2013-14, go to page 26.

Those are the only two options - what page do you turn to?

I'd prefer the Wings to have zero contracts with NTCs, but that's the way it is.

Fans making excuses for the GM once again.

Tiresome.

People acting like Kenny Holland has NO CHOICE but to give an above average goalie the world on a platter.

Ridiculous.

Which do you choose, if you're the GM?

 

[RedWingsNow*]

In that respect there isn't a change, but Holland hasn't paid a goalie more than 3m a year for the past decade.

Well, this is a guy who had $17M worth of goalies in 2003-04, if I remember right.

When we came back from the cap Holland took the discounts where he could get them.
Which was everywhere, including goalie.
Hasek and Osgood were his goalies post-cap, and they were both older guys at the end of their rope..
It was clear that Ozzie was going to give way to Howard and wasn't going to break the bank.
So the only way Holland was going to spend on the goalie was if Howie failed.

I don't think the "spend cheap on goalies" was a belief, but rather a circumstance of the times.

 

[RedWingsNow*]

Which do you choose, if you're the GM?

If i'm GM, I offer a 4 year deal worth $5.5M
Maybe I go to six years, but not with an NTC.

If not, oh well. Bye Bye Jimmy. He's not a "franchise" goalie. He's easy to replace.

However it goes, the deal is done by January or I consider moving him -- maybe to Buffalo for Miller.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

I really don't see the appeal of Miller over Howie. Especially since to make that trade you would need to add anyway.

 

[Heaton]

I really don't see the appeal of Miller over Howie. Especially since to make that trade you would need to add anyway.

Me neither. I'm not convinced Miller is any better than Howard these days.

 

[RedWingsNow*]

I really don't see the appeal of Miller over Howie. Especially since to make that trade you would need to add anyway.

Miller has shown pretty good big-game ability.
Miller is also not locked in for 6 years.
Miller is a hometown guy and helps build a connection with the community.

 

[Winger98]

If i'm GM, I offer a 4 year deal worth $5.5M
Maybe I go to six years, but not with an NTC.

If not, oh well. Bye Bye Jimmy. He's not a "franchise" goalie. He's easy to replace.

However it goes, the deal is done by January or I consider moving him -- maybe to Buffalo for Miller.

If it's an NTC for only the first few years, is that really a deal breaker, though? A couple of years in GR for Mrazek isn't going to hurt him, and backing up another year or two wouldn't be a bad thing, either. And there goes the first 3-4 years of Howard's deal, and possibly the extent of the modified NTC.

I'll be unhappy if it's an NTC for the entire contract, but any deal with Howard was going to lock him in as our guy for the next four or five years.

 

[sarcastro]

If i'm GM, I offer a 4 year deal worth $5.5M
Maybe I go to six years, but not with an NTC.

If not, oh well. Bye Bye Jimmy. He's not a "franchise" goalie. He's easy to replace.

However it goes, the deal is done by January or I consider moving him -- maybe to Buffalo for Miller.

Wait, I'm confused.

You're saying this is how you would have played it this year? It can't be how you'd play it going forward, because January is about 6 months too late if you want to re-sign Howard.

If you move him to Buffalo for Miller, you then have a goalie who is older and even more expensive, and who only has one year left before he's UFA too. So even in a best-case, you're kicking the big decision one year down the road.

If we boil your offer terms down, you're saying that you'd be willing to risk rolling with a combination of rookies and terrible veteran backups if Howard says no to your offer. All because of a NTC. That's a big risk. A bigger risk than two extra years and a NTC, I would say.

If he walks this summer, who do you replace him with?

 

[RedWingsNow*]

Wait, I'm confused.

You're saying this is how you would have played it this year? It can't be how you'd play it going forward, because January is about 6 months too late if you want to re-sign Howard.

If you move him to Buffalo for Miller, you then have a goalie who is older and even more expensive, and who only has one year left before he's UFA too. So even in a best-case, you're kicking the big decision one year down the road.

If we boil your offer terms down, you're saying that you'd be willing to risk rolling with a combination of rookies and terrible veteran backups if Howard says no to your offer. All because of a NTC. That's a big risk. A bigger risk than two extra years and a NTC, I would say.

If he walks this summer, who do you replace him with?

Whoever.
Backstrom.
Maybe I trade one of my defensive prospects and a forward for Bernier.

 

[RedWingsNow*]

If it's an NTC for only the first few years, is that really a deal breaker, though? A couple of years in GR for Mrazek isn't going to hurt him, and backing up another year or two wouldn't be a bad thing, either. And there goes the first 3-4 years of Howard's deal, and possibly the extent of the modified NTC.

I'll be unhappy if it's an NTC for the entire contract, but any deal with Howard was going to lock him in as our guy for the next four or five years.

The general point is that Howard isn't a franchise goalie. And I don't think I back up the brinks truck and give him all the clauses he wants too.

 

[Heaton]

The general point is that Howard isn't a franchise goalie. And I don't think I back up the brinks truck and give him all the clauses he wants too.

What constitutes a franchise goalie to you? I don't like the contract at all, but I think Howard is a franchise goalie.

To be honest, there's only a handful of guys I'd consider a lot better than Howard.