Speculation: Romanov's next contract

[Junohockeyfan]

I think if there was an opportunity to take a risk and dole out a longterm contract after an ELC, this is the one to do it on. But i doubt Romanov / or his agent, would agree to a longterm contract.

So i see a bridge 2 or 3 year contract at $3M AAV.

What say you?

Click to read more...

 

[_vivelequebec_]

3 years/10 millions would be very sweet.

2 years/7 millions probably

 

[Asif10]

i think he mentioned he loves montreal and wants to be here for a long time.

I can see a 5x22M

 

[jaffy27]

i think he mentioned he loves montreal and wants to be here for a long time.

I can see a 5x22M

I'd sign him 8yrs x 32M$

In my eyes, he's proven......get him long term, he's a keeper

 

[Junohockeyfan]

3 years/10 millions would be very sweet.

2 years/7 millions probably

I think that's probably in the ballpark.

I would like to see Hughes take a swing at a longterm deal though.

 

[ottawa]

I'd sign him 8yrs x 32M$

In my eyes, he's proven......get him long term, he's a keeper

I don't think he settles on a 4m for 8 years when he can likely make ~3.5 on a bridge deal.

Would like to see a ~3.5m bridge deal then lock him up for 8 x 5

 

[Vachon23]

2,5m for 2-3 years

 

[Tetragrammaton]

Romanov 8 years 4.5 million

Caufield 8 years 7.5 million

Do it now, this is how you build a contender, invest into your young talent early, don’t wait until they earn themselves more money.

 

[Bee Holder]

8 years at something around 4 - 4.125 (between 32M and 33M total) would be sweet!

 

[ReHabs]

Is Romanov really worth investing eight years? Isn't it strange for a rebuilding team to sign players for that long knowing there will be so much uncertainty to come?

 

[LaP]

Is Romanov really worth investing eight years? Isn't it strange for a rebuilding team to sign players for that long knowing there will be so much uncertainty to come?

It depends on the aav. If you can lock him 8 years at under 5 millions i'd say you do it. But i don't think he sign such contract.

 

[_vivelequebec_]

Is Romanov really worth investing eight years? Isn't it strange for a rebuilding team to sign players for that long knowing there will be so much uncertainty to come?

It’s worthy, unless it has a no-movement clause.

 

[Milhouse40]

I don't think he settles on a 4m for 8 years when he can likely make ~3.5 on a bridge deal.

Would like to see a ~3.5m bridge deal then lock him up for 8 x 5

Don't underestimate the value of certainty and security.
Would you settle for a $7 millions contract when you have a 32 millions contract in front of you.
32 millions.....That's enough money for life.....no matter what happens

No one knows the future......He could get hurt, have an accident or fall down the line-up and lose value.
25 millions is a whole lot to gamble.

 

[OldCraig71]

Is Romanov really worth investing eight years? Isn't it strange for a rebuilding team to sign players for that long knowing there will be so much uncertainty to come?

3 years 10 million is plenty, he hasn't really proven enough just yet to be getting a long-term deal.

 

[The Great Weal]

Lol at the thought of 8 years for Romanov. 2 years/6million is more than fine for now.

 

[Archijerej]

I really don't get what's the big deal with this kid. Some of the numbers for a bridge deal seem excessive.

Remember when Kulak was playing well in our top-4 for half a season? He got himself what, $1,65M for 3 years? And that was on a playoff-calibre team and before the cap got frozen.

I have not seen a similar stretch from Romanov. Sure, he's young and can develop into a good player, but unless we want to bet on his growth on a long-term deal, I fail to see how he deserves anything more than $1,5-2M on a bridge deal.

 

[ottawa]

Don't underestimate the value of certainty and security.
Would you settle for a $7 millions contract when you have a 32 millions contract in front of you.
32 millions.....That's enough money for life.....no matter what happens

No one knows the future......He could get hurt, have an accident or fall down the line-up and lose value.
25 millions is a whole lot to gamble.

I'd very easily settle for "just" 7m in Romanov's position, 10 out of 10 times. If I'm getting better every year and am already in a #4 role at just 22, I'm banking on myself by taking a 2 year contract and cashing in big right after.

From a management POV, I'd also do the bridge, 10 out of 10 times. I'm not throwing an 8 year contract to a kid with just 133 games under his belt. Yes it could turn into an amazing deal, but it could also turn into a KK deal if he just hits a wall...then we're stuck with that contract for a long time.

 

[Archijerej]

I'd very easily settle for "just" 7m in Romanov's position, 10 out of 10 times.

If I'm getting better every year and am already in a #4 role at just 22, I'm banking on myself by taking a 2 year contract and cashing in big right after. It's something pretty much most NHLers do.

From a management POV, I'd also do the bridge, 10 out of 10 times. I'm not throwing an 8 year contract to a kid with just 133 games under his belt. Yes it could turn into an amazing deal, but it could also turn into a KK deal if he just stops progressing.

You realise that this top-4 role was on the worst team in the league and he was regularly exposed in this role? We might as well played Corey Schueneman in this role, or Kulak and it wouldn't make any difference. It sure doesn't mean we should be paying any of them north of $1,5M on a 2-year deal.

 

[Canadienna]

You realise that this top-4 role was on the worst team in the league and he was regularly exposed in this role? We might as well played Corey Schueneman in this role, or Kulak and it wouldn't make any difference. It sure doesn't mean we should be paying any of them north of $1,5M a 2-year deal.

What a joke. Yeah I'm sure Schueneman could hold down Romy's minutes no problem "massivef***ingeyeroll*

 

[ottawa]

You realise that this top-4 role was on the worst team in the league and he was regularly exposed in this role? We might as well played Corey Schueneman in this role, or Kulak and it wouldn't make any difference. It sure doesn't mean we should be paying any of them north of $1,5M a 2-year deal.

I do realize this he was a top 4 on the worst team in the league, and I might be in the minority here but I also think he's shown that he's a legitimate top 4D (or better) in the making and if Romanov as a player believes this too, then he has absolutely no reason to settle on an 8 year over a bridge.

I'm sure he realizes he'll be closer to a top 4D in 2 years than he is now, thus earning him better money in 2 years. If he thinks he's plateau'd or simply wants security because he's not risk adverse then sure, he'll take that 8 years contract like KK did.

That being said, I also don't think Hughes should throw an 8 year his way as well. Give him 2 more years to prove himself.

 

[Archijerej]

What a joke. Yeah I'm sure Schueneman could hold down Romy's minutes no problem "massivef***ingeyeroll*

Well obviously I'm exaggerating in this case, but I'm eager to be educated on Romanov. You say he was "handling" his minutes. I say he was drowning more often than not. What am I not seeing with this kid?

 

[Sterling Archer]

I'd go 8 year $4+M or 3 year $8M range.

 

[Leon Lucius Black]

Is Romanov really worth investing eight years? Isn't it strange for a rebuilding team to sign players for that long knowing there will be so much uncertainty to come?

The benefit of signing a player long-term when you're rebuilding would be you're hoping the AAV will look a lot better in the later years when the team will be expected to be better.

However, you have to be 100% sure of the player you're extending and you can't be like the Sens and extend a plug like Colin White for 6 years just because he got 40 points one year.

 

[jaffy27]

Is Romanov really worth investing eight years? Isn't it strange for a rebuilding team to sign players for that long knowing there will be so much uncertainty to come?

What’s certain is that he’s a legit top 4, he’s durable and he’s good.

Sign him long term and on the double

 

[jaffy27]

You realise that this top-4 role was on the worst team in the league and he was regularly exposed in this role? We might as well played Corey Schueneman in this role, or Kulak and it wouldn't make any difference. It sure doesn't mean we should be paying any of them north of $1,5M on a 2-year deal.

If he can handle shit goaltending and plugs for partners at 22, imagine what he can do with a legit talented partner and a goalie that can make saves and with fwds that can score at 25