Rumor: Sharks and Couture working towards extension
- Thread starter Lebanezer
- Start date
pappaf2
Registered User
Juxtaposer
Outro: Divina Comedia
Vaasa
Registered User
He's getting 8 x 8. Given what Kane got and DW's recent love of loading the team up with long-term and expensive contracts, the only way it's not that is if it's for more money.
Given that garbage Kane contract as well as the Burns/Vlasic albatrosses, I think it's more than fair to say that DW has adopted a new philosophy of overpaying his guys in order to keep them. With that in mind, I have a hard time imagining Couture getting anything less than 8M over 7-8 years.
The Nemesis
Semper Tyrannus
He will sign 6.75M x 6yrs.
With assurances of the captaincy.We all know what he wants.
He's gonna have to get in line. We all know there's only one voice for Pete in the locker room.
TomasHertlsRooster
Don’t say eye test when you mean points
I think it will be 8x8.
On one hand, I can’t imagine Couture not getting at least 1 year and 1M more than Kane. On the other hand, I can’t imagine Couture getting more than Burns when Burns is a defenseman just equaled Logan’s career high in points in a down year.
The more I look at it, though, the more I am perplexed that Burns only got 1M and 1Y more than Kane. 2013-2014, when Burns played only 69 games, was the last time Burns didn’t score more points than Kane ever has in his career.
Nice to see a Vaasa post. I totally agree.
On one hand, I can’t imagine Couture not getting at least 1 year and 1M more than Kane. On the other hand, I can’t imagine Couture getting more than Burns when Burns is a defenseman just equaled Logan’s career high in points in a down year.
The more I look at it, though, the more I am perplexed that Burns only got 1M and 1Y more than Kane. 2013-2014, when Burns played only 69 games, was the last time Burns didn’t score more points than Kane ever has in his career.
Nice to see a Vaasa post. I totally agree.
8x8 wouldn't surprise but I think it's a little less if DW can convince him they need a little space to help add to the team. This negotiation isn't quite the same as a UFA from another team type deal. i.e., players like him and Burns would get more on the open market. There is also the threat of being traded for these players with one year remaining who getting extended. I'm hopeful he takes 7.5 but 8+ x 8 is likely considering his 2016 playoffs. He deserves to get paid for producing as he did.
- Sep 29, 2016
- 11,886
- 5,567
If you were Couture...would you accept a discount to save the ass of a GM who just overpaid for Kane? I wouldn't. If he does take less than 8 then Wilson better appreciate Couture's determination to win as a Shark.
slocal
Dude...what?
He's gonna have to get in line. We all know there's only one voice for Pete in the locker room.
Honestly, "if I were Couture" I would have a better thought process than you just used in determining what I wanted to be paid.
For the record, since it appears you haven't been paying attention to the Sharks thru previous contract re-signings... Everytime Wilson has re-signed a player to what is clearly below open market value he express gratitude profusely. He gives the player all the credit in those situations and explains how they realize the team needs to maintain some form of salary structure in order to build a competitive team. Marleau and Jumbo contracts come to mind immediately.
as has been addressed repeatedly, he didn't overpay for Kane. He paid market value for him. There is a difference. I know it's tough to understand. Man am I glad you and some of the others aren't running this team. The Sharks would Suuuuucccck...!
- Sep 29, 2016
- 11,886
- 5,567
one2gamble
Registered User
- Dec 24, 2007
- 17,006
- 7,995
hohosaregood
Banned
- Sep 1, 2011
- 32,410
- 12,620
Kane got the same Cap Hit % that Couture had on his last contract at 9.33% which makes sense to me. I can see Couture getting an increase on that Cap Hit % but I don't think it makes that much sense though. I appreciate that Couture is basically the only player on the team that can shoot to score, but he doesn't drive play anymore and is more of a complementary player the last couple of years. I don't think I can see him carrying a line anymore which makes me torn on giving him anything more than Kane.
Maladroit
Registered User
Burns is a full six and a half years older than Kane. That makes a huge difference when projecting future performance, which is essentially what a contract is placing a value on. Also Burns' AAV was 11% of the salary cap upper limit when he signed, the equivalent of a $8.75mil/yr contract this summer.
WTFetus
Marlov
The Nemesis
Semper Tyrannus
Not quite as old as a Lord of the Rings meme. But I'm sure you're only getting the freshest content on your MySpace page. Right underneath all those videos you took of yourself doing sick tricks on your razor scooter.
Satastic
Nazi punks **** off
Quid Pro Clowe
Registered User
hohosaregood
Banned
- Sep 1, 2011
- 32,410
- 12,620
The Nemesis
Semper Tyrannus
slocal
Dude...what?
The Nemesis
Semper Tyrannus
7 Million Years for $1 a Year on average.
Wilson becomes GM of the year for a month.
