Rumor: The Magical Mystery UFA Tour (feat. Jaromir Jagr)

[golfpro827]

Granted, it's Ekland, still interesting enough to post.

"Jagr is back talking to Montreal, but Carolina still is the team to beat...Philly isn't an impossibility if a trade (Cobourn) can be made I was told. Giroux is a HUGE supporter of bringing in Jags."

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Eklu...nothingbe-nothing-BuzzCast-and-Rumors/1/52683

Click to read more...

 

[What the Faulk]

Well, there goes any hope the Canes ever had of signing Jagr.

 

[bleedgreen]

We're haggling and fighting to be his sixth choice. No thanks. If he really wanted to be here he would've signed already.

I've watched his whole career and had a love hate thing for him. I just don't want to be part of the reunion tour.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I think he's still got a solid game, but I agree we don't need to be jerked around too much trying to get him.

 

[My Special Purpose]

I'm going to try to be a kinder, more gentler, totalkev. Apologies for my recent bad mood.

I thinking signing Jagr would be a bad idea. Here's why:

• It would put us at the top of the salary cap, leaving no room for additions during the season.
• He's not a top-4 defenseman.
• He's old (not that I have anything against him for that reason, but it does increase the injury risk).
• It puts all our "eggs in one basket" for no real reason. If we stay below the cap, and our season is going well, we can add at the deadline depending on our needs at the time. We may lose a key guy at a key position (like Cole in 2006) and want to replace him (like we did with Recchi). What if we lose Pitkanen, but we tied up our trade-deadline money in Jagr before the season?
• If we are in contention nearing the trade deadline, guys even better than Jagr will be available. I just think that if we sign him now, it may be an exciting, hopeful, move, but we'll pay for it by not being able to improve ourselves during the season.

 

[golfpro827]

Chip Alexander tweeted that the Jagr rumor wasn't true.

 

[Anton Babchuk]

^ Since Jagr is 35+, he can be signed to a contract with easily obtainable performance bonuses that are deferred to next season if they cause the team to go over the cap. See Iginla, who has a 1.8M base salary with a 4.2M bonus for playing 10 games. Why this obvious loophole exists, who knows, but it does.

 

[Anton Babchuk]

Chip Alexander tweeted that the Jagr rumor wasn't true.

His tweet was to dispel a report (by some Twitter "insider" troll) that Jagr had already signed here, not to say that there was no interest in Jagr.

 

[Navin R Slavin]

I'm going to try to be a kinder, more gentler, totalkev. Apologies for my recent bad mood.

I thinking signing Jagr would be a bad idea. Here's why:

• It would put us at the top of the salary cap, leaving no room for additions during the season.
• He's not a top-4 defenseman.
• He's old (not that I have anything against him for that reason, but it does increase the injury risk).
• It puts all our "eggs in one basket" for no real reason. If we stay below the cap, and our season is going well, we can add at the deadline depending on our needs at the time. We may lose a key guy at a key position (like Cole in 2006) and want to replace him (like we did with Recchi). What if we lose Pitkanen, but we tied up our trade-deadline money in Jagr before the season?
• If we are in contention nearing the trade deadline, guys even better than Jagr will be available. I just think that if we sign him now, it may be an exciting, hopeful, move, but we'll pay for it by not being able to improve ourselves during the season.

You may be right. I find little to dispute in your analysis.

And yet, even if all of those things are true, I'd still like to see us sign him, because I'd like to see him play for my team for a year, even if it's in the twilight of his career.

--hank

 

[My Special Purpose]

You may be right. I find little to dispute in your analysis.

And yet, even if all of those things are true, I'd still like to see us sign him, because I'd like to see him play for my team for a year, even if it's in the twilight of his career.

--hank

I was reading somewhere that it was our turn.

 

[Ole Gil]

He hasn't signed anywhere yet. That doesn't mean he doesn't want to play anywhere. Not all players sprint to get their contract inked.

In the end, he's a 50+ point guy who'd be filling a spot we currently have 25 pt guys pencilled into. Maybe he's burnt out by the playoffs, but at this point, lets just get into the playoffs, and worry about other things then.

Regardless of name or age, if we can get a guy who is expected to put up 50, and squeeze them under the cap, I think it's good for the team.

 

[Zombie Mike Murphy]

Would love to see this. Imagine if he could do for the 3rd line (or even the 2nd) what Semin did for the 1st? Plus, spending to the cap would be a sign of health. If we're ever going to, this is the year, the cap is only going to go up. With Staal and Ward both inching towards 30, going towards "win now" is the right move. We were headed there last year, even with the terrible defense (which should be better this year), until major injuries hit.

 

[golfpro827]

In my mind he would be on the third line and play in PP situations and in end of game situations when you need goals.

And just the boost the team would get in ticket sales, jersey sales, t-shirt sales, media attention - it would be great.

 

[garnetpalmetto]

In my mind he would be on the third line and play in PP situations and in end of game situations when you need goals.

And just the boost the team would get in ticket sales, jersey sales, t-shirt sales, media attention - it would be great.

And hey, instant storyline in our new division what with Jagr having played for the Pens, Flyers, Caps, and Rangers.

 

[Joe McGrath]

IF Jagr was true, Id play him with Ruutu and JStaal. Good luck getting the puck away from those 3.

 

[faulkingdynamic]

I don't think we are counting on him or being jerked around at all. I do believe that Jagr's agent was trying to drum up business in the Eastern Conference and JR gave him our best offer based on our cap situation and our level of interest. I don't think we are chasing or counter offering anything. It was merely an opportunity that presented itself and we opened the door to peak inside. That said, im on board with most of Totalkev's points. We still need some nastiness, grit and size on the bottom six, which at this point I wonder if we will trade for using the bevy of non waiver eligible youngish players.

 

[Jussijuice]

In my mind he would be on the third line and play in PP situations and in end of game situations when you need goals.

And just the boost the team would get in ticket sales, jersey sales, t-shirt sales, media attention - it would be great.

This is why it's a good idea. Putting Jagr on the PP makes it elite on paper. If he could boost the 14.6% the Canes ran last year to 18-20% the Canes are on their way to the Playoffs

His merchandise sales alone might make up his contract. Plus the recognition and ticket sales from people wanting to come see an NHL legend.

The way I see it the Canes could either sign him now, or trade valuable assets at the deadline for him or someone who at best is equal in benefit. I'd take the former.

 

[My Special Purpose]

I've got another negative (again, not that I'm being negative, but that I'm against signing Jagr). It usually takes at least half a season to incorporate a key new player into a team's lineup. We had two key new guys last offseason - J. Staal and Semin - and no training camp. Semin luckily fit in right away with E. Staal and Tlusty, but we never really found a happy place for J. Staal. And then Ruutu came back late, and it was almost like a third new forward.

If we add another key player to our top-9, even with a full training camp, it could be months before we figure out roles for everyone.

Plus, and I can't stress this enough, he's not a top-4 defenseman.

 

[Navin R Slavin]

plus, and i can't stress this enough, he's not a top-4 defenseman.

he is so why you hatin

 

[golfpro827]

Plus, and I can't stress this enough, he's not a top-4 defenseman.

Do you really think that with 7 NHL d-men on the roster (8 if you consider bellemore) and 10 NHL forwards on the roster than getting another d-man is the priority?

Only way another d-man is brought it is a trade.

 

[Wolfpuck]

I would be willing to take Jagr if the price was right. The problem is that the price probably wouldn't be right. He would put us right at the cap, leaving us very little flexibility moving forward this season. I'm not too worried about chemistry issues or finding a spot for him in the lineup, seeing as Muller will finally have a training camp to put everything together.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Do you really think that with 7 NHL d-men on the roster (8 if you consider bellemore) and 10 NHL forwards on the roster than getting another d-man is the priority?

Only way another d-man is brought it is a trade.

Yeah, but that trade is going to be tough to execute if we're at the cap limit.

 

[AD Skinner]

Jagr is a legend. Totalkev, I think all of your points are rational and I agree with them to an extent, but we're talking about one of the best players of all time. Sure, he's not what he once was, but if you get the chance to have Jaromir Jagr on your team I feel like you have to take it. Worst case scenario, someone will want him at the trade deadline.

 

[Anton Babchuk]

I've got another negative (again, not that I'm being negative, but that I'm against signing Jagr). It usually takes at least half a season to incorporate a key new player into a team's lineup. We had two key new guys last offseason - J. Staal and Semin - and no training camp. Semin luckily fit in right away with E. Staal and Tlusty, but we never really found a happy place for J. Staal. And then Ruutu came back late, and it was almost like a third new forward.

If we add another key player to our top-9, even with a full training camp, it could be months before we figure out roles for everyone.

Plus, and I can't stress this enough, he's not a top-4 defenseman.

That top 4 defenseman would have to be acclimated to the lineup, too, wouldn't he (along with Sekera and Komisarek)? Therefore it's a bad idea to acquire a top 4 defenseman.

I'd rather work on incorporating Jagr into the lineup than watch another season of Dalpe/Bowman further establishing their bust status, with Patrick Dwyer aka The New Chad in over his head as well.
This team has a disaster of a bottom six, a second line that doesn't work and Ruutu a swift breeze away from his next hip surgery.

 

[Navin R Slavin]

Yeah, but that trade is going to be tough to execute if we're at the cap limit.

Meh. The more I think about this argument, the less I buy it.

Because here's the thing: Jagr is precisely the kind of player a team *would* pick up at the deadline: a temporary hired gun to help with the playoff push, with veteran savvy and leadership. So why not get that benefit for the whole year, if we can get it?

Sure, it means that we're not going to be able to pick up specifically defensive help if we need it -- but I'm ok with that. I tend to think defensive pieces added at the deadline are less useful (unless you're getting Ray Bourque).

--hank

(Also: in a pinch, Jagr could be a brilliant top 4 defenseman.)