Tyler Ennis Contract Thread

[tehinternet]

When/What will the Ennis Contract be?

I know I'm anxious and there's plenty of time left. Even though Ennis is a RFA I wouldn't mind seeing him locked up. Any ideas on what Murray will sign him to?

I would guess $3.75 Mil cap hit per year over 3 or 4 seasons signed in early August.

 

[haseoke39]

I'm sure his agent is being a dick about all the money we just blew on lesser players. If Meszaros is worth 4, Ennis must be worth 7 kind of thing.

He'll get more than 4, guaranteed.

 

[Reddawg]

I can't see any reason why he would take anything short of Hodgson's deal...5-6 years at $4.25/yr

 

[tehinternet]

Yah I was just looking at capgeek as you were posting. IMO we are overpaying for a few guys. I think 3.75/yr is reasonable, but I could see it going closer to mid-4mil/year simply due to others on the team.

If his agency was holding out for $7/year I'd be looking for Murray to say go pound sand. While a guy like Ennis is great, right now the team is in a position where we could say 'meh' until he came crawling back.


EDIT: I'm also very curious what will happen with the rest of our UFA's (Konopka, D'Agostini, Tallinder, Sulzer, etc)

 

[joshjull]

I'm expecting something similar to the Hodgson deal.

 

[stokes84]

I can't see any reason why he would take anything short of Hodgson's deal...5-6 years at $4.25/yr

He can take a shorter contract and get to FA sooner.

 

[jvirk]

Whatever Hodgson got, Ennis will get, BUT I'm not sure he'll get the same length. I'd rather see 4 years than the 6 that Hodgson got.

 

[Sabres83]

7 years/$5M

 

[haseoke39]

7 years/$5M

I'd be down for this. Term is long enough that you're making value back at the end. Short term deals don't do anything for you unless you're scared the player busts. I think we know what we have with Ennis, and I'd rather lock that up at an overpayment now so that I know I'm not going to be giving out something much higher in a couple years, seeing how the cap goes and guys like Toews and Kane are setting the market.

By year three (if not year two!) of whatever deal you sign with him, Ennis is going to be playing with talent. He's not going to be carrying this offense anymore, might even get to be a secondary scorer and pick off weaker opposition. If you sign him to a four year deal now and he's putting up 70 points by the end of it, you might have to shell out $7-8 million per as the cap goes up to keep him.

So this is basically the Derek Roy signing updated for the higher cap. Worth it.

 

[Gabrielor]

4 x 4.25 or 4 x 4.5 would be my preference.

I'm still not sold on Ennis long term.

 

[Ruckus007]

Ha, I was planning on bumping this old thread anyway!


I buy into the Hodgson-like deal for Ennis, maybe with a little inflation adjustment.

 

[TehDoak]

Personally, I don't think we see much past 3-4 years.

Murray has already said he doesn't want to fill the roster with so many veteran contracts when young guys are ready, he wants there to be space for them.

Moulson and Hodgson are both under contract for 5 more years.

Hodgson and Ennis are both considered C/LW players at this point. Both are the same age.

I'd actually be pretty contented to do a 1 year deal and have 1 year of control left. Sure, throwing a 6 or 7 year deal will give us some cost certainty, but I think the best option is to keep things flexible as long as we can and see where we stand after next year.

I'd give ennis camp two options:

1 year, 4.5 million deal
3 years, 12 million deal

And see where it goes.

 

[tehinternet]

4 x 4.25 or 4 x 4.5 would be my preference.

I'm still not sold on Ennis long term.

I agree. I think 3-4 years is fine for now. haseoke39 compared it to the Derek Roy contract which I'd agree with. With that Roy contract though, I think we're lucky Darcy was able to move him for Ott while Roy's production was down and he was getting injured left and right. I wouldn't want to see us stuck with a 5-6 year contract for a beat up Ennis.

 

[Ruckus007]

Personally, I don't think we see much past 3-4 years.

Murray has already said he doesn't want to fill the roster with so many veteran contracts when young guys are ready, he wants there to be space for them.

Moulson and Hodgson are both under contract for 5 more years.

Hodgson and Ennis are both considered C/LW players at this point. Both are the same age.

I'd actually be pretty contented to do a 1 year deal and have 1 year of control left. Sure, throwing a 6 or 7 year deal will give us some cost certainty, but I think the best option is to keep things flexible as long as we can and see where we stand after next year.

I'd give ennis camp two options:

1 year, 4.5 million deal
3 years, 12 million deal

And see where it goes.

So I don't get the logic of mid-term deal for Ennis. If they like him enough to keep him around during the rest of the rebuild I don't see why they wouldn't want him under contract when they're good again; as opposed to going to UFA at 27. To me, the only real justification for a 3-year deal would have been to have some offensive talent on the team for the prospects to develop with, but that has been mitigated somewhat with Stewart, Moulson and Gionta around next year. So now I think they have to decide if he's going to be around long term or or not. If they don't think Ennis isn't going to be a part of the rebuilt team, I'm all for a one-year deal and getting him on the market and moved ASAP.

I think they should give him a longer deal but I'm not married to the idea of keeping him around. However a mid-length contract seems like the worst possible option of what's on the table.

 

[Jacob582]

I can't see any reason why he would take anything short of Hodgson's deal...5-6 years at $4.25/yr

This ^

Ennis is not taking less than Hodgson. Ennis did his bridge deal. Hodgson skipped his. Time to pay.

I'm sure his agent is being a dick about all the money we just blew on lesser players. If Meszaros is worth 4, Ennis must be worth 7 kind of thing.

His agent is probably arguing that Ennis is on his third contract and a better player than Hodgson. I doubt he is comparing him to what UFA's are getting.

 

[Jame]

So I don't get the logic of mid-term deal for Ennis. If they like him enough to keep him around during the rest of the rebuild I don't see why they wouldn't want him under contract when they're good again; as opposed to going to UFA at 27. To me, the only real justification for a 3-year deal would have been to have some offensive talent on the team for the prospects to develop with, but that has been mitigated somewhat with Stewart, Moulson and Gionta around next year. So now I think they have to decide if he's going to be around long term or or not. If they don't think Ennis isn't going to be a part of the rebuilt team, I'm all for a one-year deal and getting him on the market and moved ASAP.

I think they should give him a longer deal but I'm not married to the idea of keeping him around. However a mid-length contract seems like the worst possible option of what's on the table.

He gets top offensive minutes for a few years, and then we sell him in trade

I don't want Ennis on a long term deal, I think he's a playoff liability... and players of his stature/resume, are not easy to trade with term (see gagner).

Keep him around to play top 6 offensive minutes, while we develop a new forward core... and then trade him... a 2-3 year deal will make him much easier to move in a year or 2, than a 5-7 year deal...

 

[Jame]

This ^

Ennis is not taking less than Hodgson. Ennis did his bridge deal. Hodgson skipped his. Time to pay.



His agent is probably arguing that Ennis is on his third contract and a better player than Hodgson. I doubt he is comparing him to what UFA's are getting.

and Ennis/Agent have zero leverage.... they can argue whatever they want... what's he going to do, hold out?

Murray: "I didn't give Hodgson that contract"
Murray: "Ennis isn't a free agent, that's a different market"

 

[joshjull]

He gets top offensive minutes for a few years, and then we sell him in trade

I don't want Ennis on a long term deal, I think he's a playoff liability... and players of his stature/resume, are not easy to trade with term (see gagner).

Keep him around to play top 6 offensive minutes, while we develop a new forward core... and then trade him... a 2-3 year deal will make him much easier to move in a year or 2, than a 5-7 year deal...

I'm not following. Gagner had two years left on a 3 year deal.

 

[Jacob582]

and Ennis/Agent have zero leverage.... they can argue whatever they want... what's he going to do, hold out?

True. No Arbitration.

 

[TehDoak]

He gets top offensive minutes for a few years, and then we sell him in trade

I don't want Ennis on a long term deal, I think he's a playoff liability... and players of his stature/resume, are not easy to trade with term (see gagner).

Keep him around to play top 6 offensive minutes, while we develop a new forward core... and then trade him... a 2-3 year deal will make him much easier to move in a year or 2, than a 5-7 year deal...

pretty much this. I don't mind ennis as a 2nd line LW long term, but he and hodgson are both secondary scorers at this point and would not be on 'contending' teams top line. Having two players filling essentially the same role long term is a mistake. I would rather let Ennis walk to UFA for nothing than having a bad contract cause us to break a young core of talented forwards/d-men we are building in 4 years.

1 year deal, let's re-evaluate where things stand next year. He's going to get primo minutes, if he comes out and scores 30 goals and 70 points against top defenders, then we can talk long term deal.

 

[JLewyB]

The Coho contract should show that you don't sign long term contract defensive-dumb centers. If you want to sign him long-term then you sign as he's going to play wing. Definitely less than 4 million a year.

 

[VanekFanatic26]

Yah I was just looking at capgeek as you were posting. IMO we are overpaying for a few guys. I think 3.75/yr is reasonable, but I could see it going closer to mid-4mil/year simply due to others on the team.

If his agency was holding out for $7/year I'd be looking for Murray to say go pound sand. While a guy like Ennis is great, right now the team is in a position where we could say 'meh' until he came crawling back.


EDIT: I'm also very curious what will happen with the rest of our UFA's (Konopka, D'Agostini, Tallinder, Sulzer, etc)

Konopka is probably out of the NHL. D'Agostini may get a 1-year vet minimum deal. Tallinder could get a 1-year deal somewhere. Sulzer is already out of the league. He signed a contract in Germany.

 

[stokes84]

He gets top offensive minutes for a few years, and then we sell him in trade

I don't want Ennis on a long term deal, I think he's a playoff liability... and players of his stature/resume, are not easy to trade with term (see gagner).

Keep him around to play top 6 offensive minutes, while we develop a new forward core... and then trade him... a 2-3 year deal will make him much easier to move in a year or 2, than a 5-7 year deal...

This is how you argued for the Hodgson contract too, so I'm glad you are consistent. Oh, wait...

 

[VanekFanatic26]

He gets top offensive minutes for a few years, and then we sell him in trade

I don't want Ennis on a long term deal, I think he's a playoff liability... and players of his stature/resume, are not easy to trade with term (see gagner).

Keep him around to play top 6 offensive minutes, while we develop a new forward core... and then trade him... a 2-3 year deal will make him much easier to move in a year or 2, than a 5-7 year deal...

Dude has 8 points in 13 career playoff games...

 

[stokes84]

Hodgson started the season as the no. 1 center, and Ennis as a 2LW. Ennis finished the season as the no. 1 center and Hodgson as the 2RW. The organization clearly sees Ennis as the better player. There is no way he gets less money. He may want to hit FA sooner, so he may take less term.