What's the most the Canes should pay Ferland?

[top-shelf-1]

2 hours ago, Canes06cup17 said:

Sign him please or keep him as our own rental. Don’t trade him for another pick. 

Agree. And, as others have said, if the Canes can get over the hump, it should give both sides incentive to figure things out in the longer term.

[Derailed75]

13 minutes ago, top-shelf-1 said:

Agree. And, as others have said, if the Canes can get over the hump, it should give both sides incentive to figure things out in the longer term.

Im going to 3rd that. I dont think the return would be worth what we would lose in him. He hasnt played as well during the team current hot streak but he is still a big part of it and showed last night he can still produce. Also as you said Top maybe the teams current play along with rumors of teams cooling off on him make him change his mind and decide this is the best place for him.

[gocanes0506]

The last 2 months have proven to me that his concussion issues and streakyness are a valid concern. Anything more than 4 years 20 million is big risk not worth taking.

[hag65]

GMDW already basically said he is our rental, if we are contending, i.e. if we went looking for a rental we would get an unsigned guy and have to trade for him.  If we don't trade him we have an unsigned guy and don't have to trade for him.  I don't really want a rental since it won't help us long term, but this is like a rental for free so I could live with it.  And work my *edit* off to re-sign him after the season.

[remkin]

Hopefully some pressure comes off knowing we're sticking with him for our run. I'm not sure we come to terms for the long run, but I do think this run is far from over and he's worth more to us than right now than a low second rounder or a B prospect.

[LakeLivin]

People have questioned whether we could afford Mark Stone.  Which led me to this hypothetical question:

 

Which would you rather do?

sign Stone to a 7 or 8 year $9m AAV contract

OR

sign Ferland to a 5 or 6 year $5.5m AAV contract and use the "extra" $3.5m per elsewhere

[remkin]

A.

[top-shelf-1]

11 hours ago, gocanes0506 said:

The last 2 months have proven to me that his concussion issues and streakyness are a valid concern. Anything more than 4 years 20 million is big risk not worth taking.

You do realize the 10-years-older J Willy made $5M last season, right?

 

No winger showing the upside that Ferland is right now, who is his age, is going to take a deal that ends when he turns 30. He is due for his payday deal--the one that gets him into his early 30s. Somebody will give him a six-year deal, and we should too.

 

Back when JWilly was his age, we signed him to a five-year, 3.5 million deal, which was the going rate for a late-blooming RW at the time. The going rate now is 5.5 AAV, whether TD likes it or not. With a lockout looming, we can get to that under front-loaded terms I've laid out elsewhere. We should do it, and if he underperforms in a couple of years we can move him, when his annual salary will be more attractive to potential trading partners. 

 

Edited February 14 by top-shelf-1
omitted word

[coastal_caniac]

Making the playoffs this year should be the goal, and I hope that the front office see it the same way.  Keep Ferland, go after help at 2C.  If the chance to improve in goal is there, swing for the fences.

[coastal_caniac]

52 minutes ago, LakeLivin said:

People have questioned whether we could afford Mark Stone.  Which led me to this hypothetical question:

 

Which would you rather do?

sign Stone to a 7 or 8 year $9m AAV contract

OR

sign Ferland to a 5 or 6 year $5.5m AAV contract and use the "extra" $3.5m per elsewhere

 

I'd rather wait on Svech.  I don't think the wait is going to be long.  Necas is another reason not to go insane on a big winger contract, as I would bet he starts on a wing.  

Sign Ferland to those terms, then spend money and/or assets on a proven 2C and a real number one goalie.

 

 

[gocanes0506]

2 minutes ago, top-shelf-1 said:

You do realize the 10-years-older J Willy made $5M last season, right?

 

No winger showing the upside that Ferland is right now, who is his age, is going to take a deal that ends when turns 30. He is due for his payday deal--the one that gets him into his early 30s. Somebody will give him a six-year deal, and we should too.

 

Back when JWilly was his age, we signed him to a five-year, 3.5 million deal, which was the going rate for a late-blooming RW at the time. The going rate now is 5.5 AAV, whether TD likes it or not. With a lockout looming, we can get to that under front-loaded terms I've laid out elsewhere. We should do it, and if he underperforms in a couple of years we can move him, when his annual salary will be more attractive to potential trading partners.  

JWill has been pretty durable over the last 5 seasons and we had to overpay to get him here.  If a team wants to give him 6 years and 5.5+ million per or 33 + million, im glad for him.  

 

 

 

 

[hag65]

1 hour ago, coastal_caniac said:

 

I'd rather wait on Svech.  I don't think the wait is going to be long.  Necas is another reason not to go insane on a big winger contract, as I would bet he starts on a wing.  

Sign Ferland to those terms, then spend money and/or assets on a proven 2C and a real number one goalie.

 

 

 

Yes yes yes yes yes...  Coastal for assistant GM.

[coastal_caniac]

I liked Top's model of keeping Ferland's contract front-loaded  Kind of Ruutu protection. But more so, pay Ferland his money when guys like Svech and Necas are making ELC numbers.  My bet is this works out, particularly if we hold on to him through the trade deadline.  We need this guy, IMO.  Huge part of the team.

[remkin]

I have to agree on Svech and Necas. I personally am obviously pretty high on Stone though. That is a two way forward that teams win with. He has managed to put up numbers on a D first team (previous coach's iteration of the Sens) and a pretty bad one. He's a leader too. He's worth the money. I'd trade Jordan for a bag of pucks if we would slide Stone in here. And that includes Necas and Svech, and to me even losing Ferland. Stone is really really good. Like Aho. Over 4 years he's the #30 most productive forward in the NHL. And he plays both ways and is character. I would not do this for Duchene. 

Another place we can get salary for contemplation of Stone AND Ferland, besides trading J, is making the move on D. Moving out Faulk, Pesce or Hamilton's salary, and going with a budget deal guy like Fleury and/or entry guy like Fox or Bean even moving out a LHD salary at some point.

 

That said, we will not get Stone, so that's a pipe dream. He would have to really want to play here since we'd have to trade and sign or sign and trade, meaning he's committed to being here long term. That is a long long shot.

 

For me, I do NOT sign Duchene. While he puts up points, he does none of the other stuff that Stone does. If we can't get Stone (we probably can't) and if we think Ferland can be a 20-25 goal guy for at least most of his new deal, then I agree he is the kind of guy we've wanted for a long time.

 

Lastly, we don't know if Ferland really wants to be here either.

[LakeLivin]

Unless the team nosedives I'm all for Ferland as an "own rental".

 

If he really wants to stay, doesn't Turbo's new contract of $5.4 AAV set an upper limit on what Ferland could reasonably ask?  Maybe some negotiation on number of years, and I know they bring different things, but does anyone see Ferland as being worth more than Turbo?

 

note: I don't know if Canes would be willing to pay $5.4m, just seems to me like that would be a "natural" max he couldn't reasonably ask to exceed

Edited Friday at 05:44 PM by LakeLivin

[remkin]

22 hours ago, remkin said:

 

Lastly, we don't know if Ferland really wants to be here either.

Well that was fortuitous timing. Almost immediately it is put out there that Ferland would like to stay. I keep wondering who else is lurking on these boards! We don't know for sure that no one who matters peaks in here.... 

[slapshot02]

23 hours ago, remkin said:

 

 

For me, I do NOT sign Duchene. 

Yeah I'm one of the few who doesn't think Duschne is the answer for our team. There are many players I would prefer over him. I wouldn't break the bank or trade away players and assets for his services. We need a Teresanko/Landeskog type player to complement Svech/Necas.

Edited Friday at 06:44 PM by slapshot02

[remkin]

23 hours ago, slapshot02 said:

Yeah I'm one of the few who doesn't think Duschne is the answer for our team. There are many players I would prefer over him. I wouldn't break the bank or trade away players and assets for his services. We need a Teresanko/Landeskog type player to complement Svech/Necas.

I am as mesmerized as the next guy by Duchene's offense. He is fast, he is skilled, he makes offense happen. For years we've needed offense so badly too. But now the team is finding offense and guys like Svech and Necas will score into the future. Despite moving Skinner we are suddenly less desperate for offense.

 

The committee told us early on, that they were looking for players who did the things that led to winning. This includes scoring, but guys who score while still playing the "right way". I've long held that a team full of two way players would win. That includes offense, but also the other things that tend to lead to a strong plus-minus or at least not a hugely negative one. The brass also told us that they were using higher level stats that tracked those very things directly for individual players individual shifts (not just the collective mess that is plus/minus). And they told us that they would be using those stats to find players. 

 

I do not know that Duchene is an absolute fail at those things. I do not watch every Duchene shift with a check list. But my sense is that Duchene is at best mixed at doing those things the "right way". He is -84 for his career despite creating a lot of offense. This is just smoke, but it's a lot of smoke. Then there's the combined record of teams he's played for, and how Colorado bounced back when he left. Again, more smoke. And just some indirect evidence he's a bit of a selfish player. A little smoke. 

 

If the Cane's internal stats show something different, then fine, I'd take him. But we don't have access to that and so that stuff up there is what we have to go on. And based on that, and the fact that some team is going to pay through the nose and give him a long term high dollar deal, probably with a NTC? PASS. 

 

Have I mentioned that Mark Stone is the opposite of all that and I'd pay him? I guess I have.

[legend-1]

I'd also pass on Duchene he literally has a polar effect on the teams he joins and leaves. Sens go from top 2 in their division to the basement with him. Avs go from the basement to the playoffs without him. I have a feeling a video of him talking *edit* about his coach likely explains a lot of the cancer he brings to the locker room and wasn't just what players do to blow off steam. I can't see anyone talking crap about Roddy.