Forums/NHL Signings

Nashville Predators signed Roman Josi (8 Years / $9,059,000 AAV)

Was this a good signing?
Le graphique a été masqué

Options de sondage

 

30 oct à 8 h 56
#126
The evil stats guy
Rejoint: jun 2018
Messages: 4,258
Mentions "j'aime": 1,793
Quoting: Brian2016
Trade Josi??? HAHA!!! Seriously!?

Their Cup window is wide open now! Josi is their best player hands down.


You seem to think they wouldn't get something back for Josi that would help in that and be cost controlled for better years at a better price. They absolutely could have
Quoting: Hockeyfan1972
I say that knowing that Josi is an elite D man. The averages of an entire league dilute the impact of the truly exceptional players. We can chart each other to death in this case. Show me Giordano's chart, Lidstrom's, or Chelios's. Some payers age better and I believe Josi will be one of those players... That is all


I have said it 40 times in this thread. The exception does not disprove the rule. There are many stars whom have fallen off asking this timeline.
Trickster a aimé ceci.
30 oct à 9 h 30
#127
Rejoint: jun 2017
Messages: 421
Mentions "j'aime": 121
Quoting: Random2152
You seem to think they wouldn't get something back for Josi that would help in that and be cost controlled for better years at a better price. They absolutely could have

I have said it 40 times in this thread. The exception does not disprove the rule. There are many stars whom have fallen off asking this timeline.


I understand your point with many players declining into their 30s but Josi's prime may be extended a bit due to being relatively injury-free.
Here are some comparables:
Ryan Suter will be 35 and is still a servicable top pairing D man playing 24 min a night.
Letang is almost 33 riddled with injuries and is still near PPG pace.
Giordano also 36 and still a solid d man.
The decline will happen when it does but Josi at 9 mil, 6-7 years from now when average contracts are probably hitting 3-4+ mil won't be as bad as you think.
30 oct à 9 h 54
#128
Rejoint: déc 2017
Messages: 1,739
Mentions "j'aime": 717
Quoting: Random2152
You seem to think they wouldn't get something back for Josi that would help in that and be cost controlled for better years at a better price. They absolutely could have

I have said it 40 times in this thread. The exception does not disprove the rule. There are many stars whom have fallen off asking this timeline.


I get what you're saying and I agree with you in principle, but trading your best player when your Cup window is wide open makes less than no sense. It's a non-starter. I'm sure Poile could've offered $11M for 6 years, but that would've put them in a world of cap trouble. This contract makes perfect sense, especially given what Karlsson just signed for and what Pietrangelo is about to sign for. Josi is better than both of them.

And CHI won 2 Cups w/ Keith on his current contract. Vlassic and Orpik are not comparable to Josi. John Carlson and Erik Karlsson are.
moli92 a aimé ceci.
30 oct à 10 h 05
#129
best poster
Rejoint: jui 2019
Messages: 1,475
Mentions "j'aime": 850
I don't see Josi getting traded, especially now that the Predators are looking to win for the next few seasons. Even if trading him is a logically good move financially, I don't think they're looking to mess with the team cohesion.

Quoting: Brian2016
And CHI won 2 Cups w/ Keith on his current contract.


Keith's contract has always been a luxury, and no team would be able to replicate it.
30 oct à 10 h 23
#130
Rejoint: fév 2016
Messages: 1,070
Mentions "j'aime": 152
Quoting: Random2152
You seem to think they wouldn't get something back for Josi that would help in that and be cost controlled for better years at a better price. They absolutely could have

I have said it 40 times in this thread. The exception does not disprove the rule. There are many stars whom have fallen off asking this timeline.


What team is willing to give you a younger top pairing D-man with a lower AAV? Please provide a team or player to which they absolutely could have traded for.
Can you please name all these star defenseman who have fallen off prior to the AVERAGE NHL aging curve? I'm dying to see this.
Brian2016 a aimé ceci.
30 oct à 10 h 37
#131
The evil stats guy
Rejoint: jun 2018
Messages: 4,258
Mentions "j'aime": 1,793
Quoting: Hockeyplayer1
What team is willing to give you a younger top pairing D-man with a lower AAV? Please provide a team or player to which they absolutely could have traded for.
Can you please name all these star defenseman who have fallen off prior to the AVERAGE NHL aging curve? I'm dying to see this.


This clearly missed the point in what I was saying, but if you want a team Colorado could have been a decent idea. The point is to not pay a 38 year old 1d money when you could pay a 25 year old 2d money instead.

I also never said there was an epidemic of stars falling off before the average. That is entirely made up on your part. If you want to criticize my argument atleast understand it first
30 oct à 13 h 56
#132
Rejoint: aoû 2019
Messages: 139
Mentions "j'aime": 42
Quoting: palhal
Who else has the cap or is even willing to give him 11m x 6 or 7? Not that I mind Preds giving him that contract if they think he worth long term, but can't think any team that would offer more.


Unrestricted free agency can be brutal. If NYR can sign Panarin for 11.6, Josi could get 11 or at least close to it. My main point is that the Preds really didn't have a better option than signing Josi for this deal
Brian2016 a aimé ceci.
30 oct à 19 h 53
#133
Rejoint: déc 2017
Messages: 1,739
Mentions "j'aime": 717
Quoting: MadLin27
Unrestricted free agency can be brutal. If NYR can sign Panarin for 11.6, Josi could get 11 or at least close to it. My main point is that the Preds really didn't have a better option than signing Josi for this deal


And Panarin could've gotten even more from the Isles or Jackets. No doubt Josi would get more AAV on the open market. No doubt whatsoever.
30 oct à 22 h 15
#134
Just a Sad Green Man
Rejoint: jui 2019
Messages: 109
Mentions "j'aime": 56
Quoting: Random2152
Josi is well worth the money but you cannot give 8 years at a high cap hit to past their prime players. This along with some of the sharks contracts have buyout written all over it sometime after 2024.


You're assuming the 9m will be a high cap hit 5-6 years from now. Top end players are already commanding 10-12m. In 5 years it might not be unreasonable to see 16-18m contracts being penned. in such a market, a 9m player, (albeit, past their prime) who can still produce effectively, will still look like a solid deal. And considering Josi has been an elite D for years, he will likely continue to be elite for years to come

TL;DR: This is a good deal for now, and a decent deal for the far future. Thumbs up for NSH
30 oct à 22 h 32
#135
The evil stats guy
Rejoint: jun 2018
Messages: 4,258
Mentions "j'aime": 1,793
Quoting: OrangeMallard
You're assuming the 9m will be a high cap hit 5-6 years from now. Top end players are already commanding 10-12m. In 5 years it might not be unreasonable to see 16-18m contracts being penned. in such a market, a 9m player, (albeit, past their prime) who can still produce effectively, will still look like a solid deal. And considering Josi has been an elite D for years, he will likely continue to be elite for years to come

TL;DR: This is a good deal for now, and a decent deal for the far future. Thumbs up for NSH


This is very short sighted. 9 million for a 38 year old, even in a 100 mil cap league is huge to not have at a teams disposal if they want to compete. aav wise it is fine for now but overall this is a bad contract considering he likely wont be worth 9 mil for the majority of it.
Trickster a aimé ceci.
31 oct à 10 h 10
#136
Rejoint: avr 2018
Messages: 178
Mentions "j'aime": 102
Quoting: Random2152
Carlson, Karlsson and Josi all suffer from the same issue. All the deals are bad thanks to the term for the same reasons. Pay a guy until he is 30-32 (either 8 year deal right off or two mid terms or a bridge and a long term deal) and let him go after if he wont take a cut.

Handy rule of thumb is that 30 is the new 33.


So you'd rather not pay the guy and lose your chance at a Cup, ok.
31 oct à 12 h 20
#137
The evil stats guy
Rejoint: jun 2018
Messages: 4,258
Mentions "j'aime": 1,793
Quoting: DDoverChucky
So you'd rather not pay the guy and lose your chance at a Cup, ok.


You pay someone else. Either by trade or draft etc. Even better, keep the guy and pay him until he is ~32, then see if he will take a cut next time around. Term is key
Trickster a aimé ceci.
2 nov à 4 h 18
#138
Rejoint: mai 2019
Messages: 46
Mentions "j'aime": 10
$9,000,000 for one of the most overrated defensemen in the league.
3 nov à 18 h 44
#139
Earfgang
Rejoint: oct 2019
Messages: 43
Mentions "j'aime": 13
Quoting: Random2152
This is very short sighted. 9 million for a 38 year old, even in a 100 mil cap league is huge to not have at a teams disposal if they want to compete. aav wise it is fine for now but overall this is a bad contract considering he likely wont be worth 9 mil for the majority of it.


But your missing the point, he will be great for the next 3 years and good for the 2 after that, that is Nashville's entire window if they are lucky, they do not care how screwed their cap will be 5 years from now if they have a cup, and if they don't have one then they failed and heads will roll. Contract had to be done, this was the number he needed, now we see if it works out.

Also your chart of WAR against age is true for as true as WAR is. WAR is a decent indicator of usefulness compared to peers but it is mostly an offensive based stat and doesn't account for an increase in personal defensive prowess which is common to see in players going into high 20's. All im saying is WAR is not be all end all and a players prime is alot harder to measure than one stat.
3 nov à 19 h 52
#140
The evil stats guy
Rejoint: jun 2018
Messages: 4,258
Mentions "j'aime": 1,793
Quoting: Earfgang
But your missing the point, he will be great for the next 3 years and good for the 2 after that, that is Nashville's entire window if they are lucky, they do not care how screwed their cap will be 5 years from now if they have a cup, and if they don't have one then they failed and heads will roll. Contract had to be done, this was the number he needed, now we see if it works out.

Also your chart of WAR against age is true for as true as WAR is. WAR is a decent indicator of usefulness compared to peers but it is mostly an offensive based stat and doesn't account for an increase in personal defensive prowess which is common to see in players going into high 20's. All im saying is WAR is not be all end all and a players prime is alot harder to measure than one stat.


I used war because that is a better indicator than some others (also it was first available) but the articles I link where the research was taken from links to other methods of calculation. They all agree with the basic idea here.

I understand that they may not care about the long term, but they are just creating an issue for themselves later. Cycle theory (the idea of cup windows and rebuilds) is an entirely gm made phenomenon and it exists entirely because of contracts like this. If they manage their cap better combined with good drafting and smart trading they should never have to rebuild. Until recently San Jose was the leader in this thinking (good trading, good drafting) but they messed it up with contracts like Vlasic, Karlsson, etc. Had they not extended Vlasic and Karlsson, they could have switched to the new core that they had done a fantastic job at creating and skipped the rebuild almost entirely.

So I reject the notion that this contract is fine because they don't care about the last year's when he isn't worth the deal (by your own admission he won't be worth it for 5 years) because that is based of flawed gming that can easily be avoided by not making stupid decisions like this.
3 nov à 20 h 17
#141
Earfgang
Rejoint: oct 2019
Messages: 43
Mentions "j'aime": 13
Quoting: Random2152
I used war because that is a better indicator than some others (also it was first available) but the articles I link where the research was taken from links to other methods of calculation. They all agree with the basic idea here.

I understand that they may not care about the long term, but they are just creating an issue for themselves later. Cycle theory (the idea of cup windows and rebuilds) is an entirely gm made phenomenon and it exists entirely because of contracts like this. If they manage their cap better combined with good drafting and smart trading they should never have to rebuild. Until recently San Jose was the leader in this thinking (good trading, good drafting) but they messed it up with contracts like Vlasic, Karlsson, etc. Had they not extended Vlasic and Karlsson, they could have switched to the new core that they had done a fantastic job at creating and skipped the rebuild almost entirely.

So I reject the notion that this contract is fine because they don't care about the last year's when he isn't worth the deal (by your own admission he won't be worth it for 5 years) because that is based of flawed gming that can easily be avoided by not making stupid decisions like this.


I completely agree with your philosophy on gming, but with that in mind, that is only a philosophy and not a viable model for most teams as of right now. Teams like Carolina and Toronto can begin this model and be set for a long time, but a team like Nashville is not built for the long run. They are ageing quickly and their drafting has not fully replenished the pool, so they're left with a good team that will not last forever. Sure they could punt and be mediocre for a few years and then be contenders again, but I think they see exactly what I see. A wide open field in the western conference, and a eastern conference that will murder whichever team comes out of it like the final gladiator coming out to take on a relatively fresh champion. No one can deny that for strong western conference teams, now is as open a field as it will ever be. So instead of punting they went for it, will they get a cup out of it? I personally don't think so, but I respect them for trying and not just giving up on what is their best chance ever as a team to win a cup since their creation. Last year Columbus went for a hail marry and came up short, but you have to respect not just folding and choosing to punt an opportunity that may never come again.
3 nov à 20 h 36
#142
The evil stats guy
Rejoint: jun 2018
Messages: 4,258
Mentions "j'aime": 1,793
Quoting: Earfgang

1)that is only a philosophy and not a viable model for most teams as of right now.
2) A team like Nashville is not built for the long run. They are ageing quickly and their drafting has not fully replenished the pool, so they're left with a good team that will not last forever.
3) Sure they could punt and be mediocre for a few years and then be contenders again, but I think they see exactly what I see. A wide open field in the western conference, and a eastern conference that will murder whichever team comes out of it like the final gladiator coming out to take on a relatively fresh champion. No one can deny that for strong western conference teams, now is as open a field as it will ever be. So instead of punting they went for it, will they get a cup out of it? I personally don't think so, but I respect them for trying and not just giving up on what is their best chance ever as a team to win a cup since their creation.
4) Last year Columbus went for a hail marry and came up short, but you have to respect not just folding and choosing to punt an opportunity that may never come again.


1) Bull****. It is just a philosophy change. Some teams are certainly in a better position but all teams can switch on a dime if they wanted to.
2) Nashville's GM has been gm for decades. That is PLURAL! The team being this way is entirely his own fault.
3) Who said punt and be mediocre? They have the rest of their team, and they could have traded guys who weren't interested in signing shorter deals into their twilight (imagine the return Josi would have gotten a year ago, or even at the draft). Teams aren't just screwed if they don't want to sign contracts with guys that they think will be too much for too long.
4) Columbus' hail marry was very different from this one as it didn't hinder their ability to ice a competitive roster in 5 years time. While I think they overpaid for Duchene and did spend slightly frivolously (picks for McQuaid?!?!?) They still have their young core and good prospects coming so that they will be back in it soon enough. Nashville on the other hand has guaranteed a 5 year period where they are basically Detroit. Don't be Detroit.

Just as a note:
Here is a potential team made up entirely of picks a contending team might have (no first rounders and limited to the last 10 years to keep relevant) or free agents from college.
Aho-ROR-Stone
Kerfoot-Point-Debrincat
Gourde-Hintz-Lebanc
Moore-Blueger-Malign

Slavin-Paryko
Edmundson-Barrie
Nutivaara-Holl

Gibson
Jarry

Is this exhaustive? Not even close. Are there better options? Maybe. I did this quickly.
Point is there is tons of talent available and smart GM's get them and a team can easily be made that works cap wise and respects age curves and doesn't hamper your ability to compete going forwards.
3 nov à 21 h 45
#143
Earfgang
Rejoint: oct 2019
Messages: 43
Mentions "j'aime": 13
Quoting: Random2152
1) Bull****. It is just a philosophy change. Some teams are certainly in a better position but all teams can switch on a dime if they wanted to.
2) Nashville's GM has been gm for decades. That is PLURAL! The team being this way is entirely his own fault.
3) Who said punt and be mediocre? They have the rest of their team, and they could have traded guys who weren't interested in signing shorter deals into their twilight (imagine the return Josi would have gotten a year ago, or even at the draft). Teams aren't just screwed if they don't want to sign contracts with guys that they think will be too much for too long.
4) Columbus' hail marry was very different from this one as it didn't hinder their ability to ice a competitive roster in 5 years time. While I think they overpaid for Duchene and did spend slightly frivolously (picks for McQuaid?!?!?) They still have their young core and good prospects coming so that they will be back in it soon enough. Nashville on the other hand has guaranteed a 5 year period where they are basically Detroit. Don't be Detroit.

Just as a note:
Here is a potential team made up entirely of picks a contending team might have (no first rounders and limited to the last 10 years to keep relevant) or free agents from college.
Aho-ROR-Stone
Kerfoot-Point-Debrincat
Gourde-Hintz-Lebanc
Moore-Blueger-Malign

Slavin-Paryko
Edmundson-Barrie
Nutivaara-Holl

Gibson
Jarry

Is this exhaustive? Not even close. Are there better options? Maybe. I did this quickly.
Point is there is tons of talent available and smart GM's get them and a team can easily be made that works cap wise and respects age curves and doesn't hamper your ability to compete going forwards.


1. There has only ever been a handful of teams that were able to remain at the top of their division for more than a decade, acting like any team can just do it is ignorant. Everyone would love to be the Red Wings dynasty but that good of drafting is something that nobody else has had until maybe Tampa bay recently.

2. Nashville came in at a bad time, had to draft for years to become close to competitive, and have finally found consistent success. They worked with what they had, did they do a good job? I don't know, with hindsight it could have been better, but the past is the past, who cares.

3. If they trade Josi, they wont get a player that is equal value, why would a team trade a younger cheaper comparable for an older Josi. If they shop Josi in the middle of a cup run what does that say about their faith in their core that they have built. If they trade Josi, they will be getting worse as a team in the right now in an attempt to be even better in the future, AKA punting seasons. Likely you get high picks and a bluechip prospect, and the team you have right now is not going to be as good in 2 years. Unless you plan on trading every aging player on the roster for more inexpensive younger options and draft picks then you have to push now, everything about how this core is built says push now. The west is weaker than i have ever seen, (I was born in 2000) and you just won your division and get to come back with a similar core, THIS IS NOT THE TIME TO TRADE YOUR BEST DEFENSEMAN.

4. Our opinions on Columbus are very similar, I just think they are a bit worse off than you think they are, they need a lot of TLC to be a contender in 5 years.

And Lastly that note is such a lie, every single one of those players are outliers in their own rights, getting elite talent in the later rounds is so goddamn rare you could never hope to build a team around assuming your just better at scouting than everyone else in the league. Any team without a gm named Yzerman is lucky to get ONE let alone TWO like Carolina has been blessed with. (Praise be Carolina luck gods). Your perfect world hindsight of what teams should have done is ignorant to the reality of the odds of getting great players in the draft.

SURE, if you could draft better than anyone else, take advantage of other GM's and get steals of deals through trades, and get inexpensive valuable players in free agency OF COURSE YOU WOULD BE BETTER OFF. That is not reality, reality is, you take chances that might bite you later on. Im not saying GM's are all good at their jobs, quite the opposite. I'm not saying this Josi contract is necessarily good, Josi might fall off a cliff in 2 years who the hell knows. What I am saying is you don't trade away the best player on your team while you have a serious chance for a deep playoff run for the chance at another superstar in 2/3 years that you will run into the same problem with.
George_Kush a aimé ceci.
5 nov à 7 h 20
#144
Rejoint: jun 2019
Messages: 1
Mentions "j'aime": 0
Quoting: Earfgang
1. There has only ever been a handful of teams that were able to remain at the top of their division for more than a decade, acting like any team can just do it is ignorant. Everyone would love to be the Red Wings dynasty but that good of drafting is something that nobody else has had until maybe Tampa bay recently.

2. Nashville came in at a bad time, had to draft for years to become close to competitive, and have finally found consistent success. They worked with what they had, did they do a good job? I don't know, with hindsight it could have been better, but the past is the past, who cares.

3. If they trade Josi, they wont get a player that is equal value, why would a team trade a younger cheaper comparable for an older Josi. If they shop Josi in the middle of a cup run what does that say about their faith in their core that they have built. If they trade Josi, they will be getting worse as a team in the right now in an attempt to be even better in the future, AKA punting seasons. Likely you get high picks and a bluechip prospect, and the team you have right now is not going to be as good in 2 years. Unless you plan on trading every aging player on the roster for more inexpensive younger options and draft picks then you have to push now, everything about how this core is built says push now. The west is weaker than i have ever seen, (I was born in 2000) and you just won your division and get to come back with a similar core, THIS IS NOT THE TIME TO TRADE YOUR BEST DEFENSEMAN.

4. Our opinions on Columbus are very similar, I just think they are a bit worse off than you think they are, they need a lot of TLC to be a contender in 5 years.

And Lastly that note is such a lie, every single one of those players are outliers in their own rights, getting elite talent in the later rounds is so goddamn rare you could never hope to build a team around assuming your just better at scouting than everyone else in the league. Any team without a gm named Yzerman is lucky to get ONE let alone TWO like Carolina has been blessed with. (Praise be Carolina luck gods). Your perfect world hindsight of what teams should have done is ignorant to the reality of the odds of getting great players in the draft.

SURE, if you could draft better than anyone else, take advantage of other GM's and get steals of deals through trades, and get inexpensive valuable players in free agency OF COURSE YOU WOULD BE BETTER OFF. That is not reality, reality is, you take chances that might bite you later on. Im not saying GM's are all good at their jobs, quite the opposite. I'm not saying this Josi contract is necessarily good, Josi might fall off a cliff in 2 years who the hell knows. What I am saying is you don't trade away the best player on your team while you have a serious chance for a deep playoff run for the chance at another superstar in 2/3 years that you will run into the same problem with.


Thank you very much dude, that's just how it is. Couldn't agree more! Also if anybody thinks this is a bad contract, please listen to the chiclets episode from last week. I also think it's funny how a leafs fan in here is trying to tell us what a bad contract is.
5 nov à 10 h 01
#145
best poster
Rejoint: jui 2019
Messages: 1,475
Mentions "j'aime": 850
Quoting: George_Kush
I also think it's funny how a leafs fan in here is trying to tell us what a bad contract is.


Because New Jersey and Detroit are well known for signing excellent contracts.
Random2152 a aimé ceci.
 
Répondre
To create a post please Login or S'inscrire
Question:
Options:
Soumettre les modifications du sondage