That's very good. I still can't get my head around the fact that a guy can have a kind of decent year and get paid but what the hell do I know.
I think the Raymond contract probably helped out here. Raymond is a way further along than Brule and what did he get, 2.5? I'd bet at that point the writing was on the wall for Gilbert.
HBomb: If I'm not mistaken, Brule will still be RFA when this pact expires in 2012. His ELC didn't kick in in 2005-06 cuz he played fewer than 10 NHL games.
dawgbone: Point taken. I think Brule is the kind of player a team can overpay (because of the boxcars) and was pretty worried about this deal.
But 1.85M times two years suggests that it might be a "value" contract even if he doesn't emerge as a multi-dimensional forward.
He can score and that's a crazy tough thing to do. There's a good chance the Oilers will be happy they signed him to the second year 12 months from now.
dawgbone: He was a good scorer in the WHL (39 goals in 45 games as an 18 year old; 23 goals in 27 games as a 19 year old) but the Jackets handled him poorly and he suffered injuries and was ineffective for a couple of years.
But he has a scorer's resume. I do agree he EV/goals per 60 number was beyond the pale this season. We shouldn't expect that kind of number.
Chalk me into the group of "not a fan of Brule's game," but I can live with this deal. It's basically a low risk flyer on a guy with a great shot, great mitts, and a great pedigree.
Probably 150k or so less than I thought he'd get in arbitration (although Black Dog's probably right about Raymond's deal leveling the playing field after the Kulemin Award) and with an RFA year remaining at the end....without exaggeration this is an A+ signing.
"But 1.85M times two years suggests that it might be a "value" contract even if he doesn't emerge as a multi-dimensional forward."
problem is that he eats a top 6 roster spot, since he really isn't a 3rd or 4th line guy. maybe 3rd line but eh.. i think the term makes it *okay* but i'd rather they'd given him a 1 year contract.
but as godot10 mentions, 1/3rd buyout after the first year if it doesn't work out - i think that makes the term ok.
it is a good signing, especially if he outperforms it but in his slot i'd rather have a 2.5/3m player performing to his contract than a 1.8m player slightly exceeding his.
I don't want to sound like I'm coming down on the guy, but the best part about this rather than an arbitrator's award is that we still have the option of trading him. Personally, I think he makes a good RW on a line with Penner and Gagner (assuming Hall's on the top line with 10-83).
Like DB, I worry about him improving or even repeating his numbers from last year, but I'm happy with the deal because I expected him to get well north of $2M (which I would've hated). Still, it's only 15K less than Nilsson's deal that people were happy to see him bought out of.
I'm not wild about this deal either. I think that the RFA market is nuts for guys with Brule's history of production. He's not a top sixer moving forward, IMO. About the best they can hope for is a big year and a trade. More likely is 25-30 points and a waste of money.
One thing of note on Gagner because he has an august birthday he is actually an not a UFA until 15/16 that gives him 5 more years before he's a UFA. if the oil can get him locked up at reasonable $ for the next 4 it would be great. would 4 years at $12 be an ok starting point?
LT: Better fit under your last thread but diaper changes meant that boat had sailed.
Assuming they can trade Souray (Witt and a 4th from NYI and bury Witt in OKC?) I would like to see them make a play for Kaberle using Cogliano.
I think he can develop into a good player but clearly the Oilers have picked the horses they are going to run with and he is not one of them. Might as well trade him as you can only develop so many young guys at once and we are at, or likely beyond, our quota. Nowhere would he get better value then T.O. given he is a local boy and Bobby Mac and others in the media think very highly of him.
Pair Kaberle with Smid and the D looks ok. Also sends a positive message that they are serious about at least being competitive and maybe the Czech factor helps make Smid and Hemsky more likely to stay long term.
Also opens up the Forward core a bit to bring in another solid veteran if need be.
Worst case scenario is Kabby doesn't fit and sends signals that he won't re-up or this year goes FUBAR like last year and you have a very nice trading chip at the deadline. Likely equal value to what you would get for Cogs based on the rumours at the draft.
It would look bad if Cogs tears it up in Toronto but I would still argue there is no way he has the ice time to do that in Edmonton and in 3 or 4 years he is a UFA and gets a contract we couldn't fit into the salary cap anyway.
The best part about this deal is it's a lot better than I thought it would be... because I expected it to be right in the range of $2,000,000... and 3 years.
At least this way, he has next year to prove himself either way.
//One thing of note on Gagner because he has an august birthday he is actually an not a UFA until 15/16 that gives him 5 more years before he's a UFA. if the oil can get him locked up at reasonable $ for the next 4 it would be great. would 4 years at $12 be an ok starting point?//
I believe you are wrong. One becomes unrestricted at age 27 OR after seven years of service, whichever comes first. (See Article 10.1, CBA).
Gagner has played 3 seasons.
So Gagner has 4 more years till UFA status. So a contract of 3 years gives Gagner control of his own destiny (because he can opt for arbitration in the 4th).
So the Oilers options for Gagner are 2 years, or long term.
Am I wrong to start getting a little excited about this season?
Yeah, there's still issues with this team for the rebuild, but the Oilers have shed a ton of bad salary: Nilsson, Moreau, Pisani (Sorry--injury related), O'Sullivan, Staios, Grebeshkov, and Pouliot (based on injury). I wouldn't include Visnovsky in that list because he's a joy to watch, but it's still a big contract on an aging player that's been moved.
I'm pretty surprised that some of these contracts moved (though some expired obviously).
Back to creme brule, I'm okay with this signing since it could have been worse though I agree with Black Dog that it's just one kind of decent year under his belt.
Wow, almost no love for the local boy made good. It would appear this blog eats its young ;)
I guess I'm in the minority but I fully expect a strong year from Brule. Coming out of CB, he very much looked more suspect than prospect but I thought he showed some real flashes last year. He's willing to go in the tough areas of the rink and he's got hands. That's an all too rare trait in Oil Country in recent years. Most importantly, he seems like a real team guy with some good hockey sense. I'd certainly keep Brule over Cogs in a NY minute. Cogliano's just a little too comfortable on the periphery for my liking, but I can't fault the guy for having a survival instinct. He got absolutely blown up a couple times last year when he ventured into the slot.
I think he will be drastically overpaid if he can not hammer down a spot in the top six this season, because like Cogliano, he does not add anything to a bottom six.
Hopefully he can keep one of the rookies out of the top six, score a few points and make a good trading chip for the Oilers.
It's rare that I disagree with Bank Shot, but to me Brule has skills which would work OK in a bottom 6:
Versatility: Can play C or RW.
Faceoff ability: Had the best FO% on the team, and it wasn't close. Among the 9 guys who took 180+ draws, Brule was nearly 5% ahead of the next best guy. Oh, yeah, he's RH.
Physical play: Buddy's a banger, and one of the very few on the Oilers who can really punish with a hit. Doesn't mind playing out on the cusp of legality.
Shot: Maybe he was riding 7s all year, but the impression I got is Brule can score from anywhere. It seemed like a bunch of his goals were on semi-broken plays and there'd be traffic and then boom! The shot would take the goalie by surprise and handcuff him. One or two of them could be categorized as "bad goals", but when the same sort of thing happens several times it's starting to look like a pattern. Check out this video montage and tell me buddy doesn't have a wicked shot.
Even if that shot is buried on the bottom 6 it's still gonna deliver the odd goal out of nowhere. This team could use a little more firepower on the bottom 6.
Thing is, if Brule does wind up on the bottom end of the roster, that contract is going to seem like an overpay, but with that skill set he's gonna come a lot closer to covering the bet than a Nilsson or an O'Sullivan likely would in the same circumstances. And if he makes the next step into a legitimate top 6er, even if only in the second year of the deal, it's going to be money very well spent.
I agree that the kid has some good tools Bruce, I just wonder if he can develop enough of an all around game to keep his head above water on the third line.
Looking at this team going into the season, the only "sure thing" dependable line they can put together would be a Penner-Horcoff-Hemsky.
The fourth line with Stortini, and MacIntyre/jacques will not be suited for tough minutes, and the all the rookies will need sheltering as well. That means the 3rd line is going to be facing some tough matchups. Can Brule handle it?
Can he learn to PK? The team only has two PKers in the top six and about one in the bottom six right now. The way this team is being put together, they are going to need a third line of strong defensive players to have a shot at winning games IMO.
That's very good. I still can't get my head around the fact that a guy can have a kind of decent year and get paid but what the hell do I know.
ReplyDeleteI think the Raymond contract probably helped out here. Raymond is a way further along than Brule and what did he get, 2.5? I'd bet at that point the writing was on the wall for Gilbert.
Lets hope he outperforms it in a big way.
Wow, I was thinking 2 million per on the low end was going to be the price point, especially after the Kulemin contract in Toronto.
ReplyDeleteVery acceptable cap hit and on a two-year term.
Now, knowing the following guys go to free agency in the following summers:
2012: Hemsky, Penner, Brule
2013: Hall, Eberle, Paajarvi*, Whitney
What do they do with Gagner (and, to a lesser extent, Cogliano) in terms of length of their respective contracts?
Is there enough evidence to go long term (5-6 years) with Gagner, or is a 2 year deal the ideal scenario? What about a 3 year deal?
1 year would not be smart - that could backfire if he jumps to 70 points. And 4 years takes him to UFA, so that's a non-starter.
HBomb: If I'm not mistaken, Brule will still be RFA when this pact expires in 2012. His ELC didn't kick in in 2005-06 cuz he played fewer than 10 NHL games.
ReplyDeleteI have been pretty tough on Oiler management but I think this is yet another decent signing by "Tambi" this summer.
ReplyDeleteIf we make enough nice changes on the periphery, it makes our entire roster better
I guess the good news is that it's not a 3 year deal.
ReplyDeleteI still don't like his game, he spends too much time chasing around and not enough time actually doing anything.
Hopefully last year wasn't the outlier year.
Bruce: good point, although I didn't really draw a distinction between RFA's and UFA's.
ReplyDeleteFree agency, in either form, is "decision time".
3 years is a bad idea for Gagner from the Oilers perspective because he can opt for arbitration in the 4th and be unrestricted.
ReplyDeleteTwo years or long term are the only real options.
Brule would be a 1/3rd buyout next summer if he really sucks.
ReplyDeletedawgbone: Point taken. I think Brule is the kind of player a team can overpay (because of the boxcars) and was pretty worried about this deal.
ReplyDeleteBut 1.85M times two years suggests that it might be a "value" contract even if he doesn't emerge as a multi-dimensional forward.
He can score and that's a crazy tough thing to do. There's a good chance the Oilers will be happy they signed him to the second year 12 months from now.
Slight correction... he scored last year. He doesn't have much of a track record of doing it, which is what really worries me.
ReplyDeleteIf he had a knack for doing it and was the kind of guy who chased around, I'd probably really like the deal.
I'm just not convinced his offense from last year was the real deal.
Like most of you I was expecting bad news when this deal was finally announced (something well north of 2 million).
ReplyDeleteObviously, this is a pleasant little surprise.
dawgbone: He was a good scorer in the WHL (39 goals in 45 games as an 18 year old; 23 goals in 27 games as a 19 year old) but the Jackets handled him poorly and he suffered injuries and was ineffective for a couple of years.
ReplyDeleteBut he has a scorer's resume. I do agree he EV/goals per 60 number was beyond the pale this season. We shouldn't expect that kind of number.
I estimated Brule at 2.25M, so this is a much better deal than expected.
ReplyDeleteI was expecting 2-2.5M, to come in under 2m is a win.
ReplyDeleteCan never have enough value contracts. At least the player has a chance to at least meet or even out perform the contract.
ReplyDeleteThese short term value contracts are obviously easier to trade if necessary.
Chalk me into the group of "not a fan of Brule's game," but I can live with this deal. It's basically a low risk flyer on a guy with a great shot, great mitts, and a great pedigree.
ReplyDeleteProbably 150k or so less than I thought he'd get in arbitration (although Black Dog's probably right about Raymond's deal leveling the playing field after the Kulemin Award) and with an RFA year remaining at the end....without exaggeration this is an A+ signing.
ReplyDelete"But 1.85M times two years suggests that it might be a "value" contract even if he doesn't emerge as a multi-dimensional forward."
ReplyDeleteproblem is that he eats a top 6 roster spot, since he really isn't a 3rd or 4th line guy. maybe 3rd line but eh.. i think the term makes it *okay* but i'd rather they'd given him a 1 year contract.
but as godot10 mentions, 1/3rd buyout after the first year if it doesn't work out - i think that makes the term ok.
it is a good signing, especially if he outperforms it but in his slot i'd rather have a 2.5/3m player performing to his contract than a 1.8m player slightly exceeding his.
yay, 2 years....excellent signing!
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI don't want to sound like I'm coming down on the guy, but the best part about this rather than an arbitrator's award is that we still have the option of trading him. Personally, I think he makes a good RW on a line with Penner and Gagner (assuming Hall's on the top line with 10-83).
ReplyDeleteLike DB, I worry about him improving or even repeating his numbers from last year, but I'm happy with the deal because I expected him to get well north of $2M (which I would've hated). Still, it's only 15K less than Nilsson's deal that people were happy to see him bought out of.
difference being Brule's a much better player than Nilsson.
ReplyDeleteI'm not wild about this deal either. I think that the RFA market is nuts for guys with Brule's history of production. He's not a top sixer moving forward, IMO. About the best they can hope for is a big year and a trade. More likely is 25-30 points and a waste of money.
ReplyDeleteOne thing of note on Gagner because he has an august birthday he is actually an not a UFA until 15/16 that gives him 5 more years before he's a UFA. if the oil can get him locked up at reasonable $ for the next 4 it would be great. would 4 years at $12 be an ok starting point?
ReplyDelete@mc79hockey--i'd rather have Brule signed than the real waste of space....Cogliano, and i'm hopeful he'll be gone before training camp!
ReplyDeleteLT: Better fit under your last thread but diaper changes meant that boat had sailed.
ReplyDeleteAssuming they can trade Souray (Witt and a 4th from NYI and bury Witt in OKC?) I would like to see them make a play for Kaberle using Cogliano.
I think he can develop into a good player but clearly the Oilers have picked the horses they are going to run with and he is not one of them. Might as well trade him as you can only develop so many young guys at once and we are at, or likely beyond, our quota. Nowhere would he get better value then T.O. given he is a local boy and Bobby Mac and others in the media think very highly of him.
Pair Kaberle with Smid and the D looks ok. Also sends a positive message that they are serious about at least being competitive and maybe the Czech factor helps make Smid and Hemsky more likely to stay long term.
Also opens up the Forward core a bit to bring in another solid veteran if need be.
Worst case scenario is Kabby doesn't fit and sends signals that he won't re-up or this year goes FUBAR like last year and you have a very nice trading chip at the deadline. Likely equal value to what you would get for Cogs based on the rumours at the draft.
It would look bad if Cogs tears it up in Toronto but I would still argue there is no way he has the ice time to do that in Edmonton and in 3 or 4 years he is a UFA and gets a contract we couldn't fit into the salary cap anyway.
MC:
ReplyDeleteThe best part about this deal is it's a lot better than I thought it would be... because I expected it to be right in the range of $2,000,000... and 3 years.
At least this way, he has next year to prove himself either way.
I still would have dealt him though.
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=328670
ReplyDeleteWhat double standards the league has. If Sean Avery had done that, he would have been suspended.
//One thing of note on Gagner because he has an august birthday he is actually an not a UFA until 15/16 that gives him 5 more years before he's a UFA. if the oil can get him locked up at reasonable $ for the next 4 it would be great. would 4 years at $12 be an ok starting point?//
ReplyDeleteI believe you are wrong. One becomes unrestricted at age 27 OR after seven years of service, whichever comes first. (See Article 10.1, CBA).
Gagner has played 3 seasons.
So Gagner has 4 more years till UFA status. So a contract of 3 years gives Gagner control of his own destiny (because he can opt for arbitration in the 4th).
So the Oilers options for Gagner are 2 years, or long term.
difference being Brule's a much better player than Nilsson.
ReplyDeleteWe can only hope. Nilsson played pretty well the year he got his deal (at least the 2nd half) and was doing it at both ends of the ice.
@ gotot10
ReplyDeleteThanks for the info. I was sure I read that you had to be a minimum of 25 in there but I just looked at it again and its not in there anywhere.
Thanks.
Am I wrong to start getting a little excited about this season?
ReplyDeleteYeah, there's still issues with this team for the rebuild, but the Oilers have shed a ton of bad salary: Nilsson, Moreau, Pisani (Sorry--injury related), O'Sullivan, Staios, Grebeshkov, and Pouliot (based on injury). I wouldn't include Visnovsky in that list because he's a joy to watch, but it's still a big contract on an aging player that's been moved.
I'm pretty surprised that some of these contracts moved (though some expired obviously).
Back to creme brule, I'm okay with this signing since it could have been worse though I agree with Black Dog that it's just one kind of decent year under his belt.
Wow, almost no love for the local boy made good. It would appear this blog eats its young ;)
ReplyDeleteI guess I'm in the minority but I fully expect a strong year from Brule. Coming out of CB, he very much looked more suspect than prospect but I thought he showed some real flashes last year. He's willing to go in the tough areas of the rink and he's got hands. That's an all too rare trait in Oil Country in recent years. Most importantly, he seems like a real team guy with some good hockey sense. I'd certainly keep Brule over Cogs in a NY minute. Cogliano's just a little too comfortable on the periphery for my liking, but I can't fault the guy for having a survival instinct. He got absolutely blown up a couple times last year when he ventured into the slot.
I am glad the contract is only for two years.
ReplyDeleteI think he will be drastically overpaid if he can not hammer down a spot in the top six this season, because like Cogliano, he does not add anything to a bottom six.
Hopefully he can keep one of the rookies out of the top six, score a few points and make a good trading chip for the Oilers.
It's rare that I disagree with Bank Shot, but to me Brule has skills which would work OK in a bottom 6:
ReplyDeleteVersatility: Can play C or RW.
Faceoff ability: Had the best FO% on the team, and it wasn't close. Among the 9 guys who took 180+ draws, Brule was nearly 5% ahead of the next best guy. Oh, yeah, he's RH.
Physical play: Buddy's a banger, and one of the very few on the Oilers who can really punish with a hit. Doesn't mind playing out on the cusp of legality.
Shot: Maybe he was riding 7s all year, but the impression I got is Brule can score from anywhere. It seemed like a bunch of his goals were on semi-broken plays and there'd be traffic and then boom! The shot would take the goalie by surprise and handcuff him. One or two of them could be categorized as "bad goals", but when the same sort of thing happens several times it's starting to look like a pattern. Check out this video montage and tell me buddy doesn't have a wicked shot.
Even if that shot is buried on the bottom 6 it's still gonna deliver the odd goal out of nowhere. This team could use a little more firepower on the bottom 6.
Thing is, if Brule does wind up on the bottom end of the roster, that contract is going to seem like an overpay, but with that skill set he's gonna come a lot closer to covering the bet than a Nilsson or an O'Sullivan likely would in the same circumstances. And if he makes the next step into a legitimate top 6er, even if only in the second year of the deal, it's going to be money very well spent.
I agree that the kid has some good tools Bruce, I just wonder if he can develop enough of an all around game to keep his head above water on the third line.
ReplyDeleteLooking at this team going into the season, the only "sure thing" dependable line they can put together would be a Penner-Horcoff-Hemsky.
The fourth line with Stortini, and MacIntyre/jacques will not be suited for tough minutes, and the all the rookies will need sheltering as well. That means the 3rd line is going to be facing some tough matchups. Can Brule handle it?
Can he learn to PK? The team only has two PKers in the top six and about one in the bottom six right now. The way this team is being put together, they are going to need a third line of strong defensive players to have a shot at winning games IMO.