SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/NHL Signings

San Jose Sharks signed Tomas Hertl (4 Years / $5,625,000 AAV)

Was this a good signing?
The chart has been hidden

Poll Options


Jul. 2, 2018 at 6:47 p.m.
#1
Tomas Hertl has signed a new contract with the San Jose Sharks.
Standard Contract
Comparable ContractsCOMPARE THIS CONTRACT
SIGNED BY: Doug Wilson
Length: 4 years
Value: $22,500,000
Expiry Status: UFA
Cap % Tooltip: 7.08
Signing Team: Logo of the San Jose SharksSan Jose Sharks
Signing Date: Jul. 2, 2018
Source: @KKurzNHL

Tomas Hertl signed a 4 year, $22,500,000 contract with the San Jose Sharks on Jul. 2, 2018. The contract has a cap hit of $5,625,000.

SEASONClauseCap HitTooltipAAV TooltipP. BonusesTooltipS. BonusesTooltipBase SalaryTooltipTotal SalaryTooltipMinors SalTooltip
2018-19$5,625,000$5,625,000$0$2,000,000$4,000,000$6,000,000$6,000,000
2019-20$5,625,000$5,625,000$0$2,000,000$4,250,000$6,250,000$6,250,000
2020-21M-NTC$5,625,000$5,625,000$0$2,000,000$2,750,000$4,750,000$4,750,000
2021-22M-NTC$5,625,000$5,625,000$0$2,000,000$3,500,000$5,500,000$5,500,000
TOTAL$22,500,000$22,500,000$0$8,000,000$14,500,000$22,500,000$22,500,000
CLAUSE DETAILS: 2020-21 & 21-22: Player submits a 3 team trade list.
CLAUSE SOURCE: CapFriendly
Jul. 2, 2018 at 6:51 p.m.
#2
Rangers 2024
Avatar of the user
Joined: Nov. 2017
Posts: 19,071
Likes: 5,438
a bit high but he seems primed for a breakout
Jul. 2, 2018 at 8:49 p.m.
#3
Let's go Pens!
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2017
Posts: 1,788
Likes: 382
Right now, I don't like the cap hit that much. But maybe Hertl can change my mind with his production for the next seasons. We'll see...
Jul. 2, 2018 at 9:30 p.m.
#4
Grierless Sharks Fan
Avatar of the user
Joined: Dec. 2017
Posts: 3,020
Likes: 947
At that cap hit, I would of preferred 5 or 6 years. He's been improving every year so, I think in a season or two it will be a great cap hit.
Jul. 3, 2018 at 1:57 p.m.
#5
mothariah
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2017
Posts: 149
Likes: 51
If you look at comparable, it's not horrible. I think he fits better in the 4.8-5.2 range, but this is fine. It's not a huge overpayment.

Here's the thing to consider: if he's the third center on the team, this is an outrageous contract. He simply can't produce the offensive numbers to make up for the dollar figure on the third line. If he's a top six winger (which is where I put him), I think he can crack 50 point this season. 55 would be perfect for that salary in my eyes.

I guess if you have a combo Labanc, Meier, and Donskoi on the third line with Hertl, that could be formidable. But that would require a winger to play with Couture. My suggestion is Panarin, but that might cost too much (Meier and Labanc/Donskoi) and wouldn't give Hertl good wingers.

Long story short: put him on the wing on the Couture or Pavelski group, and he will produce well enough for this deal.
Jul. 3, 2018 at 11:17 p.m.
#6
Avatar of the user
Joined: Aug. 2017
Posts: 1,717
Likes: 543
Quoting: mothariah
If you look at comparable, it's not horrible. I think he fits better in the 4.8-5.2 range, but this is fine. It's not a huge overpayment.

Here's the thing to consider: if he's the third center on the team, this is an outrageous contract. He simply can't produce the offensive numbers to make up for the dollar figure on the third line. If he's a top six winger (which is where I put him), I think he can crack 50 point this season. 55 would be perfect for that salary in my eyes.

I guess if you have a combo Labanc, Meier, and Donskoi on the third line with Hertl, that could be formidable. But that would require a winger to play with Couture. My suggestion is Panarin, but that might cost too much (Meier and Labanc/Donskoi) and wouldn't give Hertl good wingers.

Long story short: put him on the wing on the Couture or Pavelski group, and he will produce well enough for this deal.


ALL I SEE IS A 24 YEAR OLD WITH ZERO 50 POINT SEASONS....WHY IS HE GETTING PAID LIKE THE 22 YEAR OLD RFA'S WHO'VE ALREADY PUT UP 60 POINTS ?

- 8 MIL X 7 FOR 33 YEAR OLD BURNS
- 8 MIL X 7 FOR 30 YEAR OLD COUTURE
- 7 MIL X 7 FOR 31 YEAR OLD VLASIC
- 7 MIL X 7 FOR KANE - WHO HASN'T HIT 60 POINTS AT 27
- PAVELSKI'S GONNA WAN'T HIS 8 MIL X 7 NEXT YEAR TOO....AND HE'LL BE 34.

THIS TEAM WILL BE A DUMPSTER FIRE IN 3 YEARS....
Jul. 9, 2018 at 10:17 a.m.
#7
mothariah
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2017
Posts: 149
Likes: 51
Quoting: drewjenks
ALL I SEE IS A 24 YEAR OLD WITH ZERO 50 POINT SEASONS....WHY IS HE GETTING PAID LIKE THE 22 YEAR OLD RFA'S WHO'VE ALREADY PUT UP 60 POINTS ?

- 8 MIL X 7 FOR 33 YEAR OLD BURNS
- 8 MIL X 7 FOR 30 YEAR OLD COUTURE
- 7 MIL X 7 FOR 31 YEAR OLD VLASIC
- 7 MIL X 7 FOR KANE - WHO HASN'T HIT 60 POINTS AT 27
- PAVELSKI'S GONNA WAN'T HIS 8 MIL X 7 NEXT YEAR TOO....AND HE'LL BE 34.

THIS TEAM WILL BE A DUMPSTER FIRE IN 3 YEARS....




Well, this is the new norm. The cap is going up, so everyone's salaries are going up. He is taking the same percentage of cap as others did before him, it's just a larger number since the cap is going up and up and up.

I agree they are looking at problems down the road, but the Burns deal will be fine for awhile. The Couture deal will be fine for awhile. The Hertl deal will be fine for the duration.

Vlasic might get to be a bad one if he starts to wear down faster.

Kane is overpaid, but the same argument as Hertl. He is also GOING to hit career highs in everything this year, his first full season with the Sharks.

Like I said, I think I would have liked Hertl to be at $5.000 mil, but this is fine if he keeps playing in the top 6 and keeps improving.

The alternative is what? Trade him for a couple of picks? No thank you.

Also, Pavelski is NOT getting a seven year deal. That's insane. He's also not getting $8 mil if he doesn't score 35+ goals this season and lead the team in points. Look for a 3-4 X $6.5-7.25 mil.
Jul. 9, 2018 at 5:04 p.m.
#8
Avatar of the user
Joined: Aug. 2017
Posts: 1,717
Likes: 543
Quoting: mothariah
Well, this is the new norm. The cap is going up, so everyone's salaries are going up. He is taking the same percentage of cap as others did before him, it's just a larger number since the cap is going up and up and up.

I agree they are looking at problems down the road, but the Burns deal will be fine for awhile. The Couture deal will be fine for awhile. The Hertl deal will be fine for the duration.

Vlasic might get to be a bad one if he starts to wear down faster.

Kane is overpaid, but the same argument as Hertl. He is also GOING to hit career highs in everything this year, his first full season with the Sharks.

Like I said, I think I would have liked Hertl to be at $5.000 mil, but this is fine if he keeps playing in the top 6 and keeps improving.

The alternative is what? Trade him for a couple of picks? No thank you.

Also, Pavelski is NOT getting a seven year deal. That's insane. He's also not getting $8 mil if he doesn't score 35+ goals this season and lead the team in points. Look for a 3-4 X $6.5-7.25 mil.


Fair....but I just said he's going to wan't the money.....especially after the other big contracts his peers have received. I'm not sure if he'll get it.

Also....I think you're being FAR too bullish on Kane.

Winnipeg & Buffalo fans both said the exact same thing about Kane EVERY season !

In 2011-12 Kane got 30 goals & 57 points (that was his contract year).

He never got anywhere near those numbers for the next 5 seasons....then he got 29 goals & 54 points last season (which also happened to be a contract year).

Last season was the best Kane's gonna give you (and he was only on pace for 59 points in 82 games while playing with the Sharks - not that impressive for a $7,000,000 honeymoon).

And he was only on pace for 45 points in 82 games during the playoffs.
mothariah liked this.
Jul. 10, 2018 at 9:20 a.m.
#9
mothariah
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2017
Posts: 149
Likes: 51
Quoting: drewjenks
Fair....but I just said he's going to wan't the money.....especially after the other big contracts his peers have received. I'm not sure if he'll get it.

Also....I think you're being FAR too bullish on Kane.

Winnipeg & Buffalo fans both said the exact same thing about Kane EVERY season !

In 2011-12 Kane got 30 goals & 57 points (that was his contract year).

He never got anywhere near those numbers for the next 5 seasons....then he got 29 goals & 54 points last season (which also happened to be a contract year).

Last season was the best Kane's gonna give you (and he was only on pace for 59 points in 82 games while playing with the Sharks - not that impressive for a $7,000,000 honeymoon).

And he was only on pace for 45 points in 82 games during the playoffs.


Let's say we throw out the playoff performance because he was hurt. I'm not sure how relevant those numbers will be towards next year.

That being said, you have a fair point about being concerned about Kane returning to "normal." I'm sure the Jets/Sabres fans were disappointed he never really reached his "potential", but what did those teams give him exactly? Winnipeg (originally the Thrashers) had TERRIBLE teams that couldn't score and couldn't defend. Just now do they have players like Mark Schiefele and Patrik Laine to score goals, and an actually goalie in Connor Hellybuyck. You ask a guy to succeed on a team without those three players, and you expect what to happen?

Same thing with Buffalo. Sure, he had a great center in Jack Eichel, but two guys can't carry the load when you have no other offensive weapons, a defense that is only one guy deep, and a goaltender who doesn't actually know how to play the position.

You project out his points from last season and don't even factor in that he played most of the year with a terrible team.

I get it that you're concerned that DW overpaid for Kane, and you're probably not totally wrong, but let's see what happens in a full season with Kane on a GOOD TEAM for a change.

I am by no means saying Kane will score a point a game, nor will he hit 40 goals. But 30 goals and 65 points isn't out of the question, and is something that is perfectly fine for that dollar figure.
Jul. 10, 2018 at 9:24 a.m.
#10
mothariah
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2017
Posts: 149
Likes: 51
Quoting: drewjenks
Fair....but I just said he's going to wan't the money.....especially after the other big contracts his peers have received. I'm not sure if he'll get it.


Completely missed the Pavelski part...

I agree he will want the money, and he will likely get a Joe-Thornton-one-year-lots-of-money type deal, but he's 34 tomorrow. He is simply not getting the term you are afraid of. Maybe he gets three years, it's remotely possible he gets four. I think he will get a raise, but I doubt it will be insane. He is slowing down. He's still the best forward on the team (except Couture), and will likely get a deal around Kane but below Couture. That won't kill the team.
Jul. 11, 2018 at 4:25 a.m.
#11
Avatar of the user
Joined: Aug. 2017
Posts: 1,717
Likes: 543
Quoting: mothariah
Let's say we throw out the playoff performance because he was hurt. I'm not sure how relevant those numbers will be towards next year.

That being said, you have a fair point about being concerned about Kane returning to "normal." I'm sure the Jets/Sabres fans were disappointed he never really reached his "potential", but what did those teams give him exactly? Winnipeg (originally the Thrashers) had TERRIBLE teams that couldn't score and couldn't defend. Just now do they have players like Mark Schiefele and Patrik Laine to score goals, and an actually goalie in Connor Hellybuyck. You ask a guy to succeed on a team without those three players, and you expect what to happen?

Same thing with Buffalo. Sure, he had a great center in Jack Eichel, but two guys can't carry the load when you have no other offensive weapons, a defense that is only one guy deep, and a goaltender who doesn't actually know how to play the position.

You project out his points from last season and don't even factor in that he played most of the year with a terrible team.

I get it that you're concerned that DW overpaid for Kane, and you're probably not totally wrong, but let's see what happens in a full season with Kane on a GOOD TEAM for a change.

I am by no means saying Kane will score a point a game, nor will he hit 40 goals. But 30 goals and 65 points isn't out of the question, and is something that is perfectly fine for that dollar figure.


You can't use "poor defense" and "poor goaltending" in your argument....because all were talking about is point production.

Yeah....Buffalo is bad....so I would expect his +/- to be bad on that team. But he should have been racking up the points while playing with Eichel (who had more point/game than anyone on SJS).
Jul. 11, 2018 at 9:19 a.m.
#12
mothariah
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2017
Posts: 149
Likes: 51
Quoting: drewjenks
You can't use "poor defense" and "poor goaltending" in your argument....because all were talking about is point production.

Yeah....Buffalo is bad....so I would expect his +/- to be bad on that team. But he should have been racking up the points while playing with Eichel (who had more point/game than anyone on SJS).


But can you be expected to put up big points when your defensemen constantly turn the puck over in your own zone? Can you be expected to put up big points when the other team's best players, best shut-down players, play against you every night?

The point is the Sabres were Eichel and Kane and Ristolainen. The Sharks are a better team not because they have a great player like Eichel, but because they have a collection of good players in Thornton, Pavelski, Hertl, Couture, Burns, Vlasic, etc.

And goaltending is a big deal here, because Evander Kane has NEVER had a #1 goalie behind him. Did he have a good goalie in Winnipeg? Ondrej Pavolec? Nah... How about Buffalo? Robin Lehner? No thanks.

You say it's not a part of the conversation, but it totally is. Look at the Alex Ovechkin era. The guy didn't play defense until this spring, and they couldn't beat good teams in the playoffs because of it. He blocks three huge shots in the SCF and they win the Cup. It's a TEAM game, and if one are of the team (goaltending) is bad, the WHOLE team suffers.

Look, I'm not going to argue with you saying Kane couldn't have had better numbers before, because he certainly could have. And he is likely never going to be better than 30 goals and 60 points. But all that is fine when you consider he has good chemistry with the Sharks, he actually WANTS to be there, unlike Winnipeg and Buffalo, and the Sharks have a good team around him.

Honestly, you could put Kane with any two forwards on the Sharks roster and that could be a dangerous line. Put him with Marcus Sorensen and Barclay Goodrow. That line with would be quick, physical, and could hem a team in their own end for a shift. Would that line score 100 goals on the season? No, but it would be effective.

Could you say that in Buffalo? No. If I'm playing against Buffalo, I have to limit Eichel's line to less than two goals and I win most nights because the rest of the team stinks. You can shut down the Sharks "top" line, and the rest of the team could still beat you.

THAT is my point. And THAT is why Evander Kane will have a career year with the Sharks in 2018-19.
Jul. 11, 2018 at 2:05 p.m.
#13
Avatar of the user
Joined: Aug. 2017
Posts: 1,717
Likes: 543
Quoting: mothariah
But can you be expected to put up big points when your defensemen constantly turn the puck over in your own zone? Can you be expected to put up big points when the other team's best players, best shut-down players, play against you every night?

The point is the Sabres were Eichel and Kane and Ristolainen. The Sharks are a better team not because they have a great player like Eichel, but because they have a collection of good players in Thornton, Pavelski, Hertl, Couture, Burns, Vlasic, etc.

And goaltending is a big deal here, because Evander Kane has NEVER had a #1 goalie behind him. Did he have a good goalie in Winnipeg? Ondrej Pavolec? Nah... How about Buffalo? Robin Lehner? No thanks.

You say it's not a part of the conversation, but it totally is. Look at the Alex Ovechkin era. The guy didn't play defense until this spring, and they couldn't beat good teams in the playoffs because of it. He blocks three huge shots in the SCF and they win the Cup. It's a TEAM game, and if one are of the team (goaltending) is bad, the WHOLE team suffers.

Look, I'm not going to argue with you saying Kane couldn't have had better numbers before, because he certainly could have. And he is likely never going to be better than 30 goals and 60 points. But all that is fine when you consider he has good chemistry with the Sharks, he actually WANTS to be there, unlike Winnipeg and Buffalo, and the Sharks have a good team around him.

Honestly, you could put Kane with any two forwards on the Sharks roster and that could be a dangerous line. Put him with Marcus Sorensen and Barclay Goodrow. That line with would be quick, physical, and could hem a team in their own end for a shift. Would that line score 100 goals on the season? No, but it would be effective.

Could you say that in Buffalo? No. If I'm playing against Buffalo, I have to limit Eichel's line to less than two goals and I win most nights because the rest of the team stinks. You can shut down the Sharks "top" line, and the rest of the team could still beat you.

THAT is my point. And THAT is why Evander Kane will have a career year with the Sharks in 2018-19.


Eichel AND O'Rielly were both as good (or better) offensively as any C on SJS last year. Kane played with them and got tons of ice time....he's not getting an upgraded C in SJS.

Defense / goaltending have very little impact on point production....just ask the NYI....who had the most goals in the league last year AND the worst defense / goal-tending.

Sorry to say....but your argument calling for Kane to set "Career Highs" this year has no merit....it's possible....but it's definitely indicated by any special circumstance.
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Loading animation
Submit Poll Edit