Forums/NHL Signings

Florida Panthers signed Troy Brouwer (1 Year / $850,000 AAV)

Was this a good signing?
The chart has been hidden

Poll Options

 

Aug 27 at 3:35 PM
#1
Troy Brouwer has signed a new contract with the Florida Panthers.
STANDARD CONTRACT
COMPARE THIS CONTRACT
LENGTH: 1 YEAR
EXPIRY STATUS: UFA
SIGNING TEAM: Florida Panthers
VALUE: $850,000
C.H.% : 1.07
SIGNING DATE: August 27, 2018
SEASONCLAUSECAP HIT AAV P. BONUSES S. BONUSES BASE SALARY TOTAL SALARY MINORS SALARY
2018-19$850,000$850,000$0$0$850,000$850,000$850,000
TOTAL$850,000$850,000$0$0$850,000$850,000$850,000
Aug 27 at 3:56 PM
#2
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 2,761
Likes: 738
Bottom-6 forward for almost the minimum salary. should be good value
Aug 27 at 3:57 PM
#3
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 721
Likes: 148
crazy to think the blues trade oshie for him. but solid value
Aug 27 at 4:01 PM
#4
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 320
Likes: 115
Minimum salary and he should still crack 15-20pts easily, great signing.
Aug 27 at 4:04 PM
#5
Go Jets Go!!
Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 12
Likes: 3
1 year and bellow the point where you can bury him in the minors and no remaining salary would count towards the cap. Team friendly contract here.
mothariah liked this.
Aug 27 at 4:05 PM
#6
mothariah
Joined: Jul 2017
Posts: 149
Likes: 51
This means the Panthers don't believe their kids are good enough on the fourth line (also see Mark Letestu PTO). I think they are going all out for a Cup run, and this is just a decent depth signing. The guy is obviously slowing down, but he is either a bottom line guy who chips in a couple points, or he is their AHL captain. Simple as that. Nothing wrong here.
weirfanno1 and MountRoyal514 liked this.
Aug 27 at 5:05 PM
#7
Club de Hockey 1909
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 967
Likes: 151
A player who can put up 22 points in 76 games for just 850k, sounds like a good deal to me.
Aug 27 at 5:40 PM
#8
BostonBeat97
Joined: Aug 2018
Posts: 10
Likes: 14
Love this signing. Florida has a sneaky good fourth line if it gels. Haley, McKenzie, and brouwer. Won't put up a ton of points, but can definitely chip in and brings good character and whole lot of grit.
Aug 27 at 6:43 PM
#9
V3 Arizona AGM
Joined: Jun 2017
Posts: 1,935
Likes: 375
Low risk, low reward signing. Decent.
Aug 27 at 7:01 PM
#10
Okie no worries
Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 5,155
Likes: 880
I voted no b/c even though it's a good signing in a vacuum, it doesn't make sense for a team like FLA. They need to find slots for guys like Tippett, Malgin, Borgstrom, and Vatrano, and they already have Haley and MacKenzie taking up space. This also probably eliminates Letestu's chance at a contract. On a team with poor forward depth, this signing would be perfect, but for FLA, it's not a good choice.
niong108 and DoctorBreakfast liked this.
Aug 27 at 8:11 PM
#11
bhavikp27
Joined: Jun 2016
Posts: 145
Likes: 30
Quoting: kaljakori
Minimum salary and he should still crack 15-20pts easily, great signing.


Doubtful he even plays 50+ games (assuming no injuries)
Aug 28 at 12:25 AM
#12
All Together Now
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 12
Likes: 1
I am obligated to call this good for 2 reasons.

1: It's near the minimum salary. There's not much risk here.
2: THAT ONE GOAL AGAINST THE BLACKHAWKS IN GAME 7 OF THE FIRST ROUND IN 2016. (Bias is big here, I know.)
Aug 28 at 8:00 AM
#13
mothariah
Joined: Jul 2017
Posts: 149
Likes: 51
Quoting: Icegirl
I voted no b/c even though it's a good signing in a vacuum, it doesn't make sense for a team like FLA. They need to find slots for guys like Tippett, Malgin, Borgstrom, and Vatrano, and they already have Haley and MacKenzie taking up space. This also probably eliminates Letestu's chance at a contract. On a team with poor forward depth, this signing would be perfect, but for FLA, it's not a good choice.


I agree with you that the kids need to start finding their place on the Panthers' NHL squad. I would argue, however, that if they don't think the kids are responsible enough, why throw them in a situation where they will learn bad habits and hurt the team's chances for success? Would it not be better to give the kids more time in the minors, where they can learn to play a complete game, and come up when they are ready?

On the other hand, what will happen if the kids are ready to play (and I would imagine they will get a really good chance to show it), then the Panthers either trade Brouwer, or they send him to the AHL. They would have to waive him, but if no one claims him, his whole cap hit would be gone, and it wouldn't really matter if they had signed him. Plus, they would be able to bring a veteran guy up in case of injury or need.

I see this as a win-win. An aging veteran scored a guaranteed contract, and the Panthers grabbed at best a decent depth piece, and at worst a good veteran presence for their kids in the AHL.
Aug 28 at 11:53 AM
#14
Okie no worries
Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 5,155
Likes: 880
Quoting: mothariah
I agree with you that the kids need to start finding their place on the Panthers' NHL squad. I would argue, however, that if they don't think the kids are responsible enough, why throw them in a situation where they will learn bad habits and hurt the team's chances for success? Would it not be better to give the kids more time in the minors, where they can learn to play a complete game, and come up when they are ready?

On the other hand, what will happen if the kids are ready to play (and I would imagine they will get a really good chance to show it), then the Panthers either trade Brouwer, or they send him to the AHL. They would have to waive him, but if no one claims him, his whole cap hit would be gone, and it wouldn't really matter if they had signed him. Plus, they would be able to bring a veteran guy up in case of injury or need.

I see this as a win-win. An aging veteran scored a guaranteed contract, and the Panthers grabbed at best a decent depth piece, and at worst a good veteran presence for their kids in the AHL.


While it's true that he could go to the minors, the fact that it's a one-way makes me think he'll prolly be with the big club. If the kids are ready to go, then they might not have more to show in the minors, too. As a guy on Twitter said, coaches will bench rookies who do the wrong thing by mistake in favor of veterans who do the wrong thing on purpose. It's a cultural thing.
Aug 28 at 12:27 PM
#15
mothariah
Joined: Jul 2017
Posts: 149
Likes: 51
Quoting: Icegirl
While it's true that he could go to the minors, the fact that it's a one-way makes me think he'll prolly be with the big club. If the kids are ready to go, then they might not have more to show in the minors, too. As a guy on Twitter said, coaches will bench rookies who do the wrong thing by mistake in favor of veterans who do the wrong thing on purpose. It's a cultural thing.


True, and I'm not saying that won't happen. But I don't see the fact that the contract is one-way makes a big difference. So they are going to pay him $850,000 no matter what. If he is the 17th best forward in the organization, there is no reason why he should be on the NHL roster. I agree that coaches generally pull kids out when they make a couple bad mistakes, but that doesn't mean that Brouwer won't start in the AHL or the kids will be bad enough to get benched for Brouwer.

My point, though, was this was a good signing because you either get a good fourth line player in Brouwer, or you get organizational depth because you can send him to the minors and bring him back whenever you want.

Let's say Owen Tippett makes the team out of camp and has ten bad games in his own zone. Well, you probably want him to play a lot to learn and grow. Maybe he doesn't have anything left to prove offensively in the AHL. He obviously isn't up to par defensively for the NHL. You tell him go play in the AHL for a couple of weeks to work on your defensive game, while we bring up a guy we know can play in all three zones. Give the kid a couple games to correct some of his bad habits, bring him back up, and send the veteran back down. You can't afford to give away games to develop aspects of young players games. If you give Owen Tippett a month to correct his mistakes at the NHL level, you could end up missing the playoffs by one point again.

Just an example. Not trying to rag on Tippett or any of the young guys. It's a cut throat world in the NHL, and if you aren't ready, you need to keep your feet moving. If the Panthers have someone that can play a few games to help the kids learn and grow more, that's good. If he plays 76 games in the AHL this year, no big deal.

Look at Kevin Labanc of the Sharks last season. He had a bad couple of weeks. He went down the AHL, played a few games, and then came back up and tore up the rest of the season. He still has some things to work on, but the fact that he could take advantage of a lesser league for 8 games taught him some better habits, and now he will likely be a top 6 forward for the Sharks this season.
Icegirl liked this.
Aug 28 at 12:51 PM
#16
Sensible Commentary
Joined: Jul 2016
Posts: 579
Likes: 145
Quoting: mothariah
True, and I'm not saying that won't happen. But I don't see the fact that the contract is one-way makes a big difference. So they are going to pay him $850,000 no matter what. If he is the 17th best forward in the organization, there is no reason why he should be on the NHL roster. I agree that coaches generally pull kids out when they make a couple bad mistakes, but that doesn't mean that Brouwer won't start in the AHL or the kids will be bad enough to get benched for Brouwer.

My point, though, was this was a good signing because you either get a good fourth line player in Brouwer, or you get organizational depth because you can send him to the minors and bring him back whenever you want.

Let's say Owen Tippett makes the team out of camp and has ten bad games in his own zone. Well, you probably want him to play a lot to learn and grow. Maybe he doesn't have anything left to prove offensively in the AHL. He obviously isn't up to par defensively for the NHL. You tell him go play in the AHL for a couple of weeks to work on your defensive game, while we bring up a guy we know can play in all three zones. Give the kid a couple games to correct some of his bad habits, bring him back up, and send the veteran back down. You can't afford to give away games to develop aspects of young players games. If you give Owen Tippett a month to correct his mistakes at the NHL level, you could end up missing the playoffs by one point again.

Just an example. Not trying to rag on Tippett or any of the young guys. It's a cut throat world in the NHL, and if you aren't ready, you need to keep your feet moving. If the Panthers have someone that can play a few games to help the kids learn and grow more, that's good. If he plays 76 games in the AHL this year, no big deal.

Look at Kevin Labanc of the Sharks last season. He had a bad couple of weeks. He went down the AHL, played a few games, and then came back up and tore up the rest of the season. He still has some things to work on, but the fact that he could take advantage of a lesser league for 8 games taught him some better habits, and now he will likely be a top 6 forward for the Sharks this season.
This example would work better if Tippett weren't still CHL-eligible. He gets 9 games to prove himself for Florida, and, if he doesn't, he's going back to Missisauga and may or may not play for Springfield at the tail end of the year.

I would argue they don't necessarily need to have their younger players start immediately with the Panthers. Springfield's been a crap team for the past couple of years, and re-vamping their farm system would probably help in terms of prospect development. Waiver eligibility's also an important consideration. Borgström and Malgin both still have waiver exemption and probably will start the year with Springfield. Tippett's likely playing with Missisauga, and Vatrano has a spot on the roster, methinks, on the 3rd line with McCann and McGinn. Next year, though, Haley, MacKenzie, McGinn, and Brouwer's contracts are all up, and the Panthers might promote more young players at that time.
mothariah liked this.
Aug 28 at 3:55 PM
#17
mothariah
Joined: Jul 2017
Posts: 149
Likes: 51
Quoting: DragonRaptorHybrid
This example would work better if Tippett weren't still CHL-eligible. He gets 9 games to prove himself for Florida, and, if he doesn't, he's going back to Missisauga and may or may not play for Springfield at the tail end of the year.

I would argue they don't necessarily need to have their younger players start immediately with the Panthers. Springfield's been a crap team for the past couple of years, and re-vamping their farm system would probably help in terms of prospect development. Waiver eligibility's also an important consideration. Borgström and Malgin both still have waiver exemption and probably will start the year with Springfield. Tippett's likely playing with Missisauga, and Vatrano has a spot on the roster, methinks, on the 3rd line with McCann and McGinn. Next year, though, Haley, MacKenzie, McGinn, and Brouwer's contracts are all up, and the Panthers might promote more young players at that time.


All strong points.
Sep 1 at 3:15 PM
#18
skates21
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 41
Likes: 19
Quoting: Icegirl
I voted no b/c even though it's a good signing in a vacuum, it doesn't make sense for a team like FLA. They need to find slots for guys like Tippett, Malgin, Borgstrom, and Vatrano, and they already have Haley and MacKenzie taking up space. This also probably eliminates Letestu's chance at a contract. On a team with poor forward depth, this signing would be perfect, but for FLA, it's not a good choice.


Who's going to lead them thats been to a cup? Brouwer has the skills to be a leader and has been there and won it. They majority of the Panthers barely have playoff experience. Outside of Hoffman and Lou, no ones been to a cup final.
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Submit Poll Edit