Apr 8, 2017
Nov 1, 1987
Posts per Day
Well, well, well. This contract’s certainly gonna spark some debate. It’s gonna be very polarizing, methinks. You’ll either love this or hate this contract.
What it comes down to is about where you land on a spectrum of stability vs flexibility. Looking back, NSH has often been more likely to offer *longer-term* contracts to players it considers to be core pieces (Weber, Forsberg, RJ, Jarnkrok, Turris, etc...). Just with those examples you can see the pros and cons of such a strategy, whereby you engender roster stability and player (and ?fan) loyalty alongside a lower cap hit. Conversely you are committed to a significantly longer term for the player. 6y or 7y instead of 2 or 3y.
Personally I LOVE this deal. In my spreadsheet, I had Sissons at $2.6M for 3y most likely. The Predators got that AAV but have secured it over 7y! As the cap goes up, this contract will look even better.
The downside of course is his play decreases faster than one would expect as he enters his 30’s in years 5/6/7. Generally speaking however, bottom-6 players (which is all that Sissons is, will be, and all they need him to be - esp on this deal) tend to see a drop off around age 32, which is the final year of this deal. Would 6y have been better? Yes. I’d have liked it a good deal more. But I don’t think y7 will be crippling. Worst case they bury his contract in the AHL and by that time it’s likely the majority of the cap hit will be buryable so the cap implications are minimal.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Brian2016</b></div><div>Good analysis, but I'm not convinced WPG will be a contending team next season. I could see them as low as 6th in the Central and 10th in the West. They lost a ton this summer and haven't added anyone of consequence besides Pionk. Most of the teams around them in the standings last season have improved substantially. CHI, COL, ARI, DAL, and NSH have all made big changes and big steps forward, at least on paper. The big underlying problem seems to be that nobody really wants to play in WPG. It's supposedly very cold there and very isolated.</div></div>
I don’t disagree fundamentally. But I’d expect them to at least be contesting for a playoff until the last handful of games - and certainly longer than the Rangers did the past 2 seasons (which was, basically, never). They still have 2 excellent scoring lines with an avg bottom-6 and perhaps one of the best 5 goalie tandems in the NHL, particularly if Hellebucyk bounces back. There is a big hole at LD but that’s nothing new really as it’s been there for the past 4y. For Winnipeg, finishing anywhere from 6th to 11th is reasonable but I think it’ll be close (for the playoffs).
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>GeraltofRivia</b></div><div>2.8 million a year would have been more accurate but I’m just nitpicking</div></div>
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Brian2016</b></div><div> I think $3M AAV is a bit too high for a 3rd pair D on a bridge deal, but it's not terrible. $2.25 would've been perfect, in my opinion.</div></div>
Right between these guys, I had Pionk coming in for 2y at 2.6M. $3.0M would be appropriate for a 3y bridge, but for a 2y this is a moderate, but not egregious, overpayment. Ultimately for any Top-4 D you’re going to be paying them at least $2.5M even if there’s a limited body of work to judge it on. Also, I imagine that management has perhaps learned a thing or two from the Trouba situation and decided to acquiesce to the player’s demands this time around with the hopes of being more likely to sign a long-term deal in 2y time. Assuming of course he can adjust to a 2nd pairing role on a competitive team in Winnipeg.
He has been playing Top-4 minutes since arriving in the NHL, and has put up decent offensive numbers as well (tho his underlying stats leave a bit to be desired). There’s some raw talent there to harness, but it may turn out that he’s a price 3rd Pair guy on a contending team, which would be a disappointment given that he was a 1:1 trade for Trouba, but there wasn’t much else that Chevy and co could really do. Both with the trade (given the Jets cap situation) and with this contract (given the base salary expectations for a Top-4 D-Man.