Noah Hanifin

[kehatch]

35 minutes ago, Going4TheCup said:

I think this deal with Hanifin is a great one because if they would have made a bridge deal it might have backfired for the Flames. Doesn't Jacob Trouba make 5.5 million this season?? All I am saying is that there could have been a risk of paying him more per year after the Bridge deal .

 

Of course there is a risk he progresses and it costs more to sign an extension. That is always the risk with a bridge. But Hanafin is largely unproven. 6 years at a big dollar figure is too much. 

 

If the Oilers signed Nurse to this contract most would be saying "here we go again". Signing unproven players to big long term deals isn't normally a good idea. 

[rickross]

2 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

He barely cracked the top 4 last season. That was true of his ice time, zone starts, competition, etc. He isn't worth 5 million based on his play last season. Anytime you are paying for potential you are taking a risk, especially when the player hasn't played a game for you yet. 

 

Will he get better and earn his contract? Probably. But we could have saved some cap in the short term and assessed his fit before making the big commitment. That also would have given us the opportunity to buy more then two UFA years. 

 

I am not going to harp to hard on the contract. Given the term Treliving did a good job keeping the number low. I just would have preferred a bridge. 

He's 21 years old, the fact the he's pushing if not already a top 4 NHL D man is a big deal. Sure we could have bought a couple extra FA years by bridging him but at what premium for each of those years? He put up 32pts last year which is the same as Brodie so why not pay for potential but in a conservative manner? 

 

Think about it, Treliving has effectively placed YOUNGER succesors to both Tj Brodie and Michael Backlund with contracts of near equal or lessor value. It's actually a big deal now and for the future of this organization. Which other GM (besides Poile)is getting this kind of value of such calculated value? 

 

Looking back this may be one of the most efficient and cost effective off seasons of any team/GM in recent history.

[travel_dude]

11 minutes ago, kehatch said:

 

2 years at 3 million per

 

Two things.

There was very little chance you get a 2 year deal cheaper than Montour's.

Second, a two year deal bumps into contract negotiations (or replacement) of 5 other Flames D-men and prospects.

Brodie, Hamonic, Stone, Andersson and Kylington.

That's the worst possible timing for a potential 1st or 2nd pairing D-man.

[The_People1]

9 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

He barely cracked the top 4 last season. That was true of his ice time, zone starts, competition, etc. 

 

It's hard to crack top 4 in Carolina though.  One of the most stacked D after Nashville.

 

One nice thing was that he was able to hold down 1st unit PP QB while others like Faulk failed.

[cross16]

10 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

If the Oilers signed Nurse to this contract most would be saying "here we go again". Signing unproven players to big long term deals isn't normally a good idea. 

 

 

Is this fair?

 

The Oilers get a lot of flak for what they did but if you look at it now they weren't exactly wrong. Looking at it now i'd say they made the right call on Eberle/Hall (both are below market) but missed on Nuge. Roman Josi turned into a massive home run for Nashville.

 

The reservation is for sure fair, i'm just not sure it's based on an accurate premise. 

[The_People1]

25 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

 

Is this fair?

 

The Oilers get a lot of flak for what they did but if you look at it now they weren't exactly wrong. Looking at it now i'd say they made the right call on Eberle/Hall (both are below market) but missed on Nuge. Roman Josi turned into a massive home run for Nashville.

 

The reservation is for sure fair, i'm just not sure it's based on an accurate premise. 

 

I also don't think $5-mil is "big money" anymore.  Standards are changing fast because the cap keeps moving up.

 

You don't get $3-mil bridge anymore for top 5 picks who looks on pace to reach potential.  

[MAC331]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

 

Is this fair?

 

The Oilers get a lot of flak for what they did but if you look at it now they weren't exactly wrong. Looking at it now i'd say they made the right call on Eberle/Hall (both are below market) but missed on Nuge. Roman Josi turned into a massive home run for Nashville.

 

The reservation is for sure fair, i'm just not sure it's based on an accurate premise. 

Nobody should be complaining about this deal.

[cross16]

3 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Nobody should be complaining about this deal.

 

I don't think that angle is fair either. I don't mind the deal but I think it's perfectly fair and accurate to question it. Kehatch makes good points as to why a bridge deal made some sense, even if I disagree with them. This contract is a pretty big risk by Treliving and the Flames. 

 

At the end of the day this is a 30 million commitment to a player with 1 competent  season in the NHL. He is young yes and he is trending the right way yes, but that does not guarantee anything. Kent Wilson did a good look at this for the Athletic and he compared Hanifin to other players with similar draft pedigree and results int he first few seasons. While there were alot of players in the mix that turned out to be good players there were also a few that plateaued and some that never amounted to much so I think it's very fair to question how much of a risk the contract is. 

[Flyerfan52]

I was expecting 6 years but saw the $s as 5-5.5. He came in just a tad lower but it's a fair deal for both sides IMO. He's young, usually healthy & his points have risen slightly every year. If he progresses as I think he will this deal could look like a steal.Paired with Hamonic he can go 2 ways but if the 2 can form a shutdown pair near as good as Trouba/Morrissey we're good & if Hamonic frees him to go offense that's fine as well.

 

The Jets would love to sign Morrissey to similar but there I still figure 5.5 as Josh did play the harder minutes as 1/2 the top shutdown pair while still having untapped offensive potential.

[MAC331]

35 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

I don't think that angle is fair either. I don't mind the deal but I think it's perfectly fair and accurate to question it. Kehatch makes good points as to why a bridge deal made some sense, even if I disagree with them. This contract is a pretty big risk by Treliving and the Flames. 

 

At the end of the day this is a 30 million commitment to a player with 1 competent  season in the NHL. He is young yes and he is trending the right way yes, but that does not guarantee anything. Kent Wilson did a good look at this for the Athletic and he compared Hanifin to other players with similar draft pedigree and results int he first few seasons. While there were alot of players in the mix that turned out to be good players there were also a few that plateaued and some that never amounted to much so I think it's very fair to question how much of a risk the contract is. 

Every player contract is a risk, this is one worth taking IMO because it takes what should be a very good defenseman past any of the contracts we currently have with our defensemen.

[Carty]

29 minutes ago, Flyerfan52 said:

I was expecting 6 years but saw the $s as 5-5.5. He came in just a tad lower but it's a fair deal for both sides IMO. He's young, usually healthy & his points have risen slightly every year. If he progresses as I think he will this deal could look like a steal.Paired with Hamonic he can go 2 ways but if the 2 can form a shutdown pair near as good as Trouba/Morrissey we're good & if Hamonic frees him to go offense that's fine as well.

 

Pretty much sums up the way that I see it as well...

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

I don't think that angle is fair either. I don't mind the deal but I think it's perfectly fair and accurate to question it. Kehatch makes good points as to why a bridge deal made some sense, even if I disagree with them. This contract is a pretty big risk by Treliving and the Flames. 

 

At the end of the day this is a 30 million commitment to a player with 1 competent  season in the NHL. He is young yes and he is trending the right way yes, but that does not guarantee anything. Kent Wilson did a good look at this for the Athletic and he compared Hanifin to other players with similar draft pedigree and results int he first few seasons. While there were alot of players in the mix that turned out to be good players there were also a few that plateaued and some that never amounted to much so I think it's very fair to question how much of a risk the contract is. 

 

https://flamesnation.ca/2018/08/31/how-does-noah-hanifins-contract-compare-to-other-defencemen/

 

I don't subscribe to The Athletic, so I'm posting a similarly themed comparison.

[travel_dude]

49 minutes ago, Flyerfan52 said:

I was expecting 6 years but saw the $s as 5-5.5. He came in just a tad lower but it's a fair deal for both sides IMO. He's young, usually healthy & his points have risen slightly every year. If he progresses as I think he will this deal could look like a steal.Paired with Hamonic he can go 2 ways but if the 2 can form a shutdown pair near as good as Trouba/Morrissey we're good & if Hamonic frees him to go offense that's fine as well.

 

The Jets would love to sign Morrissey to similar but there I still figure 5.5 as Josh did play the harder minutes as 1/2 the top shutdown pair while still having untapped offensive potential.

 

I've heard it said (don't have a linky poo) that Brodie and Hamonic didn't have very good communication on the ice.  Brodie would assume that Hamonic knew when he was going to wheel, or move to this or that spot.  At least that was the gist of it.  Probably why Brodie is working with Gio right now to get the signal/spots straight. 

[Flyerfan52]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

I've heard it said (don't have a linky poo) that Brodie and Hamonic didn't have very good communication on the ice.  Brodie would assume that Hamonic knew when he was going to wheel, or move to this or that spot.  At least that was the gist of it.  Probably why Brodie is working with Gio right now to get the signal/spots straight. 

Makes sense. That worked last go around.

Since Brodie & Hamonic clicked like the Odd Couple (not @ all) I have high hopes the younger Hanifin will take his cue from the more experienced Hamonic on when to stay & when he can free wheel. Hamonic can remind him that job 1 for a D is defense while points scored are icing.

Remember every goal prevented is 1 we don't need to get back. In every game I watch (regardless of which of my 3 teams is playing) if I see a goal against due to a bonehead play by a D I curse (words like dang or my stars I assure you ) & go now we have to get that back to bail you out you dumb sob.

[MAC331]

8 minutes ago, Flyerfan52 said:

Makes sense. That worked last go around.

Since Brodie & Hamonic clicked like the Odd Couple (not @ all) I have high hopes the younger Hanifin will take his cue from the more experienced Hamonic on when to stay & when he can free wheel. Hamonic can remind him that job 1 for a D is defense while points scored are icing.

Remember every goal prevented is 1 we don't need to get back. In every game I watch (regardless of which of my 3 teams is playing) if I see a goal against due to a bonehead play by a D I curse (words like dang or my stars I assure you ) & go now we have to get that back to bail you out you dumb sob.

Over the past 3 years Brodie has become very indecisive with his puck handling, this was before Hamonic arrived on the scene. I wouldn't ever say he is the smartest player on the ice however his strengths were in his playmaking and knowing when to shoot the puck. He has to get back to his strengths because he was never great defensively. Hanifin will be on his strong LSD which should be a plus while playing with Hamonic.

[kehatch]

6 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

 

Is this fair?

 

The Oilers get a lot of flak for what they did but if you look at it now they weren't exactly wrong. Looking at it now i'd say they made the right call on Eberle/Hall (both are below market) but missed on Nuge. Roman Josi turned into a massive home run for Nashville.

 

The reservation is for sure fair, i'm just not sure it's based on an accurate premise. 

 

I am normally not a fan of bridge deals for top players. I didn't think they should have bridged Gaudreau, Monahan, or Hamilton. I don't think they should bridge Tkachuk. What I don't like about this deal is how sheltered Hanafin was in a limited top 4 role, and that was just for a season. Hanafin is still largely an unknown and the Flames are paying for potential. I don't like that on a 6 year deal. 

 

Again, I don't hate the deal and I think it will probably workout. And it is fair dollars for the term. I just want my players a bit more established before handing out ling term deals because bad long term deals can sink a club. 

[7wit]

6 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

I am normally not a fan of bridge deals for top players. I didn't think they should have bridged Gaudreau, Monahan, or Hamilton. I don't think they should bridge Tkachuk. What I don't like about this deal is how sheltered Hanafin was in a limited top 4 role, and that was just for a season. Hanafin is still largely an unknown and the Flames are paying for potential. I don't like that on a 6 year deal. 

 

Again, I don't hate the deal and I think it will probably workout. And it is fair dollars for the term. I just want my players a bit more established before handing out ling term deals because bad long term deals can sink a club. 

 

The interesting thing I find with this deal is the modified no trade clause in the last 2 years of the contract. Probably how the Flames managed to sign him for less than $5 million per season. I was expecting 6 years at 5-5.5 million. This could be a burden if he doesn’t play well or “fit” well with the team. This contract could look like the current Stone or recent Brouwer contracts a few years down the road. However, I hope it works out well as he’s got the talent, now he’s getting paid, and he just needs to play well and improve his game. Let’s hope he doesn’t try too hard to warrant his paycheque like Roman Turek did. It’s a risk with younger players.

[YounGuns]

Interesting article from TheHockeyNews: https://thehockeynews.com/news/article/why-noah-hanifins-six-year-contract-is-probably-a-bargain

 

A couple of highlights from the article:  

 

What about Hanifin’s actual performance? On the surface, he’s already producing like top-four defenseman. His 10 goals and 32 points last year were impressive considering he got nine of his goals at even strength. Offensively, especially factoring out power play time, he’s close enough to young-version Josi and Klingberg to justify a similar second contract.

 

What about the deeper offensive and defensive metrics, though? Last season, 133 defensemen played 1,000 or more minutes 5-on-5. Oddly enough, the two leaders in primary points per 60 minutes are the veteran versions of our boys Josi and Klingberg. But Year-3 Hanifin quietly slots in at 20^th. His 5-on-5 Corsi: third among all 133 blueliners in that sample. He was eighth in Corsi For per 60 and sixth in Corsi Against per 60. Hanifin graded out amazingly well in shot generation, shot suppression and even-strength offense. Sophomore Josi was middle of the pack at best in the same metrics, and 2014-15 Klingberg was a stud offensively but below average at preventing shot attempts.

[conundrumed]

14 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

I am normally not a fan of bridge deals for top players. I didn't think they should have bridged Gaudreau, Monahan, or Hamilton. I don't think they should bridge Tkachuk. What I don't like about this deal is how sheltered Hanafin was in a limited top 4 role, and that was just for a season. Hanafin is still largely an unknown and the Flames are paying for potential. I don't like that on a 6 year deal. 

 

Again, I don't hate the deal and I think it will probably workout. And it is fair dollars for the term. I just want my players a bit more established before handing out ling term deals because bad long term deals can sink a club. 

I agree with you.

I was hoping for a bridge from the outset, but as the talk and whispers kept going I resigned myself to thinking we were signing him long term.

I still would have preferred a 3 year bridge. If he proves out he gets a bigger deal, but that means he proved out. There are a lot of metrics tossed around to tell us how he's trending well, but metrics come with so much lack of peripherals that they lack objectivity.

Just as you say as well, I'm not down on this contract.

But I don't really care much for this new era of long term big dollars based on potential. Although it's a fact now, I don't have to agree with it.

At the end of the day, it's up to Hanifin. But there's a part of me that thinks we just bought a high draft pick "name".

He still has much to prove.

[MAC331]

47 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

I agree with you.

I was hoping for a bridge from the outset, but as the talk and whispers kept going I resigned myself to thinking we were signing him long term.

I still would have preferred a 3 year bridge. If he proves out he gets a bigger deal, but that means he proved out. There are a lot of metrics tossed around to tell us how he's trending well, but metrics come with so much lack of peripherals that they lack objectivity.

Just as you say as well, I'm not down on this contract.

But I don't really care much for this new era of long term big dollars based on potential. Although it's a fact now, I don't have to agree with it.

At the end of the day, it's up to Hanifin. But there's a part of me that thinks we just bought a high draft pick "name".

He still has much to prove.

Do you feel this way because the last 3 seasons were not under your watch here ? he has shown steady growth for his first 3 seasons fighting for playing time with a very talented defense group in CAR. The guy is 6'3 over 200lbs and is a very good skater who puts up points, what's not to like here ? Yet Tkachuk will now enter his 3 season with good production and everyone wants to hand him the franchise keys and a huge contract now. Like I said I see nothing to complain about with Hanifin's deal. Is everyone going to whine and complain when Valimaki is up for his first real contract ?

[travel_dude]

42 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

I agree with you.

I was hoping for a bridge from the outset, but as the talk and whispers kept going I resigned myself to thinking we were signing him long term.

I still would have preferred a 3 year bridge. If he proves out he gets a bigger deal, but that means he proved out. There are a lot of metrics tossed around to tell us how he's trending well, but metrics come with so much lack of peripherals that they lack objectivity.

Just as you say as well, I'm not down on this contract.

But I don't really care much for this new era of long term big dollars based on potential. Although it's a fact now, I don't have to agree with it.

At the end of the day, it's up to Hanifin. But there's a part of me that thinks we just bought a high draft pick "name".

He still has much to prove.

 

One issue I have with bridge deals is that it rarely works out for the club.

A 3 year deal would likely have come in around $3.6m per or higher, just based on some comps.

Arbitration tights coming out of it and would have to be qualified at $3.6m just ti get to arbitration, assuming a deal can;t be reached.

At that time, the cap has increased and the comps for even what he's worth today is a million higher.

That assumes he hasn't progressed at all.

 

On the other hand, we didn;t bridge Gaudreau and paid him the most of any forward.  Excellent stats for a sheltered player in his first two year.

But there was as much risk or more than a young D-man.

A bridge deal would have killed the salary structure and cost us a lost more this season.  Closer to $9m.

 

The other issue I had with signing him to a bridge deal was the state of the defense here in two years.  Too many expiring contracts.  We would need to replace or re-sign Brodie, Hamonic, Stone (likely gone anyway), Anderrson, and Kulak.  Any of those having career years this or next year sets up for conflicting re-signings.  Extensions being signed.  Replacing players.  

 

The cost being the issue, I get.  You are paying insurance for having a player being worth more.    

[MAC331]

37 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

One issue I have with bridge deals is that it rarely works out for the club.

A 3 year deal would likely have come in around $3.6m per or higher, just based on some comps.

Arbitration tights coming out of it and would have to be qualified at $3.6m just ti get to arbitration, assuming a deal can;t be reached.

At that time, the cap has increased and the comps for even what he's worth today is a million higher.

That assumes he hasn't progressed at all.

 

On the other hand, we didn;t bridge Gaudreau and paid him the most of any forward.  Excellent stats for a sheltered player in his first two year.

But there was as much risk or more than a young D-man.

A bridge deal would have killed the salary structure and cost us a lost more this season.  Closer to $9m.

 

The other issue I had with signing him to a bridge deal was the state of the defense here in two years.  Too many expiring contracts.  We would need to replace or re-sign Brodie, Hamonic, Stone (likely gone anyway), Anderrson, and Kulak.  Any of those having career years this or next year sets up for conflicting re-signings.  Extensions being signed.  Replacing players.  

 

The cost being the issue, I get.  You are paying insurance for having a player being worth more.    

There will always be a chance a contract or player won't work out but I don't see those red flags here with Hanifin. I also agree management has to take care of the bigger picture and our future. I am more concerned about what we will get from Brodie and Hamonic this coming season.

[Flyerfan52]

11 hours ago, 7wit said:

 

The interesting thing I find with this deal is the modified no trade clause in the last 2 years of the contract. Probably how the Flames managed to sign him for less than $5 million per season. I was expecting 6 years at 5-5.5 million. This could be a burden if he doesn’t play well or “fit” well with the team. This contract could look like the current Stone or recent Brouwer contracts a few years down the road. However, I hope it works out well as he’s got the talent, now he’s getting paid, and he just needs to play well and improve his game. Let’s hope he doesn’t try too hard to warrant his paycheque like Roman Turek did. It’s a risk with younger players.

It's only an 8 team no trade list so shouldn't hurt if we decide to trade him.

I like that the only signing bonus is $3 million this year. No big payout every July 1.

 

Details are much clearer now. Yesterday CapFriendly only had the AAV but no details.

[conundrumed]

21 hours ago, MAC331 said:

Do you feel this way because the last 3 seasons were not under your watch here ? he has shown steady growth for his first 3 seasons fighting for playing time with a very talented defense group in CAR. The guy is 6'3 over 200lbs and is a very good skater who puts up points, what's not to like here ? Yet Tkachuk will now enter his 3 season with good production and everyone wants to hand him the franchise keys and a huge contract now. Like I said I see nothing to complain about with Hanifin's deal. Is everyone going to whine and complain when Valimaki is up for his first real contract ?

No.

I feel that way because I think he's going to be overpaid by 1.5 to 2mil for at least this year. For a guy that constantly rags on Brodie I hope you're aware that Hanifin's contract is all about potential.

I haven't seen anyone whining and complaining about the contract. But if that's what you call every opinion that varies from your own, I guess alternative opinion is the new whining and complaining.

As for Tkachuk, he has proven to be a difference maker already.

As for Valimaki, we don't even know anything yet.

[travel_dude]

4 hours ago, conundrumed said:

No.

I feel that way because I think he's going to be overpaid by 1.5 to 2mil for at least this year. For a guy that constantly rags on Brodie I hope you're aware that Hanifin's contract is all about potential.

I haven't seen anyone whining and complaining about the contract. But if that's what you call every opinion that varies from your own, I guess alternative opinion is the new whining and complaining.

As for Tkachuk, he has proven to be a difference maker already.

As for Valimaki, we don't even know anything yet.

 

Paying for potential is as bad as overpaying after a bridge deal.

We did the exact same thing with Hamilton.

One full season in the NHL playing with Chara, etc.  10g and 32a playing on a playoff bound team.

I'm just going to say that Hanifin was scouted a bit longer by the Flames than Dougie was.

He was reported to be available for some time.

 

You are likely correct about being overpaid for one season.

A one year deal was going to be $3m.

A long term deal has risk built in, but you are paying to offset the long term risk.

 

All in all, overpaying for as little as one year for a 21 year old D-man isn;t that bad.