Jump to content

Jonathan Huberdeau


Thebrewcrew

Recommended Posts

41 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Fun story. I was watching Overdrive today. Mike Johnson came on to discuss the trade. In one breath he said, "well Tkachuk is a better player than Huberdeau", amongst the next breaths was, "well Huberdeau easily replaces Gaudreau".

So it's easy Math to deduce Tkachuk is better than both.

I warned you it's a fun story.

Is there a subreddit for outing the garbage we're fed?

Oh the drivel is annoying .. the haters who say they won't sign will become the " you paid too much" when we do . They hate seeing us with nice things..

 

I forget if I posted this in the other thread of somewhere else .. but to me if it had been Tkachuk for Weeger, the kid and the pick..you could have argued that was an even hockey trade .. add in huberdeau and we just replaced Johnny all In one trade .. we resign both and that is a complete fleecing .. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Good points.

 

Ideally, you'd sign him tomorrow. It's just not realistic though. 

 

He's hurting a bit from the trade. Management and ownership need to make him feel valued/wanted and give him an offer representative of that. Force him to leave 10m+ on the table if he doesn't want to be here.

 

Huberdeau has been pt/g for four seasons in a row. I expect that to continue. In terms of bargaining power, he will never have more than right now, coming off 115pts. That could give a little hope for an extension before the season. Get that money locked in now. 

Exactly.. let him get here first.. meet the guys..talk to the coach..

Sounded today that he's already comfortable that we're not rebuilding .. that souhded important to him..and he did say the flames and his agent are already discussing..his own agent already posted this ..

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

Well for starters Huberdeau never once said h wanted to play for another team.. it was just reported that theb habs were his fave team growing up .. like every french kid ..   I know the Panthers are definitely off his xmas card list now tho. 

Huberdeau can join Letang and Bergeron on the Habs.... oh wait..

 

I find the fascination with players "going home" fascinating. It almost never happens. I remember a Mike Comrie interview talking about starting his career in EDM. Essentially he said it was a headache being pulled in a thousand different directions with family and friends. Everyone wanting something.

 

I also think Gaudreau is the ultimate cautionary tale for UFA's. Johnny had the perfect walk year. But in the flat cap world, he didn't get his #1 location he wanted nor the money he wanted. The lack of money is why he considered CGY on a 7yr deal (he told Ryan Leslie he considered a 7yr deal on UFA day). CGY offering 10-10.5 will be the most money he'll see anywhere

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Good points.

 

Ideally, you'd sign him tomorrow. It's just not realistic though. 

 

He's hurting a bit from the trade. Management and ownership need to make him feel valued/wanted and give him an offer representative of that. Force him to leave 10m+ on the table if he doesn't want to be here.

 

Huberdeau has been pt/g for four seasons in a row. I expect that to continue. In terms of bargaining power, he will never have more than right now, coming off 115pts. That could give a little hope for an extension before the season. Get that money locked in now. 

 

I think I had said elsewhere that he's easily worth what Gaudreau was to us.  Or I should say what we offered.  Make it simple.  He will get what he should have got in FLA. Starts at 10.  It's only 7 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I think I had said elsewhere that he's easily worth what Gaudreau was to us.  Or I should say what we offered.  Make it simple.  He will get what he should have got in FLA. Starts at 10.  It's only 7 years.

I think there may be a "Western Canada" tax tacked on. I think it may cost 10.5-10.75.

 

Which is fine, it's better than the alternative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

I think there may be a "Western Canada" tax tacked on. I think it may cost 10.5-10.75.

 

Which is fine, it's better than the alternative.

 

Sure.  I am fine with that.  It's not like we have 2 of them.

We are one of the few teams with zero players making over $7M.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Huberdeau can join Letang and Bergeron on the Habs.... oh wait..

 

I find the fascination with players "going home" fascinating. It almost never happens. I remember a Mike Comrie interview talking about starting his career in EDM. Essentially he said it was a headache being pulled in a thousand different directions with family and friends. Everyone wanting something.

 

I also think Gaudreau is the ultimate cautionary tale for UFA's. Johnny had the perfect walk year. But in the flat cap world, he didn't get his #1 location he wanted nor the money he wanted. The lack of money is why he considered CGY on a 7yr deal (he told Ryan Leslie he considered a 7yr deal on UFA day). CGY offering 10-10.5 will be the most money he'll see anywhere

His agent dropped the ball .  He fully expected to walk right into Philly.. only to learn they didn't even attempt to make room for him.. THAT is when he considered calling Calgary back.. 

The one thing I noticed in their media day today.. both those guys just drip confidence .. hopefully it's contagious...none of this" were looking forward to contributing" etc..  both of em just " we're here to take Calgary to another level" 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

I think there may be a "Western Canada" tax tacked on. I think it may cost 10.5-10.75.

 

Which is fine, it's better than the alternative.

 

Okay this has got me thinking... Surely there is some mechanism where the cap should take into consideration local taxes etc....  The cap is meant to level the playing field for all teams.  If one state/province's tax is more penal a team needs to pay more to attract a player rather than choose Florida Vegas et al.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huberdeau said "I am open to it"... when he asked about long term deal with Calgary.  Then he said, at the end of the day it's not my decision to make, it's GM and my agent...  Now we all know it's his decision at the end.  But I can also sense if the money is extremely good, he probably will consider.  Given Flames has the cap space, and Flames should pay him well if they are seriously thinking retain him.  Unlike Tkachuk, money is not enough for him, because he is just dying to get out here.  This is the real reason why both Johnny and Tkachuk didn't win anything here as a flames, because winning the cup here is not their number 1 thing in their heart.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Well we can put to bed the rumor that Huberdeau has a place here. Says outside of playing here has only been to the Stampede. 

 

(not suggestion anything just reporting what he said)

Sorry cross I meant to respond to this earlier. I did see that come up. It's amazing how social media, and prolly media too, latches onto some random phished comment from an unverifiable source. I do know where this came from. How it spread like wildfire blows my mind though. My only inkling from that rumour was, "maybe he was in Calgary for Team Canada Jr camps".

I assumed that if I read it from some random internet user, it must me true.lol

Sorry, I don't mean to come across as putting you down for bringing it up, but I'm sure we both know how that started. It's hilarious how many people bought that crap. From likely a Canucks fan.

Well played Canucks fan. Very well played.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, phoenix66 said:

Oh the drivel is annoying .. the haters who say they won't sign will become the " you paid too much" when we do . They hate seeing us with nice things..

 

I forget if I posted this in the other thread of somewhere else .. but to me if it had been Tkachuk for Weeger, the kid and the pick..you could have argued that was an even hockey trade .. add in huberdeau and we just replaced Johnny all In one trade .. we resign both and that is a complete fleecing .. 

Yup. Right now the bs is, "Calgary won this trade for the 2022-23 season, but beyond that, they lose this trade if they can't extend them".

I love how @rocketdoctor said this the other day.

"Foxtrot Tango" everybody. Sex & travel in 2 easy words.

I have my own storyline.

Huberdeau hasn't played in the west. Not only did we get Huberdeau, we got Huberdeau with a massive chip on his shoulder. My line of thinking is that we've got ourselves a really pissed off MacKinnon at LW. Dude already plays with a snarl. Now he's super-motivated to go nuclear.

He was more than used to Quenneville as a coach, he's going to love Sutter, and Sutter's gonna love him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Yup. Right now the bs is, "Calgary won this trade for the 2023-24 season, but beyond that, they lose this trade if they can't extend them".

I love how @rocketdoctor said this the other day.

"Foxtrot Tango" everybody. Sex & travel in 2 easy words.

I have my own storyline.

Huberdeau hasn't played in the west. Not only did we get Huberdeau, we got Huberdeau with a massive chip on his shoulder. My line of thinking is that we've got ourselves a really pissed off MacKinnon at LW. Dude already plays with a snarl. Now he's super-motivated to go nuclear.

He was more than used to Quenneville as a coach, he's going to love Sutter, and Sutter's gonna love him.

100%..  they didn't come out and say it.. but you kind of sensed when weeger said he knows the city's hurting , .. but I almost sensed a " the Americans went home , Canada is taking over "..lol. 

 

 

Huberdeau on the fan this morning..mentioned he's narrowed his decision on numbers to 10 or 91...  Hoping for 91.. unique enough it will be his to own..  10 has a good history he'd be sharing..like Gary Roberts 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Sorry cross I meant to respond to this earlier. I did see that come up. It's amazing how social media, and prolly media too, latches onto some random phished comment from an unverifiable source. I do know where this came from. How it spread like wildfire blows my mind though. My only inkling from that rumour was, "maybe he was in Calgary for Team Canada Jr camps".

I assumed that if I read it from some random internet user, it must me true.lol

Sorry, I don't mean to come across as putting you down for bringing it up, but I'm sure we both know how that started. It's hilarious how many people bought that crap. From likely a Canucks fan.

Well played Canucks fan. Very well played.

 

 

No all good. I don't want to make it seem like a negative comment or that i'm thinking he won't sign here because I read nothing into it. 

 

Like you said it appeared to be a very random rumor that was quickly put to bed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One source suggests that Hibie and Weegs can both now sign 8 year extensions.  I guess I shouldn't be surprised by that, but it begs the question why Gaudreau wasn't able to.  The reasons for being able to are far less important.  I am more interested in the question of it makes more sense for us to do it.  8 years lets you add in a year to lower the AAV.  But does the player really care about the AAV as much as the structure?  8 years may be harder to sign a brand new player to.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both Weegar and Huberdeau can sign 8 years because they are under contract and we’re traded. They would be getting extensions while Gaudreau could only do 7 as a UFA.

 

It will be very telling if they want the 8 years or less (both players and team). Based on age, they might want shorter to be able to sign again before 35. We know that most over 35 contracts are significantly lower than under 35. That said, if they take 8 years because they prefer the stability, then I am all for it. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

One source suggests that Hibie and Weegs can both now sign 8 year extensions.  I guess I shouldn't be surprised by that, but it begs the question why Gaudreau wasn't able to.  The reasons for being able to are far less important.  I am more interested in the question of it makes more sense for us to do it.  8 years lets you add in a year to lower the AAV.  But does the player really care about the AAV as much as the structure?  8 years may be harder to sign a brand new player to.  

ya if you own their rights under contract, you can do 8.. the exception being if they sign a one year deal.. then you have to wait til January ..thats why Chucky had to be a sign and trade.. at the time he was not under contract if they had traded him before he signed the deal with us..

 

On that note.. now that Calgary has broken the seal on sign and trades.. that opens up a whole new world of opportunity for trading RFA and even UFA rights 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

ya if you own their rights under contract, you can do 8.. the exception being if they sign a one year deal.. then you have to wait til January ..thats why Chucky had to be a sign and trade.. at the time he was not under contract if they had traded him before he signed the deal with us..

 

On that note.. now that Calgary has broken the seal on sign and trades.. that opens up a whole new world of opportunity for trading RFA and even UFA rights 

 

Maybe it was just technicality but why not trade Tkachuk as RFA and then let FLA sign him to 8-years?  Why we sign him and then trade?  If FLA owns Tkachuk's RFA rights then they can sign him to 8-years themselves?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, bosn111 said:

Both Weegar and Huberdeau can sign 8 years because they are under contract and we’re traded. They would be getting extensions while Gaudreau could only do 7 as a UFA.

 

It will be very telling if they want the 8 years or less (both players and team). Based on age, they might want shorter to be able to sign again before 35. We know that most over 35 contracts are significantly lower than under 35. That said, if they take 8 years because they prefer the stability, then I am all for it. 

 

Thanks for reminding me what should have been too obvious abut the difference.  This equates what Gaudreau was able to do in June and part of July.  

 

They have to be fairly short term to get a new contract before they hit 35.  I think Hubie would have to re-sign after 5 years.  A shorter deal (5 year) probably drives up the price considerably.  Could be wrong about that, but I think the longer deal allows us to manage the cap a bit better.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Maybe it was just technicality but why not trade Tkachuk as RFA and then let FLA sign him to 8-years?  Why we sign him and then trade?  If FLA owns Tkachuk's RFA rights then they can sign him to 8-years themselves?

it was something to do with RFA and the arbitration .. perhaps that we had the arbitration scheduled meaning we owned his rights next year .. somebody explained it but i missed the full details 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Maybe it was just technicality but why not trade Tkachuk as RFA and then let FLA sign him to 8-years?  Why we sign him and then trade?  If FLA owns Tkachuk's RFA rights then they can sign him to 8-years themselves?

 

Rules aside, this confirmed to Tkachuk he was going to be a Panther for 8 years with a known salary and bonus structure.  Less worrying about contracts talks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The best news in this is Allan Walsh is Hubie's agent , he's a no BS agent ..

If he thinks you're a good organization for his client, he'll help sell the client.

If he plans on testing UFA, doesnt like the fit in Calgary..etc.. then BT already knows that ..

BUT.. expect a signing bonus heavy contract ..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bosn111 said:

Both Weegar and Huberdeau can sign 8 years because they are under contract and we’re traded. They would be getting extensions while Gaudreau could only do 7 as a UFA.

 

It will be very telling if they want the 8 years or less (both players and team). Based on age, they might want shorter to be able to sign again before 35. We know that most over 35 contracts are significantly lower than under 35. That said, if they take 8 years because they prefer the stability, then I am all for it. 

I think it would be an asset for both team

and players to sign term to just before 35, less lock in for team and chance for the players to Land another large contract for under 35…definitely mutually beneficial unless they end up being elite level till

lie 37 then it would

cost a lot to Keep them..they would

prob be looking for another 5 yrs at high$$

 

kinda a gamble, I get the feel these two would be totally worth locking up to age 37 ish 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would it matter if JH only gets 7 nothing from stopping him to do another 3-7 yrs no? Do you think H and W would sign 8 yrs here? I my selfd highly doubt it. I'm thinking we will end up trading Hub before regular season I truly hope im wrong but it seems US players no longer want to play here and it is due to taxes me thinks .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, zima said:

Why would it matter if JH only gets 7 nothing from stopping him to do another 3-7 yrs no? Do you think H and W would sign 8 yrs here? I my selfd highly doubt it. I'm thinking we will end up trading Hub before regular season I truly hope im wrong but it seems US players no longer want to play here and it is due to taxes me thinks .

 

I am a little confused by your post.  Both players are Canadians.  As far as I know, they haven't become Americans.  As far as what they sing here, 8 years takes them to the end of their careers.  They can sign short term deals then, but the team is on the hook for their entire cap hit if they retire early.  Joe Pavelsky signed a long deal before he turned 35, so there would be no cap penalty if he had retired.  His newest deal is one year.  Lower risk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I know they are Canadian but I also know they would rather not pay tax although I know Canada still require them to pay tax even though they play in the states I don't know the amount I don't think it is as high as if they play here in canada. I believe most canadians prefer to play in the states and yes some will play here but it seems to be getting worse for this end of canada to get players to want to play here JH toke millions less to play in the states why is that do you think? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...