Draper signs extension

On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 12:24:01 -0600, Chris wrote:

>
>Through '10-11.
>
>Anyone know the terms?

3 Years. $1.85 mil, $1.65 mil, $1.25 mil.

He's currently making $2.128 mil, so at least we didn't give him a
raise.
 >> Stay informed about: Draper signs extension 

On Oct 26, 2:35 pm, "BobInBoulder"
wrote:
> "Chris" wrote in message
>
>
>
>
>
> > Through '10-11.
>
> > Anyone know the terms?
>
> I think the terms were described as "too long."

Too long for who?
 >> Stay informed about: Draper signs extension 

On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 18:38:43 -0400, Thomas wrote:

>>>>> On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 12:24:01 -0600, Chris wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Through '10-11.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anyone know the terms?
>>>>> 3 Years. $1.85 mil, $1.65 mil, $1.25 mil.
>>>>>
>>>>> He's currently making $2.128 mil, so at least we didn't give him a
>>>>> raise.
>>>> That's not a bad contract.
>>> For Draper, it is.
>>
>> But multiply the money by 3.5x for a backup goaltender, and it's a
>> great deal.
>
>Or by 5x for the Wings' backup goaltending in 03-04.

Yes, it always makes sense to compare a non-cap-era deal with a
cap-era deal in an apples to apples fashion. Yep, no question about
it.
 >> Stay informed about: Draper signs extension 

On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 18:37:49 -0400, Thomas wrote:

>>>>> On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 12:24:01 -0600, Chris wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Through '10-11.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anyone know the terms?
>>>>> 3 Years. $1.85 mil, $1.65 mil, $1.25 mil.
>>>>>
>>>>> He's currently making $2.128 mil, so at least we didn't give him a
>>>>> raise.
>>>> That's not a bad contract.
>>> For Draper, it is.
>>
>> Nah. Good 3rd line center, solid defensively,
>
>This isn't 03-04, Chris.

True, this is 2007-2008, the year where he'd currently be tied for the
team lead in goals in Colorado.

He's still a very solid #3 center who'll get you 13 to 20 goals, plays
terrific defense, and is a real asset on the PK.

Good signing. Good terms. Theoretically, as he slows down, the money
becomes less and less of an issue. This is precisely the kind of
proper, cap-era thinking Lacroix could have learned from Holland had
he not bailed after a single year of mishandling the cap.
 >> Stay informed about: Draper signs extension 

>OK, assume for a second that your analysis of his game is correct.
>
>They gave him a THREE YEAR extension.

....and they lowered his salary in each of the years, plus lowered it
from this year. They expect a reasonable falloff due to age, in all
likelihood. So, worst case, they'll have a 39 year old, defensively
responsible 4th line veteran center for $1.25M in the last year of
that contract. That's still not bad.

>And at his age, if he retires this summer, they are on the hook for his
>entire salary for the life of the contract against the cap.

Well, sure. If he retires then that's different. But, is there any
indication that he will?

Chris
 >> Stay informed about: Draper signs extension 

>
>And at his age, if he retires this summer, they are on the hook for his
>entire salary for the life of the contract against the cap.

As he if is going he is going to retire this summer.
>
>-Thomas
 >> Stay informed about: Draper signs extension 

On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 00:19:36 -0400, Thomas wrote:

>>>>>>> He's currently making $2.128 mil, so at least we didn't give him a
>>>>>>> raise.
>>>>>> That's not a bad contract.
>>>>> For Draper, it is.
>>>> Nah. Good 3rd line center, solid defensively,
>>> This isn't 03-04, Chris.
>>
>> Yes, I know. But, that doesn't mean that Draper isn't a good
>> defensive player, nor that he can score a dozen goals a year. You
>> have a good defensive player who can center a third line and score
>> 12-15 per, $1.5Mish per season is a nice contract. Not cheap, not
>> expensive, just good.
>
>OK, assume for a second that your analysis of his game is correct.
>
>They gave him a THREE YEAR extension.
>
>And at his age, if he retires this summer, they are on the hook for his
>entire salary for the life of the contract against the cap.

His offense is up, he's getting more IT than in year's past, the team
is still winning (go figure). What exactly leads you to believe he
might retire after this year?

There's nothing wrong with grasping at straws, but at least try to
grasp for some of the straws up front.
 >> Stay informed about: Draper signs extension 

Chris wrote:
>> OK, assume for a second that your analysis of his game is correct.
>>
>> They gave him a THREE YEAR extension.
>
> ...and they lowered his salary in each of the years, plus lowered it
> from this year. They expect a reasonable falloff due to age, in all
> likelihood. So, worst case, they'll have a 39 year old, defensively
> responsible 4th line veteran center for $1.25M in the last year of
> that contract. That's still not bad.

What they actually pay him that last year is irrelevant. It's the cap
number.

>
>> And at his age, if he retires this summer, they are on the hook for his
>> entire salary for the life of the contract against the cap.
>
> Well, sure. If he retires then that's different. But, is there any
> indication that he will?

You mean besides being 36 and showing a steep decline?

-Thomas
 >> Stay informed about: Draper signs extension 

On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 15:40:40 -0400, Thomas wrote:

>Chris wrote:
>>> OK, assume for a second that your analysis of his game is correct.
>>>
>>> They gave him a THREE YEAR extension.
>>
>> ...and they lowered his salary in each of the years, plus lowered it
>> from this year. They expect a reasonable falloff due to age, in all
>> likelihood. So, worst case, they'll have a 39 year old, defensively
>> responsible 4th line veteran center for $1.25M in the last year of
>> that contract. That's still not bad.
>
>What they actually pay him that last year is irrelevant. It's the cap
>number.

Totally true. My bad.

>>
>>> And at his age, if he retires this summer, they are on the hook for his
>>> entire salary for the life of the contract against the cap.
>>
>> Well, sure. If he retires then that's different. But, is there any
>> indication that he will?
>
>You mean besides being 36 and showing a steep decline?

Have you seen a steep decline in his play? I haven't.

Chris
 >> Stay informed about: Draper signs extension 

On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 15:40:40 -0400, Thomas wrote:

>Chris wrote:
>>> OK, assume for a second that your analysis of his game is correct.
>>>
>>> They gave him a THREE YEAR extension.
>>
>> ...and they lowered his salary in each of the years, plus lowered it
>> from this year. They expect a reasonable falloff due to age, in all
>> likelihood. So, worst case, they'll have a 39 year old, defensively
>> responsible 4th line veteran center for $1.25M in the last year of
>> that contract. That's still not bad.
>
>What they actually pay him that last year is irrelevant. It's the cap
>number.

It's actually more a case of his cap hit each successive year as he
gets older.

>>> And at his age, if he retires this summer, they are on the hook for his
>>> entire salary for the life of the contract against the cap.
>>
>> Well, sure. If he retires then that's different. But, is there any
>> indication that he will?
>
>You mean besides being 36 and showing a steep decline?

Do tell.

You can leave out the part about how he'd be tied for the team lead in
goals for Colorado. That might be a bit uncomfortable.
 >> Stay informed about: Draper signs extension 

On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 13:20:40 -0700, Freedom Elz
wrote:

>> >>> And at his age, if he retires this summer, they are on the hook for his
>> >>> entire salary for the life of the contract against the cap.
>>
>> >> Well, sure. If he retires then that's different. But, is there any
>> >> indication that he will?
>>
>> >You mean besides being 36 and showing a steep decline?
>>
>> Do tell.
>>
>> You can leave out the part about how he'd be tied for the team lead in
>> goals for Colorado. That might be a bit uncomfortable.
>
>Draper has 5 goals after 11 games. Now that he has his new contract
>he'll probably finish the year with 7.

Then you'd better hope like hell that he isn't still tied with
Colorado's leading goal scorers at the end of the year.
 >> Stay informed about: Draper signs extension 

On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 18:48:00 -0600, Christophe
wrote:


>
>>>Owhen you wrote that, you felt that Detroit's young guys (which
>>>includes rookies) were outplaying the Avs' young guys (which includes
>>>rookies, which in turn would include Stastny), *except* for Stastny,
>>>who you held in high esteem?
>
>>Yes.
>
>Pray, do tell Doug - whatever happened to said 'high esteem'?

No change only disappointment.
>
>Broonzy is a very entertaining guy, but sometimes you give him a run
>for his money. Please keep it up. Good stuff, that.
>
>Chris
 >> Stay informed about: Draper signs extension 

On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 08:27:41 -0400, xpenenyx DeleteThis @earthlink.net wrote:

>On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 18:48:00 -0600, Christophe
>wrote:
>
>
>>
>>>>Owhen you wrote that, you felt that Detroit's young guys (which
>>>>includes rookies) were outplaying the Avs' young guys (which includes
>>>>rookies, which in turn would include Stastny), *except* for Stastny,
>>>>who you held in high esteem?
>>
>>>Yes.
>>
>>Pray, do tell Doug - whatever happened to said 'high esteem'?
>
>No change only disappointment.

Of course.

Chris
 >> Stay informed about: Draper signs extension