Hodgson signs a six-year deal

[spndnchz]

Still no contract but he was on TSN 1050 this morning to say:

 

I'd like to be there, you know, for a few years at least," Hodgson said. "I really like the organization. I like the team, the players. We've got a really good, young team that's full of good people with good character. So, we're only going to get better and I want to be a part of that in the future."

 

Listen here:

 

http://iphone.tsn.ca/tsnpodcasts/aug21st_hodgson.mp3

[waldo]

smart kid.. playing it down the middle. learning to be diplomatic.. sounds like he is looking for a shorter contract than maybe management wants.("few years").he knows that another sucessful year (numbers wise) with Vanek and his value goes up............ again.(a full season of numbers this time) He also knows without him those numbers will be harder to get on the Sabres. I think Vanek really likes the kid , he speaks highly of him too.

 

Your numbers are the quality of your life at this level. His agent is playing it smart ....so far.

 

I think if you are representing the kid you have to tread water until you can read the Sabres direction. The biggest piece of that for his client is Vanek.. i go for the shortest contract term possible , until the tea leaves settle .

 

two years would be my absolute max. then a full year with vanek....higher numbers ...higher value..Then ...pay me or trade me options.

 

The problem for the sabres is what does Cody look like playing with 2nd or third line talent or the children that replace Pom and Vanek on the first line. We had a glimpse of production last year when Vanek was off that line and after Pom left.

[tom webster]

This is an interesting dilemma for both the teams and players like Hodgson , Kadri, and Stepan. On one hand a "bridge" contact makes sense. On the other hand having the future secure is appealing.

 

In my mind, assuming proper insurance is available, a player who truly believes in himself should understand a short term, two year deal is advisable.

 

There are some who believe that the cap could rise near $90 million within 3 to 4 years. Third liners could be making $4 million per.

 

 

[LGR4GM]

Sounds like Cody likes being a Sabre and playing with Vanek. When he resigns I hope it put him and the Sabres in a position to sign him long term in the near future. I think we see a 2-3yr deal in the 3.25-3.5mil range.

[spndnchz]

Landeskog getting a 7 year 5.5 mill deal worries me. He puts up less points than Cody.

 

Or Bryan Little, 5 years 4.7 per.

 

Or Sam Gagner , 3 years at 4.8 per.

[IKnowPhysics]

I think we see a 2-3yr deal in the 3.25-3.5mil range.

 

Not sure he'll be that low. Bryan Little (12th overall, 2006) signed with Winnipeg for 5 years / $4.7M, had 32 points last year. Compare to Hodgson's 34 points, although Little played against (advanced) statistically "harder competition." Chris Stewart (18th overall, 2006) signed with the Blues for 2 years / $4.15M after putting up 36 points.

 

$3.3M for 5 years buys you somebody like Josh Bailey (Islanders, 9th overall, 2008), who was on pace for 24 points in 48 games this season.

 

edit: Chz was quick.

 

Also, Hodgson and his agent can see his likely future with the team: #1 center. It will be in their interest to approach negotiation with that in mind, and the Sabres, with so much cap room and limited alternatives, should be prepared to pay. All we can hope is that Cody continues to develop, perform, and not go full retardTimmay Connolly.

[rakish]

Bryan Little has 6 years experience, meaning that the 5 year contract bought 1 RFA year and 4 UFA years. Cody Hodgson will likely sign a contract that leaves him an RFA, thus Little is not a comparable.

 

Gagner has 6 years experience ...

 

The best I got off the top of my head is Tyler Ennis, 5.6 for 2, or any of the other four 23 year old centers RFA, Kadri, Stepan ...

[TrueBlueGED]

Landeskog getting a 7 year 5.5 mill deal worries me. He puts up less points than Cody.

 

Or Bryan Little, 5 years 4.7 per.

 

Or Sam Gagner , 3 years at 4.8 per.

 

Yea, but Landeskog actually plays a complete game. I've gone back and forth on this, but I want Hodgson signed long term. I think if we get him for 5 years, whatever the dollar figure looks like will look pretty awesome in just a couple years.

[IKnowPhysics]

I think if we get him for 5 years, whatever the dollar figure looks like will look pretty awesome in just a couple years.

 

Agreed, especially as it's expected the salary cap will likely start to trend upwards into ridiculousness.

[spndnchz]

Yea, but Landeskog actually plays a complete game. I've gone back and forth on this, but I want Hodgson signed long term. I think if we get him for 5 years, whatever the dollar figure looks like will look pretty awesome in just a couple years.

 

You'll have to overpay for anything over 3. I don't think they're willing to do that. If. If he ends up sucking with no Vanek you're screwed with a guy making 5 million for two or three years.

 

He takes three years 10.5mill total or he sits imo.

[TrueBlueGED]

You'll have to overpay for anything over 3. I don't think they're willing to do that. If. If he ends up sucking with no Vanek you're screwed with a guy making 5 million for two or three years.

 

He takes three years 10.5mill total or he sits imo.

 

And if he ends up being really good either way, you have a bargain contract. I'm willing to take that chance...of course, you may be right that he'd rather have a short term thing.

[dudacek]

smart kid.. playing it down the middle. learning to be diplomatic.. sounds like he is looking for a shorter contract than maybe management wants.("few years").

 

I think if you are representing the kid you have to tread water until you can read the Sabres direction. The biggest piece of that for his client is Vanek.. Short contract , until the tea leaves settle .

 

Funny, I read the bolded the opposite way — that he wanted a longer term commitment so he can cement his talent as a number one centre with a growing team and capitalize with homerun as a UFA in his next deal.

 

But your next sentence does make some sense as well.

 

The Sabres probably want three so they have more control over his next contract.

[deluca67]

Landeskog getting a 7 year 5.5 mill deal worries me. He puts up less points than Cody.

 

Or Bryan Little, 5 years 4.7 per.

 

Or Sam Gagner , 3 years at 4.8 per.

There is absolutely no truth to this statement what so ever.

[rakish]

There's an interesting article in myhockeybuzz, of all places, about the cap. The writer's belief is that teams will have excess cap space after the season starts, since it is optimal to put injured players on the injury list after the final list is complete.

 

If true, I wonder if the group of 5 RFA's (Hodgson,Kadri,Henrique...) will wait until that time to see if an offer sheet goes out. Philly has Pronger, Boston has Savard,

 

I think in the end Chz and Liger are right, it'll be about 3.5 for 3

[LGR4GM]

I'm sorry people I like Hodgson and I wouldn't give him 5mil for 3yrs. This is his 2nd contract and he has 1 48 game stretch to prove his worth. I think Cody will be good but DR and company need to stop paying for potential and put their foot down. Pay him for what he has done and give him a bridge contract until his big payday.

[LastPommerFan]

There is absolutely no truth to this statement what so ever.

 

They are almost identical in production over the last 2 years. 69 pts each, 118 games for Gabe, 119 games for Cody.

[tom webster]

I'm sorry people I like Hodgson and I wouldn't give him 5mil for 3yrs. This is his 2nd contract and he has 1 48 game stretch to prove his worth. I think Cody will be good but DR and company need to stop paying for potential and put their foot down. Pay him for what he has done and give him a bridge contract until his big payday.

 

Everyone pays on potential. The trick is being right and being able to project the market, things that on the whole this team has missed on.

If he agrees to a bridge deal like Ennis and turns into the number one center I think he can be it wi cost you $8 million per in 2 years.

You get him to agree to $5.5 per, you will be in a much better place 2 years from now if you are right.

 

It would be different if they had cap concerns but they won't for at least two years.

[LGR4GM]

Everyone pays on potential. The trick is being right and being able to project the market, things that on the whole this team has missed on.

If he agrees to a bridge deal like Ennis and turns into the number one center I think he can be it wi cost you $8 million per in 2 years.

You get him to agree to $5.5 per, you will be in a much better place 2 years from now if you are right.

 

It would be different if they had cap concerns but they won't for at least two years.

Is he signing at 5.5mil for longer than 2 years or just for 2 years? because I hate to say this but if he is worth 8mil in 2 years and you paid him 5.5 instead of 3.5 he is still worth 8mil and you have 4mil less.

 

Hodgson is worth 3.5 and until he plays a full season where he consistently puts up points, I wouldn't be interested in paying him a penny more.

[tom webster]

 

Is he signing at 5.5mil for longer than 2 years or just for 2 years? because I hate to say this but if he is worth 8mil in 2 years and you paid him 5.5 instead of 3.5 he is still worth 8mil and you have 4mil less.

 

Hodgson is worth 3.5 and until he plays a full season where he consistently puts up points, I wouldn't be interested in paying him a penny more.

 

You only pay him 5.5 if he signs for 5 or more years, otherwise he gets the $3.5M per year for 2.

[LGR4GM]

You only pay him 5.5 if he signs for 5 or more years, otherwise he gets the $3.5M per year for 2.

So again we are talking about 2 completely different contracts. You are paying him for future production, I am paying him with the promise he will make more if he reaches that future production. A player as young as him, I think using more money in the near future if you continue to progress is a good thing.

[tom webster]

 

So again we are talking about 2 completely different contracts. You are paying him for future production, I am paying him with the promise he will make more if he reaches that future production. A player as young as him, I think using more money in the near future if you continue to progress is a good thing.

 

I already stated that from a player's point of view, I would just do the 2 year deal. Last couple of post were from a team's perspective.

[Trettioåtta]

Or you build a bridge into the contract 6 years:

3, 3.5, 5, 5.5, 5.5, 6

[spndnchz]

Or you build a bridge into the contract 6 years:

3, 3.5, 5, 5.5, 5.5, 6

 

Give him a 4 million signing bonus and reduce those later years. Makes him more tradable.

[Paul Kruse]

Sign him, Vanek and trade or cut that overrated bum Miller.

[LGR4GM]

Or pay him 3.5 for two years. Tell him if he works hard and improves you will give him a long term deal and the end of year 2 for good money. Now he isn't on some cushy contract well still developing and has to work hard to ensure he does get the long term deal in 2 years.