SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/NHL Signings

Winnipeg Jets signed Declan Chisholm (1 Year / $775,000 AAV)

Was this a good signing?
Le graphique a été masqué

Options de sondage


13 sept. à 12 h 52
#1
Declan Chisholm has signed a new contract with the Winnipeg Jets.
Contrat standard
Contrats comparablesCOMPARER CE CONTRAT
SIGNÉ PAR: Kevin Cheveldayoff
Durée: 1 an
Valeur: 775 000 $
Statut à l’échéance du contrat: RFA
% Cap Info-bulle: 0,93
Contrat signé avec: Logo de Jets de WinnipegJets de Winnipeg
Date de signature: 13 sept. 2023
Source: CapFriendly

Declan Chisholm a signé un contrat de 1 ans d'une valeur de 775 000 $ avec les Jets de Winnipeg, le 13 sept. 2023. Le contrat comporte un cap hit de 775 000 $.

SAISONClauseCap hitInfo-bulleAAV Info-bulleBonis de performanceInfo-bulleBonis de signatureInfo-bulleSalaire de baseInfo-bulleSalaire totalInfo-bulleSalaire mineuresInfo-bulle
2023-24775 000 $775 000 $0 $0 $775 000 $775 000 $90 000 $
TOTAL775 000 $775 000 $0 $0 $775 000 $775 000 $90 000 $
Offre qualificativeInfo-bulle: 813 750 $
SALAIRE MINIMUM GARANTI: 2023-24: 120 000 $
13 sept. à 13 h 0
#2
Go Jets Go
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2018
Messages: 5,200
Mentions "j'aime": 3,849
Really hoping the Jets don’t pull another Kovacevic and lose this guy for nothing. He should be an extra defenceman this year ahead of Capobianco/Stanley.
pinslack, CBA, Wqrrior and 3 others a aimé ceci.
13 sept. à 13 h 8
#3
Driedger Clan
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2022
Messages: 1,017
Mentions "j'aime": 214
Rooting for the kid. One of the Jets top D prospects and sure to play some games in the NHL this season which will get him a better contract after this season
13 sept. à 13 h 19
#4
and proud of it
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: févr. 2023
Messages: 1,266
Mentions "j'aime": 697
Nothing wrong with league min signings
Chabotrrorr a aimé ceci.
13 sept. à 13 h 52
#5
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2023
Messages: 667
Mentions "j'aime": 224
Quoting: Rooney
Really hoping the Jets don’t pull another Kovacevic and lose this guy for nothing. He should be an extra defenceman this year ahead of Capobianco/Stanley.


I really don’t get why they waived Kovacevic but kept Capobianco
13 sept. à 14 h 5
#6
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2021
Messages: 926
Mentions "j'aime": 646
This is a good signing, even if he doesn't play a single NHL game. They are good in the AHL and should provide some competition at training camp this year.
Aebexz a aimé ceci.
13 sept. à 14 h 19
#7
Go Jets Go
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2018
Messages: 5,200
Mentions "j'aime": 3,849
Quoting: CBA
I really don’t get why they waived Kovacevic but kept Capobianco


You and me both, made zero sense at the time and especially not now after seeing how Kovacevic performed in MTL this year. I was so mad when they waived him. What's the point of developing these players just to lose them for nothing? Chisholm should be up all year in my opinion.
CBA et Aebexz a aimé ceci.
14 sept. à 8 h 16
#8
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2021
Messages: 872
Mentions "j'aime": 455
Quoting: Rooney
You and me both, made zero sense at the time and especially not now after seeing how Kovacevic performed in MTL this year. I was so mad when they waived him. What's the point of developing these players just to lose them for nothing? Chisholm should be up all year in my opinion.


Nobody likes it when their team loses a prospect for nothing, but a lot of teams unfortunately don’t have room on the NHL roster for what I’m going to call aging prospects (guys who are no longer waivers exempt but may still have some upside), so they have to make a tough decision. The other option is to try to trade him so they can at least get something for him, but it’s probably a mid-round draft pick at best, and then he’s gone, whereas if they waive him, there’s a chance he could clear and then they can continue to let him develop in their system.

I don’t know how much teams care about how good their AHL teams are, and whether losing a guy who they think is a good AHL player but not good enough for the NHL would bother them, but the system is geared toward developing players for the NHL. The waivers rule gives a team 3-5 years to let a player develop, but prevents them from holding him back indefinitely after that if he’s good enough to play on another NHL team, which to me seems fair for both the player and the team. If you still don't have a spot for the guy after that time, the decent thing to do is give him a chance somewhere else. A lot of them end up getting waived again and never really make it, but some waivers claims have gone on to have pretty good NHL careers.
Rooney et RawDeal a aimé ceci.
14 sept. à 8 h 57
#9
cautious optimism
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2021
Messages: 2,988
Mentions "j'aime": 5,741
oh no now the "Unsigned RFAs" section on the front page is gonna be slightly shorter than the other two and it's gonna look weird

In all seriousness, i would think he gets quite a few NHL reps this year. His stats with the Moose look pretty solid.
Rooney, RawDeal et Chabotrrorr a aimé ceci.
14 sept. à 9 h 52
#10
Go Jets Go
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2018
Messages: 5,200
Mentions "j'aime": 3,849
Quoting: jr400
Nobody likes it when their team loses a prospect for nothing, but a lot of teams unfortunately don’t have room on the NHL roster for what I’m going to call aging prospects (guys who are no longer waivers exempt but may still have some upside), so they have to make a tough decision. The other option is to try to trade him so they can at least get something for him, but it’s probably a mid-round draft pick at best, and then he’s gone, whereas if they waive him, there’s a chance he could clear and then they can continue to let him develop in their system.

I don’t know how much teams care about how good their AHL teams are, and whether losing a guy who they think is a good AHL player but not good enough for the NHL would bother them, but the system is geared toward developing players for the NHL. The waivers rule gives a team 3-5 years to let a player develop, but prevents them from holding him back indefinitely after that if he’s good enough to play on another NHL team, which to me seems fair for both the player and the team. If you still don't have a spot for the guy after that time, the decent thing to do is give him a chance somewhere else. A lot of them end up getting waived again and never really make it, but some waivers claims have gone on to have pretty good NHL careers.


Very solid analysis my friend, and good point! It's just frustrating to lose a player who you've drafted and developed, even if it's because there is no room on the roster. Especially if they have NHL upside.
14 sept. à 13 h 6
#11
why
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: oct. 2020
Messages: 4,049
Mentions "j'aime": 1,371
League minimum, why not.
 
Répondre
To create a post please Login or S'inscrire
Question:
Options:
Chargement de l'animation
Soumettre les modifications du sondage