Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina
Sorry to be clear, my point was that you can get more from Johnny, or at least the same value, in the off-season than at the deadline. So therefore why not keep him for the playoffs.
I would argue a guy like Johnny will have maximum value this summer when he has two full years remaining on a good contract, and the teams capable of trading for him expands.
Are you suggesting the Flames get more from him at next year's deadline than this summer?
|
With his contract there are two factors.
The first is that he's owed a bonus of half his salary next year. I'm not sure when that pays out, but say it's July 1.
The second factor is his limited final year ntc. I think any ntc can be a harsh factor in value, I think it played a huge part in Brodie not moving over the last year, and that was a 10 team list iirc.
So for the flames, to do a deal for Gaudreau this summer, the return will depend a lot on who is paying that bonus. A 1st round pick is worth about 3.5 on the trade market, and the flames are definitely cheap, so they will be incentivized to take a lesser return if it means not having to pay that lump sum bonus. That's a factor in the return yesterday vs this summer.
2 full years makes it more difficult for an acquiring team to forecast their budgets to take on a near 7 million dollar salary. A lot can happen two years out in terms of your prospects. Say Philly is an interested team, they have to weigh gaudreaus 2 full years against any prospect that made their team this year or who breaks out next year.
A trade yesterday gives them 3 full potential playoff runs with gaudreau whereas this summer gives them 2. 3 runs is maybe enough to entice them to make the necessary space/disrupt their salary model, but 2 years maybe not worth it.
3 runs and NOT having to disrupt their salary structure because gaudreau is at say 3.5 instead of 6.75 is worth a hell of a lot more.
The other part of the equation for me is if you're already approaching this summer under the belief.youre going to move gaudreau then I think it's really irresponsible to not capitalize on the value of your pending ufas.
If you're going to be remaking the team, and make no mistake, moving gaudreau from the flames means remaking the team, then the prudent managerial direction would be building out that runway for a summer deal that gives you more trade flexibility because of an abundance of picks.
Otherwise you're in a situation where you're making decisions about Gaudreau that need to account for the asset deficit you already face vs. having the flexibility of your own picks to either square a blockbuster valuation such as sending back a 3rd if getting a 1st like what Tampa did with Goodrow, and/or being able to poach other top talent if the goal is to try to run with the horses you've got aside from Gaudreau.
Does that make sense?
It's about positioning yourself for maximum flexibility so a variety of options are good instead of taking something from limited options available to you. Because we know the flames will try to get out of that bonus if at all possible and maybe taking less for gaudreau to not pay that bonus doesn't hurt as bad if you're sitting on a pair of second round picks already from havingoved Brodie.
For a team like the bruins or the leafs, paying out the bonus is inconsequential, and I'd bet in the case of Boston, they would have traded more than double what they sent to Anaheim for Kase as for Gaudreau at the same rough AAV for a year longer. Like maybe a major piece, PLUS the same value in picks. That return is worth disrupting their system if it basically guarantees them 3 deep playoff runs.
It's about building or buying and if the plan is to build in 4 months then it's a bad decision to keep the structure standing now.