[Signing] Huberdeau signs 2 year $3.25M AAV deal with Panthers

[Finger Cookin]

Per Mackenzie tweet.

@TSNBobMcKenzie: Jonathan Huberdeau's two-year deal with FLA has an AAV of $3.25M. $2.5M in first year, $4M in second year. On his way to FLA now.

[devo22]

Great deal for the Panthers

[driveway]

That's a good deal for them now. Having Bjugstad locked up at 4.1 for the next six seasons is pretty sweet too. They'll get the cap room from ... amazingly... Marc Savard's contract ending to pay Huberdeau in 2017-18.

Some real good pieces to build around going forward for that club, they just need to flesh out a defence and hope Luongo plays until he's 67.

[Poe969]

Damnit! I wanted either him or Nelson and both the panthers and isles decided to keep their good young players instead of giving them all to us for nothing!

This is a really good deal for the panthers.

[Caged Great]

I bet the Panthers wished they could have got more term out of him because that's going to be 6+ in two years if he continues to be good.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by devo22

Great deal for the Panthers

... for now. In two years I'll bet they wish that they locked him up for longer (even if it was for higher AAV).

[devo22]

Well I guess the alternative would have been a 6x6 type of deal. Settling for a bridge deal now is not that bad, they can still sign him long-term in 2 years and actually buy some UFA years then.

[ricardodw]

Does this have an impact on what the Flames sign Monahan and Gaudreau for next summer/fall?

Huberdeau won the Calder in 2013.

Monahan will be younger than Hurbedeau as his rookie season was his draft year.

Gaudreau will be older.


Rather than having the Oiler standard 6x6 maybe they get a bridge deal 3.5-4M x2? extend the Flame winning window for a couple of years.... (cap space for Russell / Hudler)

If the RFA offer sheet was not an option for teams looking at Huberdeau then it very well will not be for Gaudreau or Monahan.

There is a hint of collusion on these young stars coming of their ELC contracts. The Oilers messed their we didn't RFA offer yours/ don't RFA offer ours when they stole Penner.

Did the Flames owners mess up their good will around the league with the RoR mess?

Without the Flames offer sheet RoR gets about half of what he has been paid over the last 3 years.

Might be arguable but Huberdeau is at least as good as RoR.

[Hackey]

Great value for Huberdeau but you risk it back firing if he breaks out in the next 2 seasons like PK did.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Hackey

Great value for Huberdeau but you risk it back firing if he breaks out in the next 2 seasons like PK did.

Subban 2.875 x 2 bridge = 5.75

9m x 8 = 72

77.75 over 10 years. 7.75 /year for a known all star player

compare that to Eberle , Hall and RNH, who are 3-4m players getting paid 6m/yr because of unrealized potential.

If Huberdeau wins the Art Ross or Hart in 2015-16 then he wins on this deal with 9-10m long term deal

If Huderdeau gets 30-30 60 pts thge next couple of years he get his 5.5-6x6


Much better risk management by the club

[Hackey]

Montreal could have locked PK up for probably 6-7 million per if they didn't go the bridge route. Now they are paying him 9 million a year.

It's a risk that sometimes pays off and sometimes doesn't. Thats why I said Florida runs the risk if he does break out. Whether its the right move or not only time will tell but since its Florida I don't really care either way.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

Per Mackenzie tweet.

@TSNBobMcKenzie: Jonathan Huberdeau's two-year deal with FLA has an AAV of $3.25M. $2.5M in first year, $4M in second year. On his way to FLA now.

I approve. He'll get paid when he proves he can produce big points regularly. He's been up and down so far in his career. Kinda streaky.

BTW, from all accounts the team WANTED a bridge deal, not a long term deal which is what Huberdeau wanted.

[burnitdown]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Subban 2.875 x 2 bridge = 5.75

9m x 8 = 72

77.75 over 10 years. 7.75 /year for a known all star player

compare that to Eberle , Hall and RNH, who are 3-4m players getting paid 6m/yr because of unrealized potential.

Yeah, $7.75M per year for a stud dman isn't bad but if they didn't do their bridge deal, he likely would have sign an 8 year deal for around $6M per year. Sure, you save a bit up front but don't need to find ways to shave off $2-3M in salaries this year or next. We'll be more concerned 4-6 years down the road.

And there's no way those Oilers are only worth $3-$4M. Based off comparables at the time, they should have been able to get them for under $6M when they signed them...but despite their best efforts, those contracts are quickly becoming value contracts and goes to show quickly salaries can rise in the NHL. I'd be thrilled if we could lock up our young guns for a very long time and skip the bridge contract.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by burnitdown

And there's no way those Oilers are only worth $3-$4M. Based off comparables at the time, they should have been able to get them for under $6M when they signed them...but despite their best efforts, those contracts are quickly becoming value contracts and goes to show quickly salaries can rise in the NHL.

Based on 2014 signings, which were made under the assumption that the cap would continue to rise indefinitely, this is a reasonable thing to say. Based on 2015, when the cap has flatlined and looks to remain fairly flat for the foreseeable future, those are absolutely not value contracts. Salaries can rise quickly in the NHL. But at present, they are not actually doing so.

[burnitdown]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Based on 2014 signings, which were made under the assumption that the cap would continue to rise indefinitely, this is a reasonable thing to say. Based on 2015, when the cap has flatlined and looks to remain fairly flat for the foreseeable future, those are absolutely not value contracts. Salaries can rise quickly in the NHL. But at present, they are not actually doing so.

I disagree. I think GMs are showing restraint when it comes to the 2nd/3rd line forwards and 2nd/3rd pairing defencemen...but when it comes to skilled 1st line players, the stars are getting more and more money each year. Toews and Kane's contracts just raised the stakes again...and I'm sure Stamkos will be right next to them once he signs. That's why, IMO, you have to identify your stars early and lock them up long-term.

Not to mention, there'll be a lot of additional revenue coming and competition amongst teams in free agency once the NHL expands and they collect money from the World Cup. I don't think revenues are flatlining at all.

[Imported_Aussie]

Bridge contract makes sense for the Panthers - they are never a cap team, so if he earns a deal making 7-8M off this bridge then they can go there. It allows them to keep an internal salary scale and not get stuck overpaying on precedent when their other young guys start to come off ELCs

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by burnitdown

I disagree. I think GMs are showing restraint when it comes to the 2nd/3rd line forwards and 2nd/3rd pairing defencemen...but when it comes to skilled 1st line players, the stars are getting more and more money each year. Toews and Kane's contracts just raised the stakes again...

Toews and Kane are massively overpaid. All the scuttlebutt is about how Stan Bowman signed those deals in the expectation that the cap would be substantially higher this year. If it had been, he would not have had to jettison a quarter of his roster to become compliant.

Not to mention, there'll be a lot of additional revenue coming and competition amongst teams in free agency once the NHL expands and they collect money from the World Cup. I don't think revenues are flatlining at all.

It's an open question whether the expansion teams will bring in above-average revenue. Quebec probably will – but that depends on the value of the Canadian dollar. Las Vegas probably won't. Either way, those two teams cannot make a big enough difference to the top line to move the cap much.

As for the World Cup, how much HRR is that anyway? Take one tournament with a small number of games; divide it by 32 teams, and then divide by 4 again because it only happens every four years. Again, that's not going to move the cap much.

The NHL's fundamental financial constraints are not about to change. The league is heavily dependent upon gate revenue, and since ticket prices are already sky-high (compared to the other major North American team sports), the gate is highly vulnerable to setbacks in the economy. That's what we're seeing now. If not for the NHLPA invoking the 5 percent escalator clause, the cap would actually have gone down this season. There is no guarantee that it will go up in any particular year. A lot of teams are handcuffed now by contracts signed under the assumption that it would always go up.

[cam_wmh]

Would 8 years x $5m for Gaudreau & Monahan be reasonable, by skipping the bridge contract?

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

Would 8 years x $5m for Gaudreau & Monahan be reasonable, by skipping the bridge contract?

Nope... 6.5 x 8 is more realistic.

[Rutuu]

I think everybody forgets the human element. Building a "Meritocracy" where you don't have long term deals and players playing a half step behind is a better model for a franchise in my opinion.