Friedman: Gaudreau negotiations will be put on hold during World Cup

[Travis Munroe]

Originally Posted by polak

Didn't his camp say they wanted long term too? It's all about money and it makes total sense from what we've seen Brad do so far.

He's trying to get Gaudreau at under 7 which is a ####ing insult.

Johny's camp asking price (based on media) could also be looked at as an insult. Treliving knows he will be paying more than 7 but can't give away his entire hand just yet...

Hypothetically, JG is asking for more than the flames are willing to pay.
Would it be extremely unprofessional to inform the other side that you will give him that money on a short term contract but he will be dangled as trade bait throughout the term? I love JG and everything he brings but if it means handicapping the teams future cap wise and half of the league is bidding on him I feel someone would drastically overpay and the flames would come out the winners with JG having no say in where he goes.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Next person who uses the term Gio-cap needs to get banned.

Once more for old times sake?

The only Gio cap

[FlamesAddiction]

I would expect "over $8 million to be JG's asking price with the understanding it would get negotiated down to around $7.5 million. Same, but reversed for the Flames offer of $6.5 million.

If either side is making their starting point firm and non-movable, then that is bad for finding a resolution.

[Gaudreauvertime]

Originally Posted by CalgaryFan1988

You said he's a PPG player who is trending up and you want to make a bet he's a PPG player? You're a lot of talk.

82 points over 80 games isn't progression? Especially considering the new coaching staff and new system?

You don't want to take my counter offer? You're a lot of talk.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Realtor 1

Johny's camp asking price (based on media) could also be looked at as an insult. Treliving knows he will be paying more than 7 but can't give away his entire hand just yet...

Hypothetically, JG is asking for more than the flames are willing to pay.
Would it be extremely unprofessional to inform the other side that you will give him that money on a short term contract but he will be dangled as trade bait throughout the term? I love JG and everything he brings but if it means handicapping the teams future cap wise and half of the league is bidding on him I feel someone would drastically overpay and the flames would come out the winners with JG having no say in where he goes.

I feel like 8 is closer to what he's worth than 6.75 or below.

When is the last time that trading a superstar has worked out for the team losing the star? The Lindros trade? The Iginla trade? Those happened 20 years ago and both of those trades were only looked at as a success because prospects developed into out the park home run players. Why trade an out the park home run player for the CHANCE of getting a player that ends up as good?

It's extremely rare that you get the same value back in return.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by Gaudreauvertime

Might want to check your facts, Tarasenko had only played 3 seasons, and had less points than Johnny had in his two. I fail to see how that makes 7.5 the absolute cap.

If i remember correctly it was rumoured most GM's were not happy with the Tarasenko contract signed. It was taking what the gm's thought they had in place for RFA's and taking it up a notch. I doubt the flames GM and ownership wants to add to that, making a modern day precident.

[dino7c]

Stamkos as a UFA with league wide intrest just got 8.5...Gaudreau is an RFA with 2 NHL seasons under his belt. I really hope they aren't actually expecting 8M

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by polak

I feel like 8 is closer to what he's worth than 6.75 or below.

When is the last time that trading a superstar has worked out for the team losing the star? The Lindros trade? The Iginla trade? Those happened 20 years ago and both of those trades were only looked at as a success because prospects developed into out the park home run players. Why trade an out the park home run player for the CHANCE of getting a player that ends up as good?

It's extremely rare that you get the same value back in return.

come on now Iginla was no where near a superstar when traded...he was a good prospect

[Corral]

Have to say I find this whole thread laughable. Anyone (myself included) who suggested at the end of last season that the Flames were doing to play hardball with JG were tarred and feathered on this Board. And now here we are .... and something like 2500 posts debating it ....

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Corral

Have to say I find this whole thread laughable. Anyone (myself included) who suggested at the end of last season that the Flames were doing to play hardball with JG were tarred and feathered on this Board. And now here we are .... and something like 2500 posts debating it ....

unless they are insisting under 7 they aren't playing hardball

[CalgaryFan1988]

Originally Posted by Gaudreauvertime

82 points over 80 games isn't progression? Especially considering the new coaching staff and new system?

You don't want to take my counter offer? You're a lot of talk.

You want the Flames to pony up 64 million dollars, because (according to you) Gaudreau is the second coming, but you're too afraid to pony up a measly hundred.

Too many variables for you? Imagine how Flames management feels.

[OmegaV4]

I don't even come here to see if he signs, I just come to watch the fireworks.

Gaudreauvertime v. The World

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

If i remember correctly it was rumoured most GM's were not happy with the Tarasenko contract signed. It was taking what the gm's thought they had in place for RFA's and taking it up a notch. I doubt the flames GM and ownership wants to add to that, making a modern day precident.

It is what it is now though. Just like when Lowe destroyed the 2nd contract, toast ain't never gonna be bread again.

[BigFlameDog]

In my entire time here I don't think I have ever wrote so many replies, then deleted them before actually posting as I have in this thread.

Just when I think I might dive in I realize beating my head against a wall would be a better idea. So much conjecture quoted as fact in here....

[jemjey]

Originally Posted by Gaudreauvertime

Help me out here.

I said: "I wouldn't be surprised if he was the best player in the league next year."

Which has been interpreted by multiple individuals as "I expect him to be the best player in the league next year."

And you're telling me that's evidence of good reading comprehension/critical thinking?

I'll try... but I have a feeling any advice I offer will be in one ear and out the other...

I think the fact that so many people are "mis-characterizing" your statements is evidence that you aren't able to articulate those statements clearly and unambiguously.

When you say that Gaudreau is the best player at the WCH, you are saying he is better than everyone else at the WCH. Sidney Crosby is participating at the WCH. If your intended meaning was not: Johnny is better than Sidney Crosby, then articulate that. By using the superlative "best", your statement implies that he is. It's not the fault of the reader that you can't communicate your ideas clearly.

If you don't want people to "mis-characterize" your statements, perhaps stop making such hyperbolic, weak arguments that are so easily dismantled.

Or just keep backtracking and blaming your critics for your own lack of writing ability. You clearly have a victim mentality. Rather than examine your own statements and opinions, you'd rather blame "groupthink" and poor reading comprehension... yes, the world is out to get you. You are so ahead of your time and I really think it's brave of you to stand strong in your ideals in the face of overwhelming logic and reason... err I mean groupthink.

[cam_wmh]

Does anyone have or can cite the data, for Johnny's production for the 1st and 2nd halves of the season? Before & After play-off elimination?

[JiriHrdina]

^I actually have been looking for 1st/2nd half split stats for other reasons - and haven't been able to find it at all.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by polak

Didn't his camp say they wanted long term too? It's all about money and it makes total sense from what we've seen Brad do so far.

He's trying to get Gaudreau at under 7 which is a ####ing insult.

Even at just under $7.0 m it will still be one of the richest second contracts ever awarded to an RFA. There is nothing even remotely "insulting" about that.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

Does anyone have or can cite the data, for Johnny's production for the 1st and 2nd halves of the season? Before & After play-off elimination?

I don't know where you could find it but just going off memory he seemed to dip below PPG later on in the season.

He looked like a sure thing to hit PPG about 50-60 games in and then his production cooled down a bit.

[Gaudreauvertime]

Originally Posted by jemjey

I'll try... but I have a feeling any advice I offer will be in one ear and out the other...

I think the fact that so many people are "mis-characterizing" your statements is evidence that you aren't able to articulate those statements clearly and unambiguously.

I think it's more evidence that people disagree with me and are using hyperbolic tactics.

Originally Posted by jemjey

When you say that Gaudreau is the best player at the WCH, you are saying he is better than everyone else at the WCH. Sidney Crosby is participating at the WCH. If your intended meaning was not: Johnny is better than Sidney Crosby, then articulate that. By using the superlative "best", your statement implies that he is. It's not the fault of the reader that you can't communicate your ideas clearly.

When I say a player looks like the best player in a tournament, that doesn't imply that he is the best player in the world. I explained that earlier, did you miss that?

Originally Posted by jemjey

If you don't want people to "mis-characterize" your statements, perhaps stop making such hyperbolic, weak arguments that are so easily dismantled.

If my arguments were so easily dismantled, why are people intentionally mis-characterizing them? You would think that wouldn't be necessary.

Originally Posted by jemjey

Or just keep backtracking and blaming your critics for your own lack of writing ability. You clearly have a victim mentality. Rather than examine your own statements and opinions, you'd rather blame "groupthink" and poor reading comprehension... yes, the world is out to get you. You are so ahead of your time and I really think it's brave of you to stand strong in your ideals in the face of overwhelming logic and reason... err I mean groupthink.

Overwhelming logic and reason? Lol ok. I'd probably feel like less of a victim if there wasn't such a vocal minority that kept personally attacking me and mis-characterizing my statements.