Huberdeau and Weegar Signing Discussion Thread

[Your Calgary Flames!]

Originally Posted by Jiggy_12

The non-stop spin is great eh?

‘My friend showed me a photo and said “Here's a picture of me when I was younger". Every picture is of you when you were younger.’

- Mitch Hedberg

You are very good at golf.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Fair, and I'd tend to agree, but overall I just don't think there is much daylight in between them at all.



Don't have a sub so can't read the article, but it really depends on the criteria. Unless a guy signs it between age ~21-25, I think you should generally assume a 7-8 yr deal has negative value at the end, and also generally less trade value throughout.

Obviously a lot depends on where your team is in their cycle, but in most cases I'd take a shorter team great AAV over a long-term 'fair' AAV as it gives so much more flexibility.

The American TV contracts are up after year 5 of an 8 year deal. You can reasonably expect the value of those contracts to go significantly up at that time if history is an indicator. The Canadian deal is up at the end of year 3 of a 8 year deal. That deal also likely goes up. Sports betting will likely start adding significant revenue. It is reasonable to think that on the backend of a 8 year deal that the cap (along with just general societal inflationary effects) will be around 100 million or more once, which makes the backend years more manageable. Player debt is also projected to be paid off by the end of year 2 of the deal, at which time that will put upward pressure on the cap.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

The American TV contracts are up after year 5 of an 8 year deal. You can reasonably expect the value of those contracts to go significantly up at that time if history is an indicator. The Canadian deal is up at the end of year 3 of a 8 year deal. That deal also likely goes up. Sports betting will likely start adding significant revenue. It is reasonable to think that on the backend of a 8 year deal that the cap (along with just general societal inflationary effects) will be around 100 million or more once, which makes the backend years more manageable. Player debt is also projected to be paid off by the end of year 2 of the deal, at which time that will put upward pressure on the cap.

Sure, but the issue isn't really guys being overpaid by a few million at the back end - its the risk of their play falling off so dramatically that they are overpaid by 70%.

Is there a huge difference for a 10M AAV on a player who's 'bad player' market value is 4M in an inflated cap vs. 3M in today's cap?

How much better would the last years of Kessel's 8M or Subban's 9M have looked if the cap go up to 90M?

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Sure, but the issue isn't really guys being overpaid by a few million at the back end - its the risk of their play falling off so dramatically that they are overpaid by 70%.

Is there a huge difference for a 10M AAV on a player who's 'bad player' market value is 4M in an inflated cap vs. 3M in today's cap?

How much better would the last years of Kessel's 8M or Subban's 9M have looked if the cap go up to 90M?

Kessel had one real bad year from a points perspective (first year in Arizona) under that contract.

The other two years he was fine. Year before last he was on pace for 29 goals, 34 assists for 63 points in 82 games. Last year he had 52 points. In today’s NHL someone would still pay 5 million bucks for that production, so he was maybe overpaid by 30-40%.

Sub am just plain ended up sucking, that had little to do with age as he sucked for his 29 year old season.

What if he ends up like Pavelski or Crosby or Ovechkin or Zucharello or Burns or Bergeron?

There is no obvious reason to think Hubredeau will be terrible on the backend of his deal. If one accepts that in a 82 million dollar cap a 50 point guy is worth around 5 million, that is 6% of cap. If Hubredeau signs for 10.5 and the cap goes up to 105 million by the last two years, 6% value of cap is 6.3 million. If every additional 10 points is worth 1.2% of cap, if he scores 70 points a year in the final two years (on the high end of probable) he would be worth about 8.8 million a year. On the current cap, if 70 points is worth 8.4% of cap it would mean a 70 point guy is worth about 6.9 million, which is probably just on the slightly high end of what one would pay for a 70 point guy on the open market. I am not worried about the backend of a Hubredeau deal.

[Highbury]

https://twitter.com/Moe_Saghir/statu...86799783202816

[Nelson]

Originally Posted by Highbury

https://twitter.com/Moe_Saghir/statu...86799783202816

It’s interesting that Treliving made that trade without knowing if Huberdeau would be open to re-signing. I think that shows how much value Treliving felt he was getting.

[Highbury]

Originally Posted by Nelson

It’s interesting that Treliving made that trade without knowing if Huberdeau would be open to re-signing. I think that shows how much value Treliving felt he was getting.

Yep, I'd agree. From an assets perspective there are so many directions this deal could take - pretty much all of them are positive. Sign one, sign both, flip one or flip both this deal was too good to pass up.

[EVERLAST]

Originally Posted by Nelson

It’s interesting that Treliving made that trade without knowing if Huberdeau would be open to re-signing. I think that shows how much value Treliving felt he was getting.

Yep . But when 2 players tuck tail and depart what options do u really have?
Glad he got it done . The extension part though is tough. Hoping we have news soon.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Highbury

Yep, I'd agree. From an assets perspective there are so many directions this deal could take - pretty much all of them are positive. Sign one, sign both, flip one or flip both this deal was too good to pass up.

And a lot of the other potential deals involved unsigned guys (albeit RFAs).

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

The American TV contracts are up after year 5 of an 8 year deal. You can reasonably expect the value of those contracts to go significantly up at that time if history is an indicator. The Canadian deal is up at the end of year 3 of a 8 year deal. That deal also likely goes up. Sports betting will likely start adding significant revenue. It is reasonable to think that on the backend of a 8 year deal that the cap (along with just general societal inflationary effects) will be around 100 million or more once, which makes the backend years more manageable. Player debt is also projected to be paid off by the end of year 2 of the deal, at which time that will put upward pressure on the cap.

Surely the cap will be higher than $100M in 8 years. That sounds like maybe a 2% compounded growth rate. Once the debt is gone I expect to see some big jumps. 5% growth should get you to $120M or so which is a reasonable guess IMO.

[dino7c]

when a deal like that is on the table you take it...especially compared to the other rumored offers. Panthers probably asked them not to talk to their guys incase something fell through

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by dino7c

when a deal like that is on the table you take it...especially compared to the other rumored offers. Panthers probably asked them not to talk to their guys incase something fell through

Yup

Tkachuk asked for the deal, so no risk if he talks contract with Florida and it doesn’t work out.

But for Florida to approach Huberdeau and Weegar to ask them if they’d talk contract with Calgary, now you just made it awkward if that deal falls through.

[Dan403]

[Phaneuf_Phan]

Did Johnny Hockey pick his number yet? Need a Hubey jersey ASAP!

[Beatle17]

Originally Posted by Nelson

It’s interesting that Treliving made that trade without knowing if Huberdeau would be open to re-signing. I think that shows how much value Treliving felt he was getting.

How is he supposed to know that, he isn't allowed to talk to a player under contract with another team.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Beatle17

How is he supposed to know that, he isn't allowed to talk to a player under contract with another team.

Seriously? Florida would grant permission if the Flames demanded that as condition of the trade. Just like no one would trade for Tkachuk without first knowing for certain he would sign with them, and that would mean having his signature on a contract prior to making the deal, so the Flames would have to grant access to the player and his represenatation.

[djsFlames]

After the lowball offers they had, when Florida strolls in unaware of the market on Tkachuk and offers to trade you a better player, a top pairing D, a prospect you like and a 1st.. you're waving frantically at Conroy out in the parking lot to start that car.

Wouldn't even risk Zito having second thoughts by delaying the deal while you test the waters with the two players.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

After the lowball offers they had, when Florida strolls in unaware of the market on Tkachuk and offers to trade you a better player, a top pairing D, a prospect you like and a 1st.. you're waving frantically at Conroy out in the parking lot to start that car.

Wouldn't even risk Zito having second thoughts by delaying the deal while you test the waters with the two players.

I suspect that the other reported offers that have come out in the past several days are actually much lower than what was actually on the table. Even still, Treliving admitted that the Florida deal was by far the best offer.

Sent from my SM-G986W using Tapatalk

[AltaGuy]

Originally Posted by Highbury

Yep, I'd agree. From an assets perspective there are so many directions this deal could take - pretty much all of them are positive. Sign one, sign both, flip one or flip both this deal was too good to pass up.

Exactly - either we go full rebuild, or we get good assets long-term. And he gains until next trade deadline to make a decision.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Seriously? Florida would grant permission if the Flames demanded that as condition of the trade. Just like no one would trade for Tkachuk without first knowing for certain he would sign with them, and that would mean having his signature on a contract prior to making the deal, so the Flames would have to grant access to the player and his represenatation.

Unless you're going to try to negotiate their full deals it's kinda pointless in this case. As others have mentioned, you are just giving Huberdeau a grenade to blow up the deal if he simply doesn't want to leave (see Kadri, albeit a different kind of grenade). And FLA doesn't want to risk harming their relationship with the player if the deal doesn't actually go through.

If the pending FA is the most important player in the deal, then of course you want more certainty.