[Signing] Habs sign Jeff Petry to 6 year deal ($5.5 mil AAV)

[Trojan97]

I don't understand the reactions on here. Terms like "boat anchor" are way overblown.

Other dmen making 5.5 million next season:
Wisniewski, Dan Girardi, Nick Leddy, Matt Carle, Tyler Myers.

Guys like Streit/Wideman/Bogosian make a couple hundred thousand less.

Petry had a great playoffs for the Habs and he would have been one of the most sought after defencemen in a shallow market. Given that, 5.5 is not a surprise at all. People calling for 4-4.5/per for 2nd pairing Dmen are out to lunch. Especially for a RH shot who handled an immersion into the MTL market just fine.

[Caged Great]

It's not bad term wise. Dollars are about 500K to high, but they had to pony up to keep him.

[Machiavelli]

Dollars are fine, length seems a bit excessive.

These guys need more talent on offense.

[Blixa]

Originally Posted by 1qqaaz

Are we going to have to pay Russell more than this?

Excellent question! If we have to pay Russell about 5 million, it will make cap jail for Flames.

I hope that Russell would be cheaper than Brodie.

[Caged Great]

I like Russell, but there is no way I would want him for 5.5 million.

[Tinordi]

All unrestricted free agent signings shall be met with the general feeling that the salary is too much and/or the term is too long.

[Hugh Jahrmes]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

The Habs always seem to have to pay UFAs a little bit more.



I'm pretty sure it has something to do with them having the highest income tax rate in the NHL.

Dat taxation tho

In the same vein, aren't Calgary&Edmonton two of the best "bang for your buck" places to play? Funny that Edmonton still tops the "most mentions" list of the league's NTC demands.

[Tinordi]

Petry is probably the best UFA defenceman available. What did you think he would sign for?

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Petry is probably the best UFA defenceman available. What did you think he would sign for?

Exactly this. Prime years from 27 to 33. I expect he might have taken a bit of a discount from the max offer this summer, but traded that chance for 33M from a 'good' team in a great city.
This is not a great deal for Montreal. It is not horrible. It is one thing they needed to do.

[Erick Estrada]

When he was in Edmonton we laughed at their defensive depth so I find it a little hypocritical that some are saying he's the top free agent defenseman in this class or the deal compares favorably to say Wideman. He's really nothing special at all and he was even a healthy scratch a times for the Oilers and has had his ice time reduced at times for Team USA at the WHC. I personally would be horrified if the Flames signed him to this deal. Sure it's nowhere close to the worst deals in the NHL but it's not a good deal at all for the Habs.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

All unrestricted free agent signings shall be met with the general feeling that the salary is too much and/or the term is too long.

True, but in the end, the complaints frequently are not wrong.

People complained the same about the Wideman signing here, and the first two years of that contract did nothing to prove them wrong. Fortunately for us, the light bulb came on this season.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

True, but in the end, the complaints frequently are not wrong.

People complained the same about the Wideman signing here, and the first two years of that contract did nothing to prove them wrong. Fortunately for us, the light bulb came on this season.

I'm just making the point that many seem to not really understand what the marketplace for unrestricted players will bare. Every year most UFAs are deemed to be
"overpaid" or are said to have too long of deals. And then it happens again next year. Will those players be "worth" their deals? Well you have to compare UFAs to other UFAs. Apples to apples. You can't compare Wideman's deal to Brodie's. Most fans are entirely capable of comparing players on the ice, but with their pay they lose the context.

You want a defenceman that can pay top 4 minutes relatively reliably over 82 games and you don't have to give up any player assets for him? Prepare to pay up.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

When he was in Edmonton we laughed at their defensive depth so I find it a little hypocritical that some are saying he's the top free agent defenseman in this class or the deal compares favorably to say Wideman. He's really nothing special at all and he was even a healthy scratch a times for the Oilers and has had his ice time reduced at times for Team USA at the WHC. I personally would be horrified if the Flames signed him to this deal. Sure it's nowhere close to the worst deals in the NHL but it's not a good deal at all for the Habs.

I think everyone thought Petry was a 3/4 paired with a bunch of 5/6/7s on the number 1 pairing and I think everyone agreed that the Oilers offer of 4 was a joke.

This is not a terrible deal for a 3/4 and really not terrible is what you hope for when going for UFAs.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

I'm just making the point that many seem to not really understand what the marketplace for unrestricted players will bare. Every year most UFAs are deemed to be
"overpaid" or are said to have too long of deals. And then it happens again next year. Will those players be "worth" their deals? Well you have to compare UFAs to other UFAs. Apples to apples. You can't compare Wideman's deal to Brodie's. Most fans are entirely capable of comparing players on the ice, but with their pay they lose the context.

You want a defenceman that can pay top 4 minutes relatively reliably over 82 games and you don't have to give up any player assets for him? Prepare to pay up.

No, I think that is the point. Understanding that the marketplace for UFAs tends to overpay those players does not mean they aren't overpaid.

You are very much right with your comment - which I noted - but in many cases, so is the other side.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

I'm just making the point that many seem to not really understand what the marketplace for unrestricted players will bare. Every year most UFAs are deemed to be
"overpaid" or are said to have too long of deals. And then it happens again next year. Will those players be "worth" their deals? Well you have to compare UFAs to other UFAs. Apples to apples. You can't compare Wideman's deal to Brodie's. Most fans are entirely capable of comparing players on the ice, but with their pay they lose the context.

You want a defenceman that can pay top 4 minutes relatively reliably over 82 games and you don't have to give up any player assets for him? Prepare to pay up.

Not only that, but people compare salaries for contracts signed years ago to now.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

No, I think that is the point. Understanding that the marketplace for UFAs tends to overpay those players does not mean they aren't overpaid.

You are very much right with your comment - which I noted - but in many cases, so is the other side.

What is your definition overpaid?

How does a competitive marketplace overpay for these players? Infact with all the restrictions on this being a truly free labour market many (most?) players are likely underpaid.

[EldrickOnIce]

The nature of the exercise is that you overpay.
You have to overpay, otherwise someone would bid higher.
It's simple economic/auction theory - you pay too much to win the bid.
Then everyone wails that the price it too high.
And then the process repeats itself, again and again.

[DJones]

Originally Posted by Blixa

Excellent question! If we have to pay Russell about 5 million, it will make cap jail for Flames.

I hope that Russell would be cheaper than Brodie.

How could he ask for more money than Brodie? In a year or two Brodie would end up being the lowest paid on our top 4 defense. That would be weird.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by DJones

How could he ask for more money than Brodie? In a year or two Brodie would end up being the lowest paid on our top 4 defense. That would be weird.

Because Brodie's contract doesn't set the NHL market?

I would be very surprised if Russell leaves money on the table because of Brodie's contract. Now I am assuming Russell is a UFA at the end of his contract, I am not sure if that is the case.

[JohnnySkittles]

I can't see Russell getting 5M unless the cap spiked way up. He doesn't have the offense or elite defensively to command that much coin,imo.