[Rumour] Giordano Extension. Kypreos: Starting point is $72 million over 8 years

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

This trend of worrying what will happen in 5 years is really getting old. The point is to win games. A million things can happen between now and 5 years.



Yeah 4 Stanley Cup appearances and 2 wins. What evidence! And Chicago is now doing the same with their 2 stars!

And let's not act like Chara's contract is 'killing' the bruins. He got hurt this year, it happens. I'm sure they could trade him in a heartbeat if he was put on the market.

It is why the Flames got Hamilton.
So, do you keep Giordano if it costs you Brodie? That's a reasonable question

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

It is why the Flames got Hamilton.
So, do you keep Giordano if it costs you Brodie? That's a reasonable question

Or Russell

There is a pretty good argument that could be made for letting Gio go into the season with no contract and keeping Wideman. After this season they have to pay Monahan and Gaudreau big money and after 2017 they have to sign Bennett. The Flames are much better positioned to absorb the loss of Giordano on the backend then they are to absorb the loss of Hudler up front.

Assuming you could get Russell longterm around 5, I would be way more comfortable paying Hamilton, Wideman, Russell and Brodie around 21 million as a core to work with. Given Russell's age I would much rather throw a 5 year 25 million dollar contract on the books for Russell and see what type of trade packages are available for Giordano or let it ride and try to work him down to a hometown discount.

[GranteedEV]

I would much rather keep Giordano and let Russell walk. Russell's a good player but too flawed to compromise cap situation form. Even a 38 year old Giordano will have better on ice performance than a 33 year old Russell. Realistically an aging Gio should decline into a solid #3 Defenseman on a cup team. Russell will stay a tweener #5/#4 and while I love some aspects of his game, he is the kind of player you can adequately replace with a Culkin or a Wotherspoon if you just can't afford him. There's a reason the "most important thing in the offseason" isn't getting Kris Russell or Jiri Hudler signed to extensions.

[EldrickOnIce]

Which is why Russell is not a good example.
Of course you part ways vs Giordano.
Brodie is the better to use.
And yes, maybe you don't care 5 years down the road. That is entirely reasonable

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

I would much rather keep Giordano and let Russell walk. Russell's a good player but too flawed to compromise cap situation form. Even a 38 year old Giordano will have better on ice performance than a 33 year old Russell. Realistically an aging Gio should decline into a solid #3 Defenseman on a cup team. Russell will stay a tweener #5/#4 and while I love some aspects of his game, he is the kind of player you can adequately replace with a Culkin or a Wotherspoon if you just can't afford him. There's a reason the "most important thing in the offseason" isn't getting Kris Russell or Jiri Hudler signed to extensions.

While i'm with the group that does not want Gio signed to a 7-8 year deal, I agree with everything your saying about not re-signing "non-core pieces". I know some posters get got up in the "love" for some players on the team, but they should not be a priority. Would i like a Hudler and Russel to re-sign with the flames? Damn rights i would , but its not realistic. There is not enough money and term to go around for everybody.

As much as i would like to see a bridge contract for Monny , Johnny and Bennet , i dont think it will happen. The Oilers started this stupid no bridge contract, and players and agents are following it.

One of the small draw backs of having a up and coming team is that some guys have to be let go. Now its going to be up to management to decide if getting an asset for them is more valuable than making playoffs or trying to get to 3rd round of playoffs. Hudler is the question for this year. Part of me thinks that they will end up letting him walk after season for nothing just to give youngsters a chance to compete a little more in the playoffs this year. I think Wideman will be traded after this season. Depending on what some of the youngsters on D can show, this could be Russels last season as a flame. Also upfront i dont see Jones being re-signed. I think he could be somebody they trade at the deadline even if they are in a playoff spot.

[Aarongavey]

The last time the Flames were in the running to get a guy this old signed to a longterm contract was Brad Richards. Of course Richards was 2 years younger than Giordano when those sweepstakes were going on, so you had a little more certainty that there were some guaranteed years of production left in the tank.

Richards was 9th in league scoring in 2004, 11th in league scoring in 2006 then dropped off for a bit (always being in the top 30 though) and then came roaring back in 2007 to finish 7th in league scoring and then 10th in 2011 before he went out for his big contract.

Similar situations, two guys who most people would argue were top 5-8 at their positions at the time they were seeking their big deals, similar in age with Richards being less injury prone. It will be interesting to see how the Giordano situation turns out compared with the Brad Richards one.

[GranteedEV]

Brodie is signed for 5 years. He will be 30 when his next contract is up. If he's Norris-calibre by then the Flames will find a way to retain him. It might mean losing guys like Poirier or Klimchuk if they're still in the organization.

One contract is not a cap. Chara's contract didn't stop the Bruins from keeping Boychuk or Hamilton - heck he was and still is a #1D for them even if he's no longer in the Norris class.

The Bruins' troubles stem from other factors, like Iginla collecting his bonuses in 2013-14, Krejci making around 2M more than he should, Lucic becoming a supposed floater, Hamilton not wanting to sign/negotiate there for 5.5M yet signing here for 5.75M, them choosing Seidenberg over Boychuk, getting brutal value in the Seguin trade, Rask being paid 7M a year, and cumulatively overpaying all their depth players. There's a lot to be learned from their mistakes, and I'm sure Chara being paid around 1-2M smidge less would help, but it does not define their situation. If I were them I'd be shopping Rask before I'm shopping Chara as it's been proven over and over that guys paid as "franchise goaltenders" don't win anything in the cap era.. Luongo, Price, Lundqvist, Rinne, Kipprusoff, Rask.. You just can't overpay for goaltending. Aging star defenders like Lidstrom and Chara have proven more.

And yeah, in a few years they'll have to kick off a proper rebuild and they'll wish they had Seguin/Hamilton. But at the end of the day they'll live with it because this Bergeron/Chara group got them through some great years including a Cup, a President's Trophy, and another SCF. No cap era team is going to stay consistently elite six-eight years after a cup.. Detroit didn't, Pittsburgh didn't, Anaheim didn't, and even Chicago is in tough starting next year.

[Aarongavey]

Doughty, Ekman-Larsson, Pietrangelo, Weber, Suter, Keith, Subban, Hedman, McDonagh are all guys I would rather have than Gio. I am not sure how you get away with paying a guy who is probably bottom tier of the top 10 dmen in the league right now (my list would be 10, I have a hardtime seeing how you put him higher than 6 in any event) at the age of 32 top 3 dmen in the league money. If he even slips to top 20 status it is an atrocious contract.

Tampa signed Ohlund at around the same age to be a top 50 guy in the league (which he was at the time of signing). He quickly disappeared and was buyout fodder within 2 years. There is way too much risk signing a guy that age for term. Short of your Joe Sakic's I am not sure of many instances where it worked out.

[Enoch Root]

This talk that the Bruins couldn't keep Hamilton because of Chara's contract is garbage.

The Bruins made bad choices. Period.

They could have made other choices.

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I understand you have to pay to keep your top players. But it's a matter of timing, value, and age. Negotiating a big 8-year contract where you get 4 years of the player's prime at the cost of overpaying for the final 4 years may be worth it. However, Gio won't be 29 or even 30 when his next contract kicks in - he'll be 33. That means, optimistically, he'll have maybe 2 more seasons of top play left in him. So is getting 2 years of a player's prime worth overpaying him for 5 or 6 years? I don't think it is.

Thats what makes a Giordano extension so tricky...you still have him under contract for one more season at great value. The odds heavily suggest that will be the most productive season thats left in his career. You start paying him the big salary when his play is likely to start declining.

If this was the NFL you would have added money to Giordano's contract last summer. Personally I ride out this year and depending how the team does maybe look to trade him. Managers cant get tricked into paying players back for past over achievement.

At most a team can consider giving Giordano 3 years at a premium salary, than need to start peeling it back. But I don't believe the market has been set for a 33 year old top pairing defenceman on a new contract. Bouwmeester who was 31 to start this season just played the first year of a 5 year 5.4 year per deal. I hate that tin man....but that contract starts 2 years earlier than a Giordano one would. So its tough to appraise Giordano's value because its more of a market setter, and its at an age that is honestly two years too late when time is the critical factor.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

This talk that the Bruins couldn't keep Hamilton because of Chara's contract is garbage.

The Bruins made bad choices. Period.

They could have made other choices.

So they just didn't want a 22 year old defenseman on the cusp of being a #1/#2? It didn't have anything to do with cap issues based on 'bad' contracts?

[Sylvanfan]

Don Sweeny is doing a scorched earth rebuild based on the idea of trading his assets at peak value amd less on what the returns are for those assets. Akin to the investing principal of having your money invested for a period of time as opposed to picking the right stocks. Hamilton was traded at a time when his value was highest. Same with Lucic, same with Jones. Maybe he bought the wrong stocks. But hes put his money in the market. I expect he'll move guys like Chara and Seidenberg when their values increase due to the term on their contracts being less.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

So they just didn't want a 22 year old defenseman on the cusp of being a #1/#2?

Actually, it could very well be the case. Despite his points maybe they didn't think Hamilton was "on the cusp of being a #1/#2" at all. You don't think they were able to make 5.75M in cap space for him? They've got nearly 9 mil in cap space right now and only two RFAs to re-up.

It looks to me like their management just isn't a fan of the fact that Hamilton is a pure finesse player. The Bruins have very clearly made an effort to get rid of finesse players for rough and tough players. They drafted Zboril, DeBrusk, and Senyshyn when CLEARLY better finnesse players in Matt Barzal and Kyle Connor were available. They traded Reilly Smith for Jimmy Hayes. They gave up a 3rd round pick for Zac Rinaldo.

From their perspective, the Bruins are a team that built its reputation on a rough physical style of play and the team that they put out last year was soft and embarrassing. They might have lowballed Dougie based on that. They did the same when they traded Seguin away.

It didn't have anything to do with cap issues based on 'bad' contracts?

Chara's contract is 10% of the cap.

That means there was 90% of the cap left to figure out a way to keep Hamilton if they truly valued him all that much.

[EldrickOnIce]

Right. It's about choices. I'm pretty sure Chicago valued Saad highly, but had no choice given payroll.
Same with the Bruins.
Same will be the case with the Flames, if they sign Giordano to a 8 x 8 contract.
Not sure why some of you find this disturbing

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

I'm pretty sure Chicago valued Saad highly, but had no choice given payroll.

They won that Saad trade. They got an arguably better, cheaper player in Dano and they added a #2C who, lo and behold, they signed to the money Saad should have got. Meanwhile Saad signed a contract where he's one of the most overpaid players in the league.

If you do look at Chicago's contracts though, Bickell and Crawford are the "bad choices", not core players in Kane or Hossa or Toews or Seabrook or Keith or Hjalmarsson. It would be akin to the Flames handing Bouma a 3 million dollar contract or Ortio a 7 million long term contract. That's where they Flames will need to be cut-throat.

[ForeverFlameFan]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Right. It's about choices. I'm pretty sure Chicago valued Saad highly, but had no choice given payroll.
Same with the Bruins.
Same will be the case with the Flames, if they sign Giordano to a 8 x 8 contract.
Not sure why some of you find this disturbing

Hawks could have moved Bickell, Sharp, and Versteeg before Saad.

Bruins could have moved Lucic w/o salary retention, Seidenberg, Kelly, tons of players before Hamilton. Hamilton wanted out, for whatever reasons we don't know.

[EldrickOnIce]

^ Right. As I said, it's about choices.
Pretty simple.

[ForeverFlameFan]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

^ Right. As I said, it's about choices.
Pretty simple.

It's really weird at the demands nowadays, I agree.

[Rick M.]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

Hawks could have moved Bickell, Sharp, and Versteeg before Saad.

Bruins could have moved Lucic w/o salary retention, Seidenberg, Kelly, tons of players before Hamilton. Hamilton wanted out, for whatever reasons we don't know.

Chicago tried to move Bickell and Sharp but weren't successful.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

Hawks could have moved Bickell, Sharp, and Versteeg before Saad.

Bruins could have moved Lucic w/o salary retention, Seidenberg, Kelly, tons of players before Hamilton. Hamilton wanted out, for whatever reasons we don't know.

NTC/NMC

Hamilton could be traded without his consent. Lucic wanted out.

That is the reason those guys were moved and why Patrick Sharp, despite clearly being on the trade block, hasn't been moved.

You had better believe the number 1 priority for Giordano before money and term is the nmc.

Not having One now is what makes him so valuable to Calgary.