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

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

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.

Maybe speaking a little too soon on that one. He will likely be over $2, and could very well be up around $3mil. He proved last year that he's way more valuable than your typical 4th liner and is a heart and soul player.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by flameswin

Maybe speaking a little too soon on that one. He will likely be over $2, and could very well be up around $3mil. He proved last year that he's way more valuable than your typical 4th liner and is a heart and soul player.

Yep.

GOALS! You just can't argue with leading the team/league in hits and scoring a boatload of goals.

Bouma is going to get paid.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

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?

That is not what I said.

I said it was a matter of choices. There are 23 players on a roster - that's a lot of choices.

Chara's contract didn't cost them Hamilton. LOTS of bad contracts and bizarre choices did.

That was my point.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

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.

That will be determined in the next year or two, but I'm having a hard time believing Chicago won this deal. Chicago gave up the best player, by a large margin.

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.

You need to get value in every contract, especially the big ones. When you make a mistake in handing out big dollar contracts to guys that cannot produce to expectations for that contract, it is a mistake. The more dollars involved, the bigger the mistake. Handing out a huge six to eight year contract to guy who sees his production dry up in two seasons is mistake that is driven through the heart of the organization. You don't make stupid mistakes by overpaying guys for what they have done. You pay them for what they will do for you in the future. Giordano has probably two more seasons left in him where he'll be a top producer. After that the production will dry up, and dry up quickly. The Flames need to keep this in mind and make sure they only pay for these years and not handcuff themselves with a contract that will hold the organization back because they rewarded a player for what he has done, rather than what he will do.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

That is not what I said.

I said it was a matter of choices. There are 23 players on a roster - that's a lot of choices.

Chara's contract didn't cost them Hamilton. LOTS of bad contracts and bizarre choices did.

That was my point.

Unfortunately, that doesn't do anything to bolster the argument that it is worth making one of those choices for a bad contract.

[ForeverFlameFan]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

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.

Chicago could have easily traded Sharp for a lesser return in order to keep Saad. 8 teams are reportedly going after him, surely Sharp would have waived to go to at least one of those teams, especially because he's not wanted anymore. Bickell could have been moved to AZ/Toronto/Buffalo if Chicago sweetened the deal to get it done. They should have made room for Saad, I think that trade will bite them in the butt.

As for Giordano, of course he is going for the NMC, he already stated he wants to stay here for the rest of his career.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

Chicago could have easily traded Sharp for a lesser return in order to keep Saad. 8 teams are reportedly going after him, surely Sharp would have waived to go to at least one of those teams, especially because he's not wanted anymore. Bickell could have been moved to AZ/Toronto/Buffalo if Chicago sweetened the deal to get it done. They should have made room for Saad, I think that trade will bite them in the butt.

As for Giordano, of course he is going for the NMC, he already stated he wants to stay here for the rest of his career.

If it was so easy, why didn't it happen?

[Jason14h]

If it was so easy, why didn't it happen?

Maybe Chicago thinks the return for Saad + Sharp gives them a better chance at winning the Stanley cup then Saad + return for Sharp?

The point is to win games, not win signing the best value contracts!

[Iggy3x]

What about 3yr at 9.5 miles average? Gives Flames room to sign our young players in a few years but also shows Gio that we value him?

[Moneyhands23]

I think they should sign him to a one year 11 million contract. Then wait until he can be extended for 4 years at 6.25 mil.

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Yep.

GOALS! You just can't argue with leading the team/league in hits and scoring a boatload of goals.

Bouma is going to get paid.

Originally Posted by flameswin

Maybe speaking a little too soon on that one. He will likely be over $2, and could very well be up around $3mil. He proved last year that he's way more valuable than your typical 4th liner and is a heart and soul player.

I'd be surprised if Bouma got more than 2 mill.

Bouma's next contract is a good litmus test of how clouded Treliving's judgement may get when confronted vs loyalty to players. Bouma's had one modest season and one excellent one, but you can't bank on the one excellent season's performance as the basis of his next contract.

Bouma improved by a lot this year, so if I'm Treliving I give him 2 years at $1.75. Substantial raise of over 100%, a million dollars, to reward his performance for this year and to give him a shot at earning another raise not far down the road. He's earned a good solid raise, but let's not get ahead of ourselves here.

[Kjesse]

Originally Posted by Moneyhands23

I think they should sign him to a one year 11 million contract. Then wait until he can be extended for 4 years at 6.25 mil.

While I choke at the suggestion of one year/11 million, giving Gio just a one year high value contract then waiting to see what happens has some merit. It gives Gio the big payday he deserves but also hedges the Flames long term cap risk and provides better future cap management when that final contact is negotiated.

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by Moneyhands23

I think they should sign him to a one year 11 million contract. Then wait until he can be extended for 4 years at 6.25 mil.

Why would Gio's camp ever agree to a one year contract?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by kunkstyle

Why would Gio's camp ever agree to a one year contract?

If you trust each other you could do. Gio leverage would be that a back room handshake deal would be cap circumvention so it would force at Treviling to honour the deal.

Overall you would need to give Gio more money.

[Cole436]

Originally Posted by GGG

If you trust each other you could do. Gio leverage would be that a back room handshake deal would be cap circumvention so it would force at Treviling to honour the deal.

Overall you would need to give Gio more money.

Would never happen. If Gio gets a career ending injury, he loses out on a boatload of money.

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by Cole436

Would never happen. If Gio gets a career ending injury, he loses out on a boatload of money.

This point exactly.

[ForeverFlameFan]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

If it was so easy, why didn't it happen?

I said they could have easily made arrangements to keep Saad, thanks for twisting my words.

[AcGold]

Originally Posted by GGG

If you trust each other you could do. Gio leverage would be that a back room handshake deal would be cap circumvention so it would force at Treviling to honour the deal.

Overall you would need to give Gio more money.

If you're Gio you laugh at that. 42 million or 11 million inked on paper, hmm... this is his payday, the next contract. It guarantees him the money, his agent wouldn't even send the offer to Gio.

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by GGG

If you trust each other you could do. Gio leverage would be that a back room handshake deal would be cap circumvention so it would force at Treviling to honour the deal.

Overall you would need to give Gio more money.

I don't get this. How is this cap circumvention and thus how is it leverage?

[Vinny01]

3 years $24M
4 years $29M
5 years $33M
6 years $36M