[Signing] Oilers sign Klefbom to 7 year extension ($4.167 mil AAV)

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

but, but... Schultz was the next Coffey. And RNH was the next Gretzky.

How many Coffeys and Gretzkys do they need?

Well, they're making their way up the standings one at a time per Coffee and Gretzky so at their current pace I'd say about another 28 or so.

[FlamesAddiction]

I think the contract is a gamble, but not as terrible as some people. It actually has the potential to be a really good contract in the second half if he progresses the way they think he will.

There is a fair bit of risk considering that he doesn't have a lot of NHL experience yet, but sometimes you roll the dice with these types.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I really don't agree with that signing.

There are 2 other Swedish defencemen that were much more heralded coming out of the Swedish elite league (and who have both done better in that league), and then also did better in the AHL as well. They both have many more games under their belt in the NHL and have put up more points. Who are they? Our friend Tim Erixon is one, and the other is David Rundblad. Now, I get that Klefbom is on an 'upswing' in career trajectory, and those guys have flat-lined (if not fully regressed), but that is essentially the point I am making. Those were 2 "absolutely guaranteed future valuable top 4 defencemen". More importantly, they both were very good 2-way prospects capable of putting up points. They have outscored Klefbom at every level (which as we know, defencemen get paid the big bucks by how offensive they are).

If you take a quick look around the NHL, what do 2nd pairing defenders make? About as much as the contract he just signed, no? Give or take half a million or a million? Does he have an offensive ceiling to his game that I am unaware of that will make him command 5+ million a season?

Dougie Hamilton just signed for what? 1 million more? 1.5 million more? Now I get that 1-1.5 million dollar in savings is substantial in the grand scheme of things, but there is no guarantee that Klefbom ever becomes as good as Hamilton is already, and I am pretty sure that most hockey fans would agree that Hamilton has much more room to grow as a player.

In what world does a team offer pretty much 'fair market value' to a top 4 defencemen for 7 years after less than a full season's worth of games? Klefbom would be an ideal bridge-contract candidate. He doesn't have that high ceiling. He may be the 2nd best up and coming defencemen in Edmonton's pool, but what is his ceiling really? I don't think he is a top-pairing defencemen. Solid top 4 with average offensive ability (in the 30's in point production, let's say). That is what I have him pegged at. Am I so wrong with my perceived estimation of his ceiling? I must be. There is no way that a team should be lining up to offer a guy with his ceiling (especially offensive ceiling) top 4 money this early in his career for this long without having some expectations that he will significantly out-perform that contract to off-set the risk that he doesn't Erixon or Rundblad himself.

I like Klefbom. I just must be horribly unaware at what his ceiling is. He must be a bona fide top pairing guy for the future putting up at least 40+ points for this contract to be deemed a bargain. 2nd pairing providing good 2-way play? Modest cap savings in the long run, but loads of risk signing him for 7 years.

[CroFlames]

Like most on this thread have already said, of course the potential exists that this turns into a great contract. Will it? I doubt so.

But that question in and of itself makes this a bad signing. They are signing hope, and not substance. That hope could turn into substance, but again, who knows. A non-overly physical young d-man with less that 80 games under his belt? Verrrry risky to sign him long term to big money. Petry was surely the safer choice.

Meanwhile, BT on the other hand has paid big money for big time, proven players. Is there ANY (reasonable) doubt that the Brodie, Hamilton & Gio deals will turn out to be bad deals for the Flames? Of course a guy could take a tail spin into oblivion (Redden, Wade), but all the signs point to big time players with fair deals for both player and club.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

I really don't agree with that signing.

There are 2 other Swedish defencemen that were much more heralded coming out of the Swedish elite league (and who have both done better in that league), and then also did better in the AHL as well. They both have many more games under their belt in the NHL and have put up more points. Who are they? Our friend Tim Erixon is one, and the other is David Rundblad. Now, I get that Klefbom is on an 'upswing' in career trajectory, and those guys have flat-lined (if not fully regressed), but that is essentially the point I am making. Those were 2 "absolutely guaranteed future valuable top 4 defencemen". More importantly, they both were very good 2-way prospects capable of putting up points. They have outscored Klefbom at every level (which as we know, defencemen get paid the big bucks by how offensive they are).

If you take a quick look around the NHL, what do 2nd pairing defenders make? About as much as the contract he just signed, no? Give or take half a million or a million? Does he have an offensive ceiling to his game that I am unaware of that will make him command 5+ million a season?

Dougie Hamilton just signed for what? 1 million more? 1.5 million more? Now I get that 1-1.5 million dollar in savings is substantial in the grand scheme of things, but there is no guarantee that Klefbom ever becomes as good as Hamilton is already, and I am pretty sure that most hockey fans would agree that Hamilton has much more room to grow as a player.

In what world does a team offer pretty much 'fair market value' to a top 4 defencemen for 7 years after less than a full season's worth of games? Klefbom would be an ideal bridge-contract candidate. He doesn't have that high ceiling. He may be the 2nd best up and coming defencemen in Edmonton's pool, but what is his ceiling really? I don't think he is a top-pairing defencemen. Solid top 4 with average offensive ability (in the 30's in point production, let's say). That is what I have him pegged at. Am I so wrong with my perceived estimation of his ceiling? I must be. There is no way that a team should be lining up to offer a guy with his ceiling (especially offensive ceiling) top 4 money this early in his career for this long without having some expectations that he will significantly out-perform that contract to off-set the risk that he doesn't Erixon or Rundblad himself.

I like Klefbom. I just must be horribly unaware at what his ceiling is. He must be a bona fide top pairing guy for the future putting up at least 40+ points for this contract to be deemed a bargain. 2nd pairing providing good 2-way play? Modest cap savings in the long run, but loads of risk signing him for 7 years.

Sums up my opinion on this signing brilliantly.

[ricardodw]

History repeating itself in Edmonton

They locked up Tom Gilbert for 6 years @ 4M. After 94 NHL games.

They traded him for overpaid (3.5M) 30 year old journeyman Nick Schultz. Minnesota bought Gilbert out with a compliance buyout.

The Oilers just make bad deals with D-men.

Smid is getting paid 3.5M as the Flames #6/7 at the end of his 4 year deal signed with the oilers. Dumping Smid on the Flames was the high water mark for handling D-men contracts in the Lowe era.

On the other hand the Oilers lost Petry for a 2nd round pick....by using bridge contracts. (He was stuck in Edmonton for only 3 years after ELC). They did not get 1 UFA game out of him.

[Robbob]

I think the equivalent would be us signing Bouma or Ferland to this sort of deal. Both signed short prove me deals as paying for potential gets you in cap trouble quickly. This is essentially a lotto ticket for the oilers with them hoping it works out. If there is one franchise (and fanbase based on the 50/50 $ for their games)that loves and believes in lottery it is that one. It looks like it is part of their organizational plan.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Robbob

I think the equivalent would be us signing Bouma or Ferland to this sort of deal. Both signed short prove me deals as paying for potential gets you in cap trouble quickly. This is essentially a lotto ticket for the oilers with them hoping it works out. If there is one franchise (and fanbase based on the 50/50 $ for their games)that loves and believes in lottery it is that one. It looks like it is part of their organizational plan.

That's not a very good equivalent as neither have the same ceiling nor important role. I'm not sure the a Klefbom deal will make sense, but those are not good comparison's. The Gilbert one from the Oilers years ago is apt I think

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Robbob

I think the equivalent would be us signing Bouma or Ferland to this sort of deal. Both signed short prove me deals as paying for potential gets you in cap trouble quickly. This is essentially a lotto ticket for the oilers with them hoping it works out. If there is one franchise (and fanbase based on the 50/50 $ for their games)that loves and believes in lottery it is that one. It looks like it is part of their organizational plan.

Thats more apt.

Its like if we thought we had a 30-50 point per year guy in Ferland and locked him in to a 7 year deal, people would think we were crazy.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Robbob

I think the equivalent would be us signing Bouma or Ferland to this sort of deal. Both signed short prove me deals as paying for potential gets you in cap trouble quickly. This is essentially a lotto ticket for the oilers with them hoping it works out. If there is one franchise (and fanbase based on the 50/50 $ for their games)that loves and believes in lottery it is that one. It looks like it is part of their organizational plan.

The equivalent is if the Flames had signed Brodie to a 7 year contract after 2012/2013.

A young guy that looked promising and had played about a season's worth of games, but with an uncertain future.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Robbob

I think the equivalent would be us signing Bouma or Ferland to this sort of deal. Both signed short prove me deals as paying for potential gets you in cap trouble quickly. This is essentially a lotto ticket for the oilers with them hoping it works out. If there is one franchise (and fanbase based on the 50/50 $ for their games)that loves and believes in lottery it is that one. It looks like it is part of their organizational plan.

Nah, the equivalent is if we signed Monahan to 4M/7Y after his good, but not amazing rookie season, knowing full well that he might not pan out.

[Hugh Jahrmes]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Nah, the equivalent is if we signed Monahan to 4M/7Y after his good, but not amazing rookie season, knowing full well that he might not pan out.

Good god .. I wish

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

That's not a very good equivalent as neither have the same ceiling nor important role. I'm not sure the a Klefbom deal will make sense, but those are not good comparison's. The Gilbert one from the Oilers years ago is apt I think

I think both Bouma and Ferland have second line ceilings (heck Bouma has already hit that mark), which is basically what they say Klefbom will be when they call him a top 4 guy. And both Bouma and Ferland have 4th line (or lower) basements and could easily not pan out.

I think it's as if Sven had played 50 games and gotten 15 goals, and Feaster had signed him to a 7 year contract.

[Erick Estrada]

Well it finally appears a bold move came out of Edmonton. It really doesn't get much bolder than this as it's the longest contract I've ever seen for an unproven player. I imagine he's got enough skills to at least be a player for the majority of the deal but there is some risk involved as that team is going to get very expensive fast so ideally you would like to ensure you know what you have prior to diverting valuable cap money long term. I expect RNH, Eberle, and Hall are all going to seek more money than their 6x6 deals and they will have to break the bank for McDavid. It really doesn't take long to get to the cap ceiling when you accumulate talent.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

The equivalent is if the Flames had signed Brodie to a 7 year contract after 2012/2013.

A young guy that looked promising and had played about a season's worth of games, but with an uncertain future.

I think that is a pretty good comparison from a contracts perspective. While in retrospect, the hypothetical Brodie 7 year contract might look great, it would have been dumb to sign him to that in 2012.

It isn't just about the results, but the process. The process of granting 7 year deals on a season's worth of work is horribly wrong, and wonderfully oilery.

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

The equivalent is if the Flames had signed Brodie to a 7 year contract after 2012/2013.

A young guy that looked promising and had played about a season's worth of games, but with an uncertain future.

You mean you are wishfully hoping that is the equivalent because the end result is known. Like I said the contract is a hailmary or lottery ticket.

Only time will tell.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

I think that is a pretty good comparison from a contracts perspective. While in retrospect, the hypothetical Brodie 7 year contract might look great, it would have been dumb to sign him to that in 2012.

It isn't just about the results, but the process. The process of granting 7 year deals on a season's worth of work is horribly wrong, and wonderfully oilery.

As I showed earlier in the thread, Brodie's 2-year bridge deal, plus his 5-year extension, were still cheaper than this deal for Klefbom, despite significantly less risk, plus Brodie actually becoming a top pairing defender before getting extended.

Brodie's deals: 2 x 2.125 + 5 x 4.65 = 7 x 3.93 ($27.5M)

Klefbom: 7 x $4.167 ($29.17M)

Despite doing the intelligent thing and giving Brodie a bridge deal, and despite Brodie becoming a top player, the Flames will still pay him less for the 7 years than Edmonton will pay Klefbom. And of course, at this point, we have no idea what Klefbom will become.

[Izzle]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

As I showed earlier in the thread, Brodie's 2-year bridge deal, plus his 5-year extension, were still cheaper than this deal for Klefbom, despite significantly less risk, plus Brodie actually becoming a top pairing defender before getting extended.

Brodie's deals: 2 x 2.125 + 5 x 4.65 = 7 x 3.93 ($27.5M)

Klefbom: 7 x $4.167 ($29.17M)

Despite doing the intelligent thing and giving Brodie a bridge deal, and despite Brodie becoming a top player, the Flames will still pay him less for the 7 years than Edmonton will pay Klefbom. And of course, at this point, we have no idea what Klefbom will become.

Do you know what the impact is as a % of the Salary Cap between those two deals?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Izzle

Do you know what the impact is as a % of the Salary Cap between those two deals?

Yes

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Izzle

Do you know what the impact is as a % of the Salary Cap between those two deals?

You appear to have missed the point. Calgary's signing was (a) yes, marginally cheaper but (b) way more important - not a risk, because of Brodie's history, proven over his bridge contract. So Calgary got a cheaper deal without rolling the dice.