Friedman: Gaudreau negotiations will be put on hold during World Cup

[HerbalMagic]

Did you hear the sky is falling?

[Finger Cookin]

Originally Posted by HerbalMagic

Did you hear the sky is falling?

[FBI]

Was it Johnny or Mony that had the dbag agent?

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Both?

[activeStick]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Giordano could be argued above fair market.
Monahan for sure is fair market.
Hamilton was reportedly offered more from Boston, so I think under fair-market (but with reasons) for him.

But Brodie? The dude is about 5M underpaid for what he's bringing to the table.

Wait... Green text? You don't really believe Brodie should be paid 9M+ do you?

On topic, has there ever been public commentary from Treliving about this Giordano cap? Or is this just something borne from the Iginla cap that I believe Sutter actually said to the public?

I think Johnny's agent came into the negotiations with a high AAV of 7+ for a relatively short term and the Flames are arguing that if Johnny wants that high a number, it'll have to be max term. I see them finding middle ground somewhere around a 7M number for slightly less than max term, putting Johnny above Giordano's contract.

[Corral]

Originally Posted by Cole436

Not going to happen. Gaudreau has literally no leverage here. If he ever wants to play NHL hockey again, he is at the mercy of the Flames. There's no offer sheet to play with, or fear or UFA. If he doesn't sign a deal that works for the Flames, unless he wants to play in Europe for the next 5 years, he just won't play hockey.

Exactly this.

And some of you are obviously too young to remember this franchise has no problem stonewalling its best players when it comes to $$$ and leverage.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Cole436

Not going to happen. Gaudreau has literally no leverage here. If he ever wants to play NHL hockey again, he is at the mercy of the Flames. There's no offer sheet to play with, or fear or UFA. If he doesn't sign a deal that works for the Flames, unless he wants to play in Europe for the next 5 years, he just won't play hockey.

It's not leverage if Gaudreau knows they're bluffing. They won't last five weeks much less five years. By then the team would probably have five wins and the season would be just as dead as Treliving's future with the Flames.

[Vinny01]

If Gaudreau signs for the Gio cap then we won't get more than 6 years which is a mistake in my opinion. Flames need to get 8 years on this contract. Give him Tarasenko money and get it done

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Cole436

Not going to happen. Gaudreau has literally no leverage here. If he ever wants to play NHL hockey again, he is at the mercy of the Flames. There's no offer sheet to play with, or fear or UFA. If he doesn't sign a deal that works for the Flames, unless he wants to play in Europe for the next 5 years, he just won't play hockey.

Not much logic here. Gaudreau has a ton of leverage. When has a similar situation ever worked out well for a team? He's their best player, it does the flames no good to get into a prolonged contract dispute/negotiation with him. They are a worse team with out him in the line up. Full stop. He's a huge draw here in Calgary and elsewhere. He sells tickets & merchandise. He is an asset. The flames had better get him signed to a long term contract, or deal him before the season starts. They would get a enormous package for him. He is one of the most skilled players in the league. There is almost no one else in the league like him. Closest comparable would have to be Kane, or maybe datsyuk (even though he's gone).

He was a top 10 scorer in the league in his second season. It's likely he will be a top five scorer for the next decade plus/minus a few years on either side. He makes players around him better & might be the most skilled player the flames have ever had in their line up.

If I'm Jonny and his agent, I'm not even answering the phone if the conversation starts with anything less than 8 for 7 years. If the flames want 8 years, the price goes up.

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by FBI

Was it Johnny or Mony that had the dbag agent?

Monahan.

Gaudreau has the same agent that Conroy had. I haven't heard him being difficult to work with.

[IgiTang]

Agreed on the 8 years. If there is no 8 years then I sure the hell hope there is a very limited NTC w/ NMC obviously.

If it's 7 years or less at any price, I sure hope Johnny has to give a list of teams every year or atleast in the last couple years.

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by Cole436

Not going to happen. Gaudreau has literally no leverage here. If he ever wants to play NHL hockey again, he is at the mercy of the Flames. There's no offer sheet to play with, or fear or UFA. If he doesn't sign a deal that works for the Flames, unless he wants to play in Europe for the next 5 years, he just won't play hockey.

1) I don't think you know what the word literally means.
2) He does have leverage. How much is debatable.

[fuffalo]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

1) I don't think you know what the word literally means.
2) He does have leverage. How much is debatable.

The word literally is often used for emphasis and not necessarily a literal meaning. It is used so often in this way that the major dictionaries now include this definition. So it's perfectly OK for people to use it in this manner.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by fuffalo

The word literally is often used for emphasis and not necessarily a literal meaning. It is used so often in this way that the major dictionaries now include this definition. So it's perfectly OK for people to use it in this manner.

No it's not, regardless of what the dictionaries say about it.

[polak]

Originally Posted by SebC

No it's not, regardless of what the dictionaries say about it.

Why does the use of the word literally throw people in to a rage. Its literally evolved to have two meanings.

[Iniggywetrust]

The Internet isn't complete without an argument about the literal meaning of literally.

[fuffalo]

Originally Posted by SebC

No it's not, regardless of what the dictionaries say about it.

I understand your point, unfortunately this is a battle that has already been lost. The word has been used in this manner so much that people understand when someone says literally they are sometimes using it for emphasis.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by fuffalo

The word literally is often used for emphasis and not necessarily a literal meaning. It is used so often in this way that the major dictionaries now include this definition. So it's perfectly OK for people to use it in this manner.

And theirs nothing wrong with that at all.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

If Gaudreau signs for the Gio cap then we won't get more than 6 years which is a mistake in my opinion. Flames need to get 8 years on this contract. Give him Tarasenko money and get it done

I don't take the Gio team cap as a hard and fast rule. It's more of a nod to Mark as the captain and at the time the best player. Having said that, I think a Gaudreau contract at Mark's $6.75M for 6 or 7 years would be fair.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by SebC

No it's not, regardless of what the dictionaries say about it.

Did you mean irregardless?