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

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by GGG

How do you get there in terms of value. His RFA years are worth 6 million per or so. Then add 10mil per for UFA years and you get 7.14 for 7 years and 7.5 for 8 years. How do people get above 7.5 million for the contract.

Is a PPG player worth 6 million? Let's be honest now, it's worth more. Unfortunately it seems that the RFA status is clouding peoples judgements, and ultimately doing a similar mistake that the Canadians did with Subban.

Gaudreau is worth more than 6 million at the moment as a PPG regardless of if people want to argue his road productivity. We certainly are not getting Gaudreau on a bridge at 6 million.

Gaudreau's direct comparable is Tarasenko, which put's Gaudreau's negotiations at 7.5 million just to start at minimum. It is hard to argue that Tarasenko is a much better player, when Gaudreau got more points last year and is a year younger. At the very worst, they are comparable.

I also find it odd that when Tarasenko got signed, people here thought it was a steal and hoping for Monahan / Gaudreau to get something similar. And this was before Gaudreau had anywhere close to 78 points. Some were even saying to get Monahan signed to a similar deal at 7.5 million AAV.

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthr...arasenko+signs

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

That's a steal of a deal for the Blues.

Originally Posted by Canada 02

I'd expect similar for Monahan and Gaudreau next summer

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

Good AAV for a player like Tarasenko. As always, 8 years is a long time to invest in any player, even if they are as good as Tarasenko. Anything past 5 years is a gamble IMO.

Let's not kid ourselves. If Gaudreau was signed to 8 year 7.5 million AAV today people here would be ecstatic.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Firebot

Let's not kid ourselves. If Gaudreau was signed to 8 year 7.5 million AAV today people here would be ecstatic.

He had only 4 RFA years, so adjust those rates to 5 RFA years and it comes in at 7.125M and yes I'd be happy with that.

[Manhattanboy]

Will be seeing one of the owners today. Maybe can get a little OTR intel....

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by Bingo

He had only 4 RFA years, so adjust those rates to 5 RFA years and it comes in at 7.125M and yes I'd be happy with that.

I still maintain that valuing RFA years to an arbitrary low number just because, is silly.

He is not worth 6 million dollars right now. I have no idea why people keep using that amount. It makes the argument fall flat.

[Groot]

Since a lot of people make the Tarasenko comparable (which is the closest without a doubt), and there's this talk about RFA vs UFA years, here's what Tarasenko is making each year of his 60 million contract.

2015-16 $8,000,000 RFA
2016-17 $8,000,000 RFA
2017-18 $7,000,000 RFA
2018-19 $7,000,000 RFA
2019-20 $9,500,000 UFA
2020-21 $5,500,000 UFA
2021-22 $9,500,000 UFA
2022-23 $5,500,000 UFA

The only reason they kept it to a 7.5 million AAV was because he took a discount on two of his later UFA years, making them lowest in the contract. So if we followed the above and had Johnny making 8 for 2 RFA years, 7 for 3 RFA years, then 9.5, 5.5, 9.5 for his UFA years, that brings his total contract value to 61.5 million or an AAV of 7.6875. As Tarasenko had two discount years, drop one of Gaudreau's RFA years to the same 5.5 Tarasenko is taking in his UFA years, and it brings his contract to the same 60 million, 7.5 AAV. Even though I initially voted lower, I can't see it being below 7.5 looking at how Tarasenko's RFA and UFA years break down.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

Will be seeing one of the owners today. Maybe can get a little OTR intel....

Please don't tell them about this thread.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Groot

Since a lot of people make the Tarasenko comparable (which is the closest without a doubt), and there's this talk about RFA vs UFA years, here's what Tarasenko is making each year of his 60 million contract.

2015-16 $8,000,000 RFA
2016-17 $8,000,000 RFA
2017-18 $7,000,000 RFA
2018-19 $7,000,000 RFA
2019-20 $9,500,000 UFA
2020-21 $5,500,000 UFA
2021-22 $9,500,000 UFA
2022-23 $5,500,000 UFA

The only reason they kept it to a 7.5 million AAV was because he took a discount on two of his later UFA years, making them lowest in the contract. So if we followed the above and had Johnny making 8 for 2 RFA years, 7 for 3 RFA years, then 9.5, 5.5, 9.5 for his UFA years, that brings his total contract value to 61.5 million or an AAV of 7.6875. As Tarasenko had two discount years, drop one of Gaudreau's RFA years to the same 5.5 Tarasenko is taking in his UFA years, and it brings his contract to the same 60 million, 7.5 AAV. Even though I initially voted lower, I can't see it being below 7.5 looking at how Tarasenko's RFA and UFA years break down.

Is the breakdown of the contract at all relevant to the discussion though? I get what you are trying to do, but looking at it year by year and trying to disiminate what each year is actually worth is a fools game. It doesn't matter. All that matters is the Total amount paid divided by the years.

Other than that, you can assume the player will want to get paid as much money as possible in the front end of the contract, and the team would prefer to defer as much money as possible to the back end of the deal. But to try and look at each year and use the actual pay outs in the year and attempt to assign value to them is completely irrelevant.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Firebot

Let's not kid ourselves. If Gaudreau was signed to 8 year 7.5 million AAV today people here would be ecstatic.

You're speaking on behalf of the collective now?

Locutus, is that you?

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Firebot

I still maintain that valuing RFA years to an arbitrary low number just because, is silly.

He is not worth 6 million dollars right now. I have no idea why people keep using that amount. It makes the argument fall flat.

I think a few more "in my opinion"s or "I think"s would help a bit here.

I don't see the argument falling flat or becoming silly to use RFA years as a relevant factor in the discussion.

"player controlled years" is an issue in all pro spots. Less options means less power in the negotiation. Huge factor.

Nobody is upset when a UFA signs for what he wants, the teams have to hold the line on the player controlled seasons.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Firebot

I still maintain that valuing RFA years to an arbitrary low number just because, is silly.

He is not worth 6 million dollars right now. I have no idea why people keep using that amount. It makes the argument fall flat.

There's nothing silly about it. RFA years are worth less than UFA years. Those are the economics of the situation, whether you accept them or not.

[saillias]

Oh Enoch. Do you ever not take the pro-establishment side of an argument

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by saillias

Oh Enoch. Do you ever not take the pro-establishment side of an argument

Would you care to try and refute my point, or is attempting to label me all you've got?

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

He better get used to it. The best players in the league all face the toughest opposition, shift after shift, game after game, year after year. As long as Gaudreau is the top forward on the team (and he's asking to be paid like it), the game plan of every team the Flames face is goint to be to shut him down.

Hasn't this been the case for the better part of two years aready? It's not like opposing teams are worrying about Matt Stajan and Brandon Bollig. Even with Guadreau in the lineup the Flames don't really have a legitimate top 6 yet to spread coverage around.

[saillias]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Would you care to try and refute my point, or is attempting to label me all you've got?

no not at all, that would be boring. just a drive by comment on your posting tendency. meant it light-heartedly

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

Hasn't this been the case for the better part of two years aready? It's not like opposing teams are worrying about Matt Stajan and Brandon Bollig. Even with Guadreau in the lineup the Flames don't really have a legitimate top 6 yet to spread coverage around.

It's happening soon though. Tkatchuk and Bennett are legit top 6 prospects. That's 4 out of 6 spots filled and IMO, the top 6 need not have traditional "top 6" players on both wings as long as you have a top 6 C and one top 6 W.

[GioforPM]

Tarasenko is a comparable, but his contract is arguably not a good example to use. Maybe it was just poorly negotiated.

[jaikorven]

I think the two things that matter the most when we compare the two players are:

1. RFA years are cheaper than UFA years...no debate.
2. Gaudreau has 5 RFA years compared to the 4 for Tarasenko.

Bingo hit the nail on the head.

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I think a few more "in my opinion"s or "I think"s would help a bit here.

I don't see the argument falling flat or becoming silly to use RFA years as a relevant factor in the discussion.

"player controlled years" is an issue in all pro spots. Less options means less power in the negotiation. Huge factor.

Nobody is upset when a UFA signs for what he wants, the teams have to hold the line on the player controlled seasons.

Why choose 6 million though for a RFA year? Where does that number come from? Yes UFA would be worth more than a RFA year, but the problem is the valuation of those RFA years and the exceedingly high discrepancy.

6 million a year for a PPG player as a RFA versus 10 million a year for a PPG UFA? I just don't see it it being such a large discrepancy.

I would say its more 7 million as a RFA + 9 million for UFA. 5 RFA years of 7 million + 3 UFA years of 9 million = 7.75 million a year average (which is what I predict he will sign for in the end as a middle ground).

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by saillias

Oh Enoch. Do you ever not take the pro-establishment side of an argument

This is a little different than class warfare, or the little man sticking it to corporate america. It isn't who's more important to the fan the player or the team.

It's none of those things.

A salary cap removes the establishment vs the talent argument. It's managing assets, and doing your best to ice a team that can win it all.

A budget team would be slightly different because maybe they're making cash but won't spend to the cap.

Not a problem in Calgary.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Firebot

Why choose 6 million though for a RFA year? Where does that number come from? Yes UFA would be worth more than a RFA year, but the problem is the valuation of those RFA years and the exceedingly high discrepancy.

6 million a year for a PPG player as a RFA versus 10 million a year for a PPG UFA? I just don't see it it being such a large discrepancy.

I would say its more 7 million as a RFA + 9 million for UFA. 5 RFA years of 7 million + 3 UFA years of 9 million = 7.75 million a year average (which is what I predict he will sign for in the end as a middle ground).

I don't have 6 million as fact, for sure.

But when you take a stab at some of these recent contracts the numbers certainly work when you see where the AAV came in in the end.

Tarasenko at 6 for 4 and 9 for 4 equals his 7.5 but you can certainly bounce around any numbers. If you don't like 6 and want it to be 7 you can do that, but then the UFA years wouldn't be much over the RFA numbers which I don't believe to be the case.

Like 7 for 4 and 8 for 4 would do it, but is that likely?

Your numbers of 7x4 and 9x4 is 8m for Tarasenko and too high.