[Rumour] UPD: Friedman: Thinks a deal will get done between Gaudreau and the Flames in the next week

[polak]

To those people who are so fine with losing Gaudreau, do you realize it's been 20 years since the Flames developed a player of his calibre? You just want to say screw it cause he has no rights and he can leave if he doesn't like it?

You're willing to set the franchise that far back to save a million a year in cap space?

[topfiverecords]

I can't stand when a negotiation eats into camp. The rest of the team is preparing for the season, building relationships with the new coaches & players, and learning/practising a new system.

I don't agree with the comments that Johnny is so good he doesn't need to know the new systems. It's not just about JG getting used to a new linemate...it's about the new RW getting a chance to get used to both of his new linemates. Whoever is going to be playing on that top line would/could/should perform better early in the season with some consistent practice time with both Monahan & Gaudreau.

What else does Gaudreau sitting out do to the rest of the team? They don't know the inner workings of the contract negotiation either, but you can be sure the other players have assumptions and opinions just like everyone here.

[nik-]

polak stop being hyperbolic. This isn't the Iginla era Flames. There are other talented players to pay.

[polak]

Originally Posted by nik-

polak stop being hyperbolic. This isn't the Iginla era Flames. There are other talented players to pay.

No there really aren't. There are other POTENTIALLY talented players to pay but they haven't got there and they haven't even show that they're a good bet to get there. Regardless of the Bennett hype, you don't ruin your relationship with a star player on the potential of a 19 year old who scored 40 points.

[nik-]

Because Gaudreau is immune from a slide?

If a relationship is "ruined" because the Flames want to pay him close to 7 million a year, then the relationship was doomed anyway.

[polak]

Originally Posted by nik-

Because Gaudreau is immune from a slide?

Then don't go for term.

[nik-]

Well he'll probably end up getting bridged anyway, so term won't be an issue.

[polak]

Originally Posted by nik-

Because Gaudreau is immune from a slide?

If a relationship is "ruined" because the Flames want to pay him close to 7 million a year, then the relationship was doomed anyway.

Your relationship with him can be ruined if you refuse to budge from your number because the player has no rights.

[CalgaryFan1988]

Originally Posted by polak

No there really aren't. There are other POTENTIALLY talented players to pay but they haven't got there and they haven't even show that they're a good bet to get there. Regardless of the Bennett hype, you don't ruin your relationship with a star player on the potential of a 19 year old who scored 40 points.

If the relationship gets "ruined" as you put it, it's not solely on the Flames. There are two sides to every negotiation. Good managers think ahead, you can't just pay players what they want so you don't hurt their feelings.

You speak of hype and potential in regards to other players, but you want to pay Gaudreau on hype and potential.

[TheoFleury]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Yeah I misread that. I think there's enough talent on the roster for this team to be competitive without Johnny providing they get better than average goaltending. Time will tell.

Take Gaudreau out of the lineup and I think this team struggles to score at a 200 goal pace. Unless you think Elliott/Johnson/Gulutzan can reduce the GAA by about one goal per game, they are going to struggle to win games IMO. The Flames would have one of the worst groups of forwards in the league if you take out Gaudreau and replace him with a Shinkaruk or a Poirier.

Shinkaruk-Monahan-Frolik
Tkachuk-Bennett-Brouwer
Ferland-Backlund-Chaisson
Bouma-Stajan-Vey

Bollig, Hamilton

Yeah.... That's pretty crappy no matter how you organize the names

[bigrangy]

I have done some math in order to come up with what I believe to be the right numbers.

For year one of the contract, he has no rights and really has no ability to ask for more than his QO. Let's say that year is worth 3 million, just because we're negotiating in good faith.

For years two through 5, he's an RFA with full rights. Let's say he's the best player in the league, so he deserves to have the highest paid RFA years. Nobody has ever gotten 6 million/year on a bridge, so let's go for that.

Years 6, 7, and 8, he's still the best player in the league. UFA years, so let's go straight to 11 million, which would be the highest AAV in the league.

So, you get 3+6+6+6+6+11+11+11=60 million over 8 years, or 49 million over 7 years.

So this comes out to 7.5x8 or 7x7. It's not that Johnny isn't worth 8 million, it's that his contract situation simply works against him, with one year of no rights, and the extra RFA year versus most long term 2nd contracts. Treliving better stick to his guns, but if 8 million is the magic number for 8 years then so be it. Hopefully it will inflate the contracts of players on other teams.

[TheoFleury]

Originally Posted by nik-

Well he'll probably end up getting bridged anyway, so term won't be an issue.

It will be a big problem when the bridge expires. Somehow I doubt anyone is going to be on management's side at that point. It will be viewed as a Subban-esque blunder unless Gaudreau regresses.

[OmegaV4]

Looking at this from an outsider, it must be really nice to be talking about MILLIONS of dollars to get paid for work.

...wish I was worth anything over a million bucks.

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by polak

To those people who are so fine with losing Gaudreau, do you realize it's been 20 years since the Flames developed a player of his calibre? You just want to say screw it cause he has no rights and he can leave if he doesn't like it?

You're willing to set the franchise that far back to save a million a year in cap space?

When was the last time LA had a defenseman like Doughty. They went ahead and won two Stanley Cups with him. And they built themselves a competitor for many years and years to come with him.

If Johnny sits out the whole month of October, that's 11 games or 13% of a season. But that's only 1.5% of 8 seasons, which is the kind of term the Flames are pursuing. In the whole scheme of things, they need to play their hand, which is one with leverage

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by CalgaryFan1988

If the relationship gets "ruined" as you put it, it's not solely on the Flames. There are two sides to every negotiation. Good managers think ahead, you can't just pay players what they want so you don't hurt their feelings.

You speak of hype and potential in regards to other players, but you want to pay Gaudreau on hype and potential.

Hype and potential? Honestly both sides are being hyperbolic with one guy even comparing Cheechoo's lucky seasons with Gaudreau.

It isn't hype anymore for Johnny Gaudreau, he's the real deal and has proved it on every stage he's been on so far. He's one of the best players in the game.

Argue the contract and what's fair but to suggest he's still hype and potential is wrong. He already proved the naysayers wrong and plays the type of game where he will get his points. Don't see why anyone is arguing his game, we all know he is a great player. That's not the issue even though some wanna compare him to fluky seasons of Cheechoo where he was playing with one of the best passers of all time.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by TheoFleury

It will be a big problem when the bridge expires. Somehow I doubt anyone is going to be on management's side at that point. It will be viewed as a Subban-esque blunder unless Gaudreau regresses.

Only if Management only offered a bridge, which it's pretty clear they haven't. Bridging because you can't agree on a long term deal and only offering a bridge are pretty different things.

[polak]

Originally Posted by CalgaryFan1988

If the relationship gets "ruined" as you put it, it's not solely on the Flames. There are two sides to every negotiation. Good managers think ahead, you can't just pay players what they want so you don't hurt their feelings.

You speak of hype and potential in regards to other players, but you want to pay Gaudreau on hype and potential.

I was only referring to the people saying "Gaudreau has no rights, Treliving should stick to his guns". If the Flames are willing to move and Johnny isn't then yes, it's on him.

Johnny has shown more than Bennett or Tkachuk and not only that, he's shown he is a driver not a passenger. Way less chance that he slides cause of that.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by polak

To those people who are so fine with losing Gaudreau, do you realize it's been 20 years since the Flames developed a player of his calibre? You just want to say screw it cause he has no rights and he can leave if he doesn't like it?

You're willing to set the franchise that far back to save a million a year in cap space?

Stop being so scared baby.

[kermitology]

Hey Gaudreauvertime, have you ever been in a negotiation? I think you're ruling everyone up here because of the way you're painting the Flames INITIAL offer.

In any negotiation you don't just come out and offer the only amount you're willing to sign him to. You start lower than you expect so you have room to move.

It's not insulting, stop saying it is.

We also have to keep in mind that paying a player in Gaudreau's situation so highly would, in all honesty, be viewed negatively across the league. It's akin to the offer sheet insanity that Lowe had with Vanek and Penner. You completely throw the market askew when you sign a deal that doesn't make sense in the scenario. I'd argue that one of the reasons the Oilers are where they are is because of their actions and the impact those deals had across the league.

This is not a simple negotiation.

[Gaudreauvertime]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

When was the last time LA had a defenseman like Doughty. They went ahead and won two Stanley Cups with him. And they built themselves a competitor for many years and years to come with him.

If Johnny sits out the whole month of October, that's 11 games or 13% of a season. But that's only 1.5% of 8 seasons, which is the kind of term the Flames are pursuing. In the whole scheme of things, they need to play their hand, which is one with leverage

Him missing 11 games could mean the difference between playoffs and no playoffs. If they go 5-6 in those first 11 games without him, but could have gone maybe 7-4 with him, thats a 4 point difference, which is HUGE when it comes to bubble teams.

Doughty's 2nd contract was an 8 year 7M deal back in 2011. That's the equivalent of like 8.1M today.