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

[nik-]

Originally Posted by polak

A lot more proven than Sam Bennett. Who posters are saying we should worry about signing more than Gaudreau. Which is wrong.



Cause I think we should make sure we sign Gaudreau and keep him happy with a 7-7.5 million dollar deal? and that I think it's a bad idea to tell your star player to sit and pound sand because "he has no rights" and can suck it up or take some lowball Gio Cap number?

K

Because you think anyone is telling him to sit and pound sand.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by polak

A lot more proven than Sam Bennett. Who posters are saying we should worry about signing more than Gaudreau. Which is wrong.

Well there's a vast and measurable difference between saying "Gaudreau is more proven than Bennett" and "Gaudreau is a proven star."

One thing is true. The other thing is a polakism.

nik is right, you're basically just a lazier gaudreauvertime at this point.

[flylock shox]

I always wonder how much marketing figures into these negotiations. You can bat stats back and forth all day, but ultimately a hockey business needs to put butts in seats. The Flames have a bunch of great (or potentially great) players in Monahan, Bennet, Tkachuk, Brodie, Giordano, etc., but Gaudreau is the only player who - if he was traded away - I'd still tune in to watch. Anyone who's watched the Flames the last 2 seasons knows that some games he's worth the price of admission on his own (and in other, crummier games, he's the only good reason to have tuned in).

Leaving numbers and team success aside for a moment, he's a very difficult player to replace in terms of entertainment value.

I'm not too worried about the whole thing - so long as he's still a Flame for the next few years I'll be happy, even if he's a touch more expensive. The team would be significantly less entertaining to watch without him, which is really what's important to me.

[nik-]

The team just dealt with losing Iginla pretty easily attendance wise, I'm pretty sure they'd be able to handle Gaudreau. There are lots of great young players on the Flames.

[polak]

Originally Posted by nik-

Because you think anyone is telling him to sit and pound sand.

I have no idea what is actually being said in the negotiations. I'm talking to the posters who have said such statements on here and there have been plenty of people that think Treliving needs to stick to his guns and sign him for under 7 cause he has no leverage.

[CroFlames]

Polak to you 6.75M is a lowball number. I do not think it is.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by nik-

The team just dealt with losing Iginla pretty easily attendance wise, I'm pretty sure they'd be able to handle Gaudreau. There are lots of great young players on the Flames.

Lol

Yeah we had an easy time letting a 35 year old Iginla go to rebuild. The fans will be extremely pissed losing a 23 year old Gaudreau. Depending how it went down I would consider cancelling my season tickets in protest

[nik-]

Originally Posted by polak

I have no idea what is actually being said in the negotiations. I'm talking to the posters who have said such statements on here and there have been plenty of people that think Treliving needs to stick to his guns and sign him for under 7 cause he has no leverage.

You have no idea so you're assuming that the Flames management is just being rampaging dicks?

Seems logical.

[getbak]

History has shown that the only thing that really sells tickets is a winning team on the ice.

[polak]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Well there's a vast and measurable difference between saying "Gaudreau is more proven than Bennett" and "Gaudreau is a proven star."

One thing is true. The other thing is a polakism.

nik is right, you're basically just a lazier gaudreauvertime at this point.

143 points in his first 160 games. Proven enough for me to want to sign him long term and worry about possibly having to fit Bennett and Tkachuk IF it ever becomes an issue...

Originally Posted by nik-

You have no idea so you're assuming that the Flames management is just being rampaging dicks?

Seems logical.

How the #### did you get that out my statement? That's the exact opposite of what I said. I'm not assuming the Flames are doing anything.

I'm literally just debating BS hypotheticals on here with the rest of you.

[nik-]

Thankfully you're not our management. You don't start cap planning when it's too late.

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by polak

143 points in his first 160 games. Proven enough for me to want to sign him long term and worry about possibly having to fit Bennett and Tkachuk IF it ever becomes an issue...

Well, when your interpretation of "holding steady at a reasonable deal" equates to "telling the kid to pound sand", that's going to be a problem.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Lol

Yeah we had an easy time letting a 35 year old Iginla go to rebuild. The fans will be extremely pissed losing a 23 year old Gaudreau. Depending how it went down I would consider cancelling my season tickets in protest

I agree, Gaudreau is a marketing dream for any team, the type of player that will put butts in seats.

Also if it does come down to having to trade him (I don't think its at that point yet), the Flames will almost certainly lose the deal.

Would be a very tough pill to swallow if Gaudreau isn't here for a long time.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by getbak

History has shown that the only thing that really sells tickets is a winning team on the ice.

Nah

- signed the Edmonton Oilers, 2007-present.

[Bingo]

At this point I'm just glad the Flames didn't run a "enter to win a chance to sit at the negotiating table to help sign Johnny Gaudreau this summer!"

Seems like many would just up the contract by a million dollars every time Gaudreau's agent furrowed his brow.

[Red Menace]

If Flames wanted to get him at less than 7.5, then they should have offered him something like that at the start of last season (maybe they did who knows), in any case, I think most neutral observers agree he is worth at least 7.5 or 8 million now.
Just get it done already.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by getbak

History has shown that the only thing that really sells tickets is a winning team on the ice.

You are right but I don't see any way the Flames win a Gaudreau trade in the short term with long term benefits. The team got the equivalent of a first overall pick in the 4th round.

As of today Gaudreau is the only legit top line winger on the team he makes his teammates better and is one of the most entertaining players in the league. The Flames need to work out a deal that keeps him here long term which I think they will. Any thing that results in a trade is a huge screw up by the organization and i know I personally would be pretty anti Trelivng/Burke if that is what happens

[nik-]

I, for one, welcome the fact that our management is trying to build a team now as opposed to selling jerseys of our star player. It's a pretty welcome change from the last era.

Gaudreau is going to make a lot of money, but it has to fit into the plan.

[Gaudreauvertime]

Originally Posted by Gaskal

Well, when your interpretation of "holding steady at a reasonable deal" equates to "telling the kid to pound sand", that's going to be a problem.

Several posters have literally said 'he can go pound sand'. I think that's where his comment stems.

[Strange Brew]

Forget the marketing angle. Who cares? The guy was 6th in league scoring in his second pro season. That is with bad road numbers and great home numbers. They net out to an incredible 2nd pro season. We want and need him as part of the team going forward or else the rebuild takes a step back.

I presume that Treliving still sees hope of signing a long term deal or we'd have a bridge deal done by now.