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

[JiriHrdina]

Not that where we are anywhere near a deal, but it is fun to talk about it.
I think Schenn+Provorov+1st could form the foundation of a deal.

[Toonage]

Not sure what in King's comments stand out as odd or dumb or whatever.

Can a large gap be closed in a matter of weeks? Yes. The league itself has done that with its players. A few times, actually.

Johnny's ask is respective of his stats last year? We know that. This isn't shocking. Every athlete's demands are based on prior performance.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Gaudreauvertime

Half of this list makes zero sense. There's a huge gap that is guaranteed to be closed in a week or two?

Sounds like the CalgaryNext plan.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

For a man who should be so smart, Ken King sure says a lot of dumb things.

What did he say that was dumb?

[CalgaryFan1988]

Originally Posted by Da_Chief

So Gaudreau is as common as the black color car on the lot?

My post was about Gaudreauvertime and his apparent bargaining skills.

Edit: I think Gaudreau is more of a Ferrari.


.

[Gaudreauvertime]

Originally Posted by Toonage

Not sure what in King's comments stand out as odd or dumb or whatever.

Can a large gap be closed in a matter of weeks? Yes. The league itself has done that with its players. A few times, actually.

Johnny's ask is respective of his stats last year? We know that. This isn't shocking. Every athlete's demands are based on prior performance.

I don't think anyone is disputing that it can be done. But to say it's almost definite when they are so far apart?

That stands out as odd.

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by Gaudreauvertime

I don't think anyone is disputing that it can be done. But to say it's almost definite when they are so far apart?

That stands out as odd.

Its talking at me again.

[Rhettzky]

I predict that he signs today and we're all like...

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Gaudreauvertime

I don't think anyone is disputing that it can be done. But to say it's almost definite when they are so far apart?

That stands out as odd.

What else would he say?
Expect Gaudreau to hold out and the Flames to entrench? That the real deadline is the December one, where if not signed he can't play the whole season?

These are talking points; nothing new to see here - just like every other post in the thread.

[burnitdown]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

Heard Ken King speaking today about Gaudreau situation. Summary:

• there is practically zero chance Johnny's deal is not going to get done in the next week or two;
• RFA status means that if he doesn't sign here, he is not playing anywhere else this season and Johnny does want to play here;
  
• Johnny was 3rd best player in NHL last season, statistically, which means the ask is respective of that;
• cannot overpay for even the best players on the team at the expense of not being able to pay market rates for other needed players;
• Confirmed that there is a sizeable gap between the ask and the offer;
• Confident that it would be resolved very soon.

Context in this situation would be critical but from the bolded comment, it sounds as though King is implying Johnny is asking for money that would pay him in the range of the 3rd highest paid player in the league (perhaps in total dollars of the contract)? If that's not what he's implying, he used some very poor wording...

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

For a man who should be so smart, Ken King sure says a lot of dumb things.

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

What did he say that was dumb?

Johnny was 3rd best player in NHL last season, statistically, which means the ask is respective of that;

If the Flames think that Johnny was the 3rd best player in the NHL last year:

1) Just pay him the league max. The max was designed for the top 3 in the league.

2) If the Flames secret stats have Johnny Gaudreau's 2015-16 performance as the 3rd best in the NHL it would go a long way to explain the Flames success over the last 10 years being in the Canes, Leafs area in the bottom 4 of the league.

3) If the Flames have the #3 best player how bad are his supporting players: Gio, Brodie, Hamilton, Frolik, Bennett, Monahan.

4) This sounds a lot like the executive oversight that green lighted the Brad Richards offer, the ROR offer and signing Bouwmeester.


The role that King has with the Flames seems to be one of owners representative. Imagine the blowback if Chipman (Jets faux owner) came out and said that Trouba was the best under 24 d-man in the NHL last year.

King is the constant that has been with the Flames for this last decade in the desert. Maybe the Flames need rebuild at the top..... the Oilers are pretty much Lowe-free

[PlayfulGenius]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

Yeah, no.

Elite players win championships. Elite players also get paid.

Simmons+Provovov+1st is also a trash return. Seriously under rating of Johnny and overrating of Simmons.

It's also disheartening to see Flames fans turn their backs on a young, elite forward over hypothetical contract terms.

So dramatic, good grief...It's not a personal assault on a player to suggest a trade scenario...that's 25% of a hockey board.

I'm high on Provorov, so I think this deal would have potential...though, he Flames would have to get lucky for it to work in their favour.

I think Schenn would need to be involved, instead of Simmonds.

[Gaudreauvertime]

Originally Posted by CalgaryFan1988

My post was about Gaudreauvertime and his apparent bargaining skills.

Edit: I think Gaudreau is more of a Ferrari.


.

The fact that you would compare bargaining for a car (a one and done purchase) vs negotiations with a star player (essentially a strategic business partner) tells me all I need to know about your negotiation skills/experience. Never mind that I have led paid seminars teaching fortune 500 executives how to negotiate.

When you negotiate with a strategic partner, you don't need to 'win' the negotiation to 'win' the partnership. You're not buying a car, low ball offers are not constructive, especially when you have said partner over a barrel. You want your partner to feel the terms of the deal are reflective of his value in the relationship and to feel motivated to continuing delivering value to the relationship. The last thing you want to do is short change him. That's the moment when relationships move from strategic to tactical, and even adversarial.

One of my favorite quotes is from John Ruskin - it's not completely relevant but it kind of fits. He was a big "pay for quality" advocate.

"It's unwise to pay too much, but it's worse to pay too little. When you pay too much, you lose a little money - that's all. When you pay too little, you sometimes lose everything, because the thing you bought was incapable of doing the thing it was bought to do. The common law of business balance prohibits paying a little and getting a lot - it can't be done. If you deal with the lowest bidder, it is well to add something for the risk you run, and if you do that you will have enough to pay for something better."

To be clear, I'm not advocating for overpayment. I'm advocating for paying him fair market value. Just because there are special circumstances that allow us to hold our strategic partner hostage, doesn't mean it's wise to exercise that power. $1M in cap space is hardly worth a disgruntled player.

Does that make sense? And can we please limit the personal attacks? This goes for me as well, though I have been trying to not retaliate to all the crap people are spewing about me because it fills the thread with garbage. It would be nice if those who felt the need to throw out personal attacks would make the same effort.

[Gaudreauvertime]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

What else would he say?
Expect Gaudreau to hold out and the Flames to entrench? That the real deadline is the December one, where if not signed he can't play the whole season?

These are talking points; nothing new to see here - just like every other post in the thread.

I don't know, maybe be a bit more honest? It's far from definite that he'll be signed in the next week or two if the gap is still the size of Keegan Kanzig.

[MacDaddy77]

Maybe this has been touched on but does anyone know if Gaudreau is in Calgary or not?

If he's here and skating somewhere waiting for a contract to be finalized that would give some indication he thinks its close and will get done. even though Philly is only 6-7 hrs flight away if he's still there and waiting it might be the opposite.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by MacDaddy77

Maybe this has been touched on but does anyone know if Gaudreau is in Calgary or not?

If he's here and skating somewhere waiting for a contract to be finalized that would give some indication he thinks its close and will get done. even though Philly is only 6-7 hrs flight away if he's still there and waiting it might be the opposite.

Gaudreau went back to Philadelphia after the World Cup.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Gaudreauvertime

I don't know, maybe be a bit more honest? It's far from definite that he'll be signed in the next week or two if the gap is still the size of Keegan Kanzig.

It's pretty presumptuous for you to assume that King is being dishonest. Maybe he knows something about the negotiation that you do not? That seems plausible.

[Sutter_in_law]

Originally Posted by Gaudreauvertime

The fact that you would compare bargaining for a car (a one and done purchase) vs negotiations with a star player (essentially a strategic business partner) tells me all I need to know about your negotiation skills/experience. Never mind that I have led paid seminars teaching fortune 500 executives how to negotiate.

When you negotiate with a strategic partner, you don't need to 'win' the negotiation to 'win' the partnership. You're not buying a car, low ball offers are not constructive, especially when you have said partner over a barrel. You want your partner to feel the terms of the deal are reflective of his value in the relationship and to feel motivated to continuing delivering value to the relationship. The last thing you want to do is short change him. That's the moment when relationships move from strategic to tactical, and even adversarial.

One of my favorite quotes is from John Ruskin - it's not completely relevant but it kind of fits. He was a big "pay for quality" advocate.

"It's unwise to pay too much, but it's worse to pay too little. When you pay too much, you lose a little money - that's all. When you pay too little, you sometimes lose everything, because the thing you bought was incapable of doing the thing it was bought to do. The common law of business balance prohibits paying a little and getting a lot - it can't be done. If you deal with the lowest bidder, it is well to add something for the risk you run, and if you do that you will have enough to pay for something better."

To be clear, I'm not advocating for overpayment. I'm advocating for paying him fair market value. Just because there are special circumstances that allow us to hold our strategic partner hostage, doesn't mean it's wise to exercise that power. $1M in cap space is hardly worth a disgruntled player.

Does that make sense? And can we please limit the personal attacks? This goes for me as well, though I have been trying to not retaliate to all the crap people are spewing about me because it fills the thread with garbage. It would be nice if those who felt the need to throw out personal attacks would make the same effort.

purely opinion. and my opinion couldnt be more opposite.
If johnny eventually signs a long term deal for $1M less then he originally wanted I doubt that he would be disgruntled, or he wouldn't sign at all.

and $1M dollars in cap space at the deadline gets you a player with a much higher salary than $1M - so when we are a true contender, it could mean the difference between a cup, or no cup. My opinion is that the savings would be worth it, and Johnny would hardly be disgruntled when he is raising the cup over his head

[442scotty]

I believe you should pay for quality and maybe some of the poor "pay for quality" deals are making the flames antsy. There are no guarantees in life but Johnny is a better risk than most.

Pay for quality Tre.... Don't cheap out and end up overpaying for garbage (we can provide a few examples I'm sure)

[Robbob]

I guess I am an optimist as I also think it will be done before the puck drops on the first game. I also try to take the middle of the road when reading comments or summaries as people may tend to interpret things differently.

The comment of the 3rd best player statistically I interpret that as 3rd best at the position. Sizable gap could also mean anything as 500k per year could be a sizable gap over the course of a 7 or 8 year contract.

What I take out of King's comments is that Calgary wants Gaudreau, Gaudreau wants to play in Calgary, and a deal will be made. Commenting on it publicly to me tells me that there is constructive dialogue between the groups.