Well, it's good to see this conversation hasn't gone any better than others.
Here are the facts we know:
1. The Flames were initially asking around $6.4M.
2. Gaudreau's camp was initially asking $8M+
3. According to MacKenzie, both sides have conceded some, but the gap is still there.
4. Both sides continue to publicly state they want Gaudreau in Calgary long term (without directly defining "long term").
As for speculation:
1. Bob also mentioned that Gaudreau is hoping for Tarasenko money, which could mean they've come down to $7.5M
2. All the talking heads have eluded to the "Gio cap", which could mean that the Flames have come up to $6.75M.
If the two above assumptions are true, then the gap between the two sides is still about 750k. That's still a gap, but not too extreme. Furthermore, I'm not sure I would consider either offer ($6.75M & $7.5M) to be "insulting" even if they're both wide of the final amount.
This is why I, once again, land in the $7.25M/8 range. That still pays Gaudreau $58M over the next 8 years.
They said on the Flames-Canucks broadcast last night that it it believed that the Flames have made an offer in the 7-7.5 range. If that's true and if it's true that there is still a gap, I would speculate that Gaudreau's camp is still at 8+
MacInnis was traded when he was offer sheeted by the Blues in a world where small market Canadian teams couldn't compete.
Hull was traded to bolster a cup team. He was a first year player at the time, they knew what they were giving up.
Gilmour was a contract squabble and I guess maybe you're best example (and only)
St. Louis was a nobody. He was akin to Kiprusoff for the Sharks. Whoops! Not letting a star player go.
This is such a silly direction in this conversation. Why?
The irony is that Gaudreauvertime is going to actually cause the things that he is inventing.
He is trying to paint a picture that the Flames are being mean to Gaudreau and the fans are turning on him (both of which are complete fabrications of course). However, Gaudreauvertime is actually creating animosity with posts like that.
Gaudreauvertime: you are not helping Gaudreau get more money. You are not convincing anyone - certainly not anyone that matters - that he deserves more than he is going to get. All you are doing is creating animosity. You would serve your idol well to just stop!
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Enoch Root For This Useful Post:
I think it's dollars per term more than anything else at this point.
Gaudreau will not want his contract to end at the same time as Monahan's. He probably won't want it to end after Monahan either. The flames probably don't want less than 6 years, so the magic number is 6 years.
8 x 6 is pretty rich. The flames may be willing to go up to 8 x 8 but need those two extra years. Gives them flexibility and cost certainty when Monahan is up again.
In the end I think we see the term is 6 years for Gaudreau with a cap hit over 7.
I wouldn't put a lot of stock in anything those Canuck talking heads had to say. Gary Valk as a source won't get you anywhere when it comes to Flames news.
Plus the panel sort of decided it was between Winnipeg and Vancouver to make the playoffs out of the West Canadian 4 last night. (I say sort of because they didn't really come to an agreement, very awkward)
They said on the Flames-Canucks broadcast last night that it it believed that the Flames have made an offer in the 7-7.5 range. If that's true and if it's true that there is still a gap, I would speculate that Gaudreau's camp is still at 8+
In that case Gaudreau's camp is out to lunch. Most likely just Gross trying to strong arm as much money out of the Flames as possible until his deadline (Hopefully today so Gaudreau can join camp ASAP).
It would suck, but out of spite I would say to Lewis Gross "If he's not in Edmonton with the team opening night, he won't be with the team in April and we can redo these negotiations next summer. His rights will not have changed any in that time frame."
This is one of the multiple reasons why I would never be a GM.
I think there is a Gio cap (at least so long as it suits them). I would hope that it's just a fake cap because otherwise it's really ####ing stupid.
I want to believe that there isn't but the way they structured Brodie's contract kind of makes it look like there is.
The way they structured Frolik's contract and Hiller's contract suggests that there isn't.
__________________
"May those who accept their fate find happiness. May those who defy it find glory."
McKenzie: Gaudreau & Flames are closing gap, but it's still a considerable gap.
Gross's brinksmanship (an assumption but a fair one) hurts no one more than his clients. They sit out on valuable acclimation time, workouts, team bonding and almost assure themselves a slow start. Couple that with the massive pressure of a new contract and things get heavy on the players' shoulders quickly. And what does Gross care? He's cashing his 15 percent already. When his work is done, it's up to everyone else to repair the damage. And make no mistake, there is damage.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Temporary_User
I will eat a pubic hair if Giordano ever plays in the NHL again
The Following User Says Thank You to BigRed For This Useful Post:
Under 7 or let him sit. It's a hard stance but I'm taking it
Stupid. Absolutely stupid.
Piss off one of the biggest and brightest talents this team has ever seen over your stupid hypothetical cap in the name of POTENTIAL future cap problems if ALL of your prospects hit their ceilings.
If he doesn't sign and it comes out that Johnny's camp came down to the low 7's than this is a failure on Treliving.
The Following User Says Thank You to polak For This Useful Post:
