[CP Story] Bridge over Troubled Water: Gaudreau Contract

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Thanks for the great feedback guys, this has been floating around my head for 10 days.

The math just doesn't work ... the kid is just too good too quick in a very interesting contract structure.

At this point I'm in favor of a bridge. It feels like there is some lack of mutual faith between the two parties

2-3 years. Get the winning going and make everyone feel good about the future together.

A long-term deal isn't required right now if it just isn't happening.

[Enoch Root]

It's not about rooting for BT or rooting for Johnny, it's a question of what's fair and what's best for the Flames.

Pretty straight-forward, and it's curious why some make it so personal.

[getoverit]

You left out, Brad has a process

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

With all due respect...on what basis do you think people here are 100% behind BT. Rarely is the board unified in such a way on an opinion and rarely are people 100% on board with anything. I don't understand where comments like this come from.

What I read on the forum is a range of concern about whether or not this deal will be done, and if the final deal will be good for the player and Flames. That doesn't scream that the board is 100% behind the GM. It tells me there is concern.

But what do we seem to know about BT so far
- He is incredibly hard working and detail orientated
- He seems to be a fair guy and very open and transparent
- He's been able to get some other very tough deals done.

So based on that is it any surprise that there is some element of faith in the GM to find something that works?

[Lord Carnage]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

It's not about rooting for BT or rooting for Johnny, it's a question of what's fair and what's best for the Flames.

Pretty straight-forward, and it's curious why some make it so personal.

Maybe just me, but it seems that what's best for the Flames is kind of tied to rooting for BT.

The majority of us want something fair for both sides, but if it a little more towards BT, it is better for the Flames, and a little more towards Johnny is ... just worse for the Flames.

So, for a Flames board, it probably makes sense that people who want what's best for the Flames will be behind BT. But to add to it, he has shown to be a very effective GM in his short time in the roll. He's definitely earned our faith (even though he isn't perfect).

[Lord Carnage]

Oh, and that was an excellent read Bingo - thanks!

[DeluxeMoustache]

The longer something takes, the more antsy people get.

Professional negotiators in a unique situation.

I am not yet concerned.

That is all.

[Gaudreauvertime]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

The way I look at the Gio cap is that it's kind of a thing but if it's inconvenient, it's no longer a thing. It was first brought up when discussing the Brodie contract where Brodie's first year was lower than Gio's yearly contract but later rewarded Brodie for his more real worth. It probably had more to do with Brodie's wishes in respect for Gio than an ironclad rule.

Gaudreau will get paid what he's worth to the Flames, without regard to Gio. It's all a matter of paying Johnny while keeping other options open. It's a team game and Johnny has to take this into account. The Flames can't just back up an armoured truck and say take what you want.

On another note, I'm pretty sure Treliving isn't low balling Gaudreau because in my opinion he overpaid a little for Monahan as Monahan got a little more than his comparable rivals.

Here's a bit of the Brodie thread where it was discussed. Of course at the time Wideman made more than both of them, so take it with a grain of salt.





http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthr...t=Giordano+cap



It was just a nod, not a rule.




[/I]

I sincerely hope you're right. But at this point, we have no reason to believe that it's greed from the player causing the delay in negotiations because we don't know what the organization is offering.

[Gaudreauvertime]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

I want to open this with "I was probably the first person on CP to suggest Tarasenko money for Gaudreau, way back in October". So do not get me wrong. I value Gaudreau.

But there are a few issues you are brushing under the rug.

Players with a greater AAV than Tarasenko currently (all commentary is from the time of their signing):

Patrick Kane - 2 time cup champ, Conn Smythe
Jonathan Toews- 2 time cup champ, Conn Smythe, Selke, Center
Anze Kopitar - 2 time cup champ, Conn Smythe, Center
Alex Ovechkin - Rocket Richard, Art Ross, Hart etc
Evgeni Malkin - See Ovy + Add Center + Add Stanley Cup
P.K. Subban - Norris Trophy
Sidney Crosby - ... Sidney Crosby
Corey Perry - Hart Trophy, Rocket Richard
Steven Stamkos- Rocket Richard
Henrik Lundqvist - Henrik Lundqvist
Claude Giroux - Center, 3rd place Hart Finish
Ryan Getzlaf - Center, 2nd place Hart Finish
Jakub Voracek
Phil Kessel
Shea Weber - Defenseman
Rick Nash
Dustin Byfuglien- Defenseman
Ryan Suter- Defenseman
Zach Parise
Ryan O'Reilly - Center
Pavel Datsyuk - Selke, Stanley Cup etc center

Now I have bolded the players who are remotely comparable to Gaudreau. What is the common theme? They are overpaid. No Ifs and Or Buts. Those teams are hamstrung by those contracts. Kessel is the sole exception - because Toronto retained 1.2M of his 8.0M cap hit (so for Pitt, he is a 6.8M winger which is fair competitive value). Yes even Patrick Kane is overpaid despite winning all of this year's trophies. The Blackhawks window probably closed the minute they had to trade away Patrick Sharp due to the new extensions Kane/Toews signed - both players are overpaid BTW not just Kane. There is exactly one winger in the league who is worth this kind of money and it's not even Ovechkin - it is Jamie Benn because he impacts the game like a centre.

If you are paying a player this kind of money they better be the best goalie in the world, one of the best two-way centres in the world, or one of the best defensemen in the world. Period. Else you are setting your team up to be uncompetitive. It's nothing wrong with Gaudreau but at his position he is unable to impact the game the amount he needs to be worth that pay.

Despite that, I understand that the market dictates value, not competitiveness. The Tarasenko deal is fair market value even if it is in all likelyhood going to be a handcuff. But that does not mean Gaudreau is a better player than Vladimir Tarasenko was when he signed his deal.

Prorating both players' final ELC seasons to an 82 game season here's why Tarasenko holds more value:

2014-15 Tarasenko vs 2015-16 Gaudreau
78 non 3v3 points vs 73 non 3v3 points
39 non 3v3 goals vs 28 non 3v3 goals
2.86 5vs5 Points per 60 vs 2.28 5vs5 Points per 60
0 3vs3 Points vs 8 3vs3 points(3G / 5A)

Now let's explore that last one. 3vs3...does that make a team more competitive in the playoffs? Answer honestly.

Probably not.

So what then is Gaudreau's value-added over Tarasenko? Increased likelyhood at winning a President's Trophy? Is a President's Trophy more valuable than a Stanley Cup?

You ask me, given the fact that Tarasenko scored 39% more goals (let's dock 5% from Gaudreau's AAV for that) and overall 7℅ more non 3-on-3 points (and let's dock another 7% from Gaudreau for that) but was one year older (let's add 5% to Gaudreau for that) with a 3.5% lower cap ceiling at the time, Gaudreau's real cap hit should be ~7.25M (Or 58M over 8Y)

However for pride sake, you can give him a 7.575x8Y cap hit to show him we value him more than Tarasenko.

But to say he's worth a 7.8M cap hit for example, that means he's probably overpaid by $550k - that almost is an entire entry level or veteran minimum salary he would be overpaid by. Suddenly you've lost a roster player in terms of value subtracted.

I'm confused, do 3-3 points not help a team make the playoffs? And isn't making the playoffs a requirement for winning the cup? It would seem that you're very much under valuing Gaudreau's contributions to getting a team into the playoffs. I know that from a financial and statistical perspective, making the playoffs is far more valuable and reliable than winning the cup. Ownership should push management teams to put together teams with a primary goal of making the playoffs. Ask Billy Bean about playoffs. And then ask yourself who was far and away our best player in the playoffs last year?

Also, why aren't you considering career totals? It seems that was a big reason why Monahan got more than Scheifele even though Scheifele's contract covers less RFA years.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

At this point I'm in favor of a bridge. It feels like there is some lack of mutual faith between the two parties

2-3 years. Get the winning going and make everyone feel good about the future together.

A long-term deal isn't required right now if it just isn't happening.

Just curious as to why you think there is a lack of mutual faith. Is it because a deal hasn't been signed yet or is there something else that has been said or reported?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Lord Carnage

Maybe just me, but it seems that what's best for the Flames is kind of tied to rooting for BT.

The majority of us want something fair for both sides, but if it a little more towards BT, it is better for the Flames, and a little more towards Johnny is ... just worse for the Flames.

So, for a Flames board, it probably makes sense that people who want what's best for the Flames will be behind BT. But to add to it, he has shown to be a very effective GM in his short time in the roll. He's definitely earned our faith (even though he isn't perfect).

Yeah, that's pretty much what I meant.

Some people were calling it 'cheering for Brad' but I was trying to convey that Brad is trying to get the best deal for the Flames, which is what we, as Flames fans, want.

[CroFlames]

Great article Bingo with great analysis. It's better than a lot of stuff written on the big network sites too.

I agree the Johnny deal is complicated, and we are certainly lacking details. Low draft pick, only 2 years experience, but exploded in his 2nd year. What will his 3rd year look like and beyond? Hard to say, but I know what we are all hoping for.

Brad has shown to be a good negotiator, so I trust the right deal will be reached. Whether the "right" deal is a bridge or long term contract remains to be seen.

I just hope it's signed soon so we can watch gaudreauvertime go into meltdown.

[Gaudreauvertime]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Yeah, that's pretty much what I meant.

Some people were calling it 'cheering for Brad' but I was trying to convey that Brad is trying to get the best deal for the Flames, which is what we, as Flames fans, want.

I think there's a distinct difference between wanting what's best for the flames and blaming dragged out negotiations on the player when we don't know any details.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Gaudreauvertime

I think there's a distinct difference between wanting what's best for the flames and blaming dragged out negotiations on the player when we don't know any details.

I don't think the article did that.

I know I certainly wasn't trying to pick one side over the other.

I was pointing out that the 5 years of RFA in the deal is a complication that is causing an impasse IF one side is trying to ignore those 5 RFA years and calling it an 8 year UFA comparable deal.

It's a roadblock.

If Gaudreau's not asking for UFA like details and the Flames are suggesting they only need to pay him 5M a year for 8 years because he's a 4th round pick then they are out to lunch.

Having said both however, if I had to bet I'd think that Gaudreau's agent is coming in too high based on his client list, and the fact that Monahan just signed for 6.4M. The Flames at that exact contract wouldn't be that far out of the ball park.

[Gaudreauvertime]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I don't think the article did that.

I know I certainly wasn't trying to pick one side over the other.

I was pointing out that the 5 years of RFA in the deal is a complication that is causing an impasse IF one side is trying to ignore those 5 RFA years and calling it an 8 year UFA comparable deal.

It's a roadblock.

If Gaudreau's not asking for UFA like details and the Flames are suggesting they only need to pay him 5M a year for 8 years because he's a 4th round pick then they are out to lunch.

Having said both however, if I had to bet I'd think that Gaudreau's agent is coming in too high based on his client list, and the fact that Monahan just signed for 6.4M. The Flames at that exact contract wouldn't be that far out of the ball park.

No not you, article was fine, though that exact contract would be way off from a value perspective.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Gaudreauvertime

I'm confused, do 3-3 points not help a team make the playoffs? And isn't making the playoffs a requirement for winning the cup? It would seem that you're very much under valuing Gaudreau's contributions to getting a team into the playoffs. I know that from a financial and statistical perspective, making the playoffs is far more valuable and reliable than winning the cup. Ownership should push management teams to put together teams with a primary goal of making the playoffs. Ask Billy Bean about playoffs. And then ask yourself who was far and away our best player in the playoffs last year?

TJ Brodie.

Honestly, I thought that all three of Monahan, Gaudreau and Hudler were not at their best in the 2015 playoffs, but I think the young guys both deserve a pass because of their age.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Yeah, that's pretty much what I meant.

Some people were calling it 'cheering for Brad' but I was trying to convey that Brad is trying to get the best deal for the Flames, which is what we, as Flames fans, want.

It's also his job.

People tend to forget that Treliving, and all GM's, have people they need to answer to as well. Once any contract is signed, it is money those owners HAVE to pay. So it's easy to sit and say well just give him the 7.5 instead of the 6.8 over 7 years and be done with it (or whatever the numbers really are). That extra 700K means almost 5 million real dollars to those who sign the cheques.

With the plethora of factors involved in this negotiation (the agent angle is a real interesting one) no one can truly pinpoint what "fair" value is on a long term deal (though Bingo covered it very well in this article), and its even iffy to come up with the right amount on a bridge deal. It's a unique situation that hasn't really seen a precedent league wide that i recall. As such both sides have to be comfortable with the final agreement and as such im guessing its truly hard to find that common ground at this point.....although it could be much closer than anyone realizes, there could still be enough of a chasm that both sides are still saying no.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Yeah, that's pretty much what I meant.

Some people were calling it 'cheering for Brad' but I was trying to convey that Brad is trying to get the best deal for the Flames, which is what we, as Flames fans, want.

Is it? As a fan we finally have a dynamic, young, top-scorer to build around and we are somehow concerned about a fair deal for the Flames? Personally, I want to see the best team on the ice and care very little if the Flames owners and our team payroll are out an extra $.5M - $1M in the process.

If BT can't manage the cap after already signing a number of players to big, multi year deals, I would be pretty disappointed. The Flames are hardly a struggling franchise that needs to be concerned about paying their best player. A player that will sell a lot of tickets, merchandise and quite frankly single handedly put the teams offensive game back on the map after some pretty bleak years.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Gaudreauvertime

I think there's a distinct difference between wanting what's best for the flames and blaming dragged out negotiations on the player when we don't know any details.

True.

But we know that the Flames have a solid track record of treating their players fairly. And we know that Monahan got a fair deal. So based on that, it is not a huge stretch to think that the Flames have offered Gaudreau a fair deal.

So we have a track record on which to evaluate one side. Conversely, and as Bingo pointed out, we have a smaller agency on the other side that we don't have much past experience with and that may be somewhat... extra motivated, shall we say.

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

True.

But we know that the Flames have a solid track record of treating their players fairly. And we know that Monahan got a fair deal. So based on that, it is not a huge stretch to think that the Flames have offered Gaudreau a fair deal.

So we have a track record on which to evaluate one side. Conversely, and as Bingo pointed out, we have a smaller agency on the other side that we don't have much past experience with and that may be somewhat... extra motivated, shall we say.

There's fair, and then there's Gaudreauvertime fair.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

Is it? As a fan we finally have a dynamic, young, top-scorer to build around and we are somehow concerned about a fair deal for the Flames? Personally, I want to see the best team on the ice and care very little if the Flames owners and our team payroll are out an extra $.5M - $1M in the process.

If BT can't manage the cap after already signing a number of players to big, multi year deals, I would be pretty disappointed. The Flames are hardly a struggling franchise that needs to be concerned about paying their best player. A player that will sell a lot of tickets, merchandise and quite frankly single handedly put the teams offensive game back on the map after some pretty bleak years.

You answered your own question