Sean FRICKIN Monahan

[RedMileDJ]

So when is the deciding date? I thought it was 9 or 10 games in. We must be getting close.

[Stampede2TheCup]

Originally Posted by Red-Mile-DJ

So when is the deciding date? I thought it was 9 or 10 games in. We must be getting close.

It's slated to be after Tuesday's game if he doesn't miss one.

[sureLoss]

Monahan gaining confidence:
http://www.calgaryherald.com/sports/...724/story.html

So when he glides onto the ice to take a faceoff and he sees the San Jose Sharks deploy Joe Thornton . . . well, let’s just say the kid knows what time it is.


“Obviously, they’re putting him out there for a reason — they want to capitalize on that (matchup),” Monahan, 19, was saying after Sunday afternoon’s practice at the Toyota Sports Center. “That’s motivation for me and my linemates (Sven Baertschi and Jiri Hudler). We want to step up.”


Less than five minutes into Saturday’s contest, with the draw deep in Sharks territory, Monahan got his first taste of Thornton.


Then, rather surprisingly, it was the Flames who had done the hemming in.


“I remember that shift,” said Monahan. “Obviously, you come to the bench and you talk about what you could do next time to put the puck in the back of the net. Me and my linemates know we can play against the best.”


And if the rookie pivot doesn’t appear to care about who he’s facing, then neither does his boss.


In fact, when the Sharks started pulling away, Bob Hartley leaned on Monahan.


“Because I felt he was probably our best centreman out there,” said the Flames coach. “Still a young man, still a kid. But he learns very quickly and he doesn’t get rattled.”

[stemit14]

Even if he doesn't get another point before Wednesday, he'll have 7 points in 9 games. Plus he has played responsibly in both ends and has awesome chemistry with baertschi. Monahan sweaters are flying off the shelves. He hasn't looked out of place amongst professional players and he's winning battles along the boards. What more could a coach, GM, president, and owner ask of a rookie to do in his first 9 games?

[T@T]

Originally Posted by stemit14

Even if he doesn't get another point before Wednesday, he'll have 8 points in 9 games. Plus he has played responsibly in both ends and has awesome chemistry with baertschi. Monahan sweaters are flying off the shelves. He hasn't looked out of place amongst professional players and he's winning battles along the boards. What more could a coach, GM, president, and owner ask of a rookie to do in his first 9 games?

Fixed

[mrdonkey]

Originally Posted by stemit14

Even if he doesn't get another point before Wednesday, he'll have 7 points in 9 games. Plus he has played responsibly in both ends and has awesome chemistry with baertschi. Monahan sweaters are flying off the shelves. He hasn't looked out of place amongst professional players and he's winning battles along the boards. What more could a coach, GM, president, and owner ask of a rookie to do in his first 9 games?

Extend his ELC by one year, it would seem.

[troutman]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monahan

Monahan is a name of Gaelic origin, derived from manacháin, meaning "monk" after the warrior monk O'Manacháin

Monahan = Irish
Irish = Good

[stemit14]

Originally Posted by mrdonkey

Extend his ELC by one year, it would seem.

If the flames could extend his ELC by a year they would. Any team would do that for their rookies if it was possible. Entry level contracts are required to be 3 years. What's your point?

[foshizzle11]

It would be amazing if they sent him down now. I don't care about "burning" a year of his ELC if it means he develops at the NHL level and has success. So far he has.

I'm not sure he should be playing all 82 games this season because I would like to avoid injury but of he is competing and producing you can't really stop him, can yoU?

[Rerun]

All this talk about extending his ELC by one year...

Who's to say that in his final ELC year he won't sign a long term/multi year contract where all this talk becomes a moot point?

Just because, at this point in time, he may become a UFA at age 25 or 26 doesn't mean he will. He may very well, at those ages be in the middle of another contract with multiple years left on it.

In 2016 (the year his ELC expires if he plays more than 9 games with the Flames), Monahan will be 22. He then could very well sign a long term 7 year contract with the Flames which would take him to the age of 29.

I doubt the thought of burning one year off his ELC is of concern to the Flames. If he continues to play the way he is capable of, I, without a doubt, expect the Flames to offer him a long term (7 year) contract in 2016.

[Vox]

Originally Posted by stemit14

If the flames could extend his ELC by a year they would. Any team would do that for their rookies if it was possible. Entry level contracts are required to be 3 years. What's your point?

I'm just guessing, but I think his point was sarcasm.

[Zevo]

Originally Posted by foshizzle11

It would be amazing if they sent him down now. I don't care about "burning" a year of his ELC if it means he develops at the NHL level and has success. So far he has.

I'm not sure he should be playing all 82 games this season because I would like to avoid injury but of he is competing and producing you can't really stop him, can yoU?

It should work out great for Monahan if he stays up with the Olympic break in Feb. He would get almost a 3 week break to recharge his batteries. I wouldn't be against him sitting the odd game either. Would be preferable to sending him down.

[GreenLantern]

That is the 3rd or 4th time I have seen Hartley specifically bring up the fact Monahan doesn't let people rattle him. Shows a lot of maturity for a guy his age... future captain? Or too quiet?

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by Rerun

All this talk about extending his ELC by one year...

Who's to say that in his final ELC year he won't sign a long term/multi year contract where all this talk becomes a moot point?

Just because, at this point in time, he may become a UFA at age 25 or 26 doesn't mean he will. He may very well, at those ages be in the middle of another contract with multiple years left on it.

In 2016 (the year his ELC expires if he plays more than 9 games with the Flames), Monahan will be 22. He then could very well sign a long term 7 year contract with the Flames which would take him to the age of 29.

I doubt the thought of burning one year off his ELC is of concern to the Flames. If he continues to play the way he is capable of, I, without a doubt, expect the Flames to offer him a long term (7 year) contract in 2016.

Not that I disagree with what you are saying, but I think the people who are worried about the ELC stuff is probably due to the Chicago thing - players coming off their ELCs and having big pay-days, and Chicago having to dismantle a large part of their team. People are hoping that by letting Monahan's ELC slide a year, it will give the Flames a bit more money to build a competing team at that time.

Having Monahan at 3.75 vs having him at 6 (or whatever) is an extra 2.25 that can be used in the 'hopefully contending year' on something else for the roster.

Personally, I don't think that extra bit makes too much of a difference. You have to pay your stars - they do the heavy-lifting. If he is a star, pay him. Hopefully he (and others) sign 'friendly contracts'. You are not going to get them to sign friendly long-term contracts if they feel the organization has been unfair to them - like sending them back down to juniors just to save a year on the ELC.

Baertschi and Monahan will be the only two players of note that you can maybe expect big 2nd contracts for thus far. Saving a year really doesn't matter. Flames have yet to draft their other stars (more likely), with Gaudreau as a possibility as well. Jankowski, Poirier, Klimchuk and whomever else are at least another year after down the road (and if they also make it), plus whomever they draft in the next couple of drafts. Having Monahan kick in this year or next will make no notable difference - he is simply too early in the rebuild to worry about and try to 'save' a year on.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

Not that I disagree with what you are saying, but I think the people who are worried about the ELC stuff is probably due to the Chicago thing - players coming off their ELCs and having big pay-days, and Chicago having to dismantle a large part of their team. People are hoping that by letting Monahan's ELC slide a year, it will give the Flames a bit more money to build a competing team at that time.

Having Monahan at 3.75 vs having him at 6 (or whatever) is an extra 2.25 that can be used in the 'hopefully contending year' on something else for the roster.

Personally, I don't think that extra bit makes too much of a difference. You have to pay your stars - they do the heavy-lifting. If he is a star, pay him. Hopefully he (and others) sign 'friendly contracts'. You are not going to get them to sign friendly long-term contracts if they feel the organization has been unfair to them - like sending them back down to juniors just to save a year on the ELC.

Baertschi and Monahan will be the only two players of note that you can maybe expect big 2nd contracts for thus far. Saving a year really doesn't matter. Flames have yet to draft their other stars (more likely), with Gaudreau as a possibility as well. Jankowski, Poirier, Klimchuk and whomever else are at least another year after down the road (and if they also make it), plus whomever they draft in the next couple of drafts. Having Monahan kick in this year or next will make no notable difference - he is simply too early in the rebuild to worry about and try to 'save' a year on.

To add to this, assumming Monahan works out, the Flames will be looking to extend Monahan beyong his ELC point with a long term deal in the 6+ mil range. It'll be similar to what Edmonton has done. Burning a year of ELC is pretty meaningless in that situation.

[Five-hole]

Again, let's hope that we have to dismantle a part of our team because of salary cap concerns after so many players had career years in winning us a cup.

[Enoch Root]

While it shouldn't be the reason he stays or goes, the contract issue shouldn't be so quickly dismissed.

Contract renegotiations (just looking at young players):

1 year: Galiardi, Bouma (yes, no biggie there, but it all adds up)
2 years: Backlund, Brodie, Baertschi
3 years: Monahan and Gaudreau (if he signs after this season - it would be a 2-year ELC)

Then there is the chance that one or two of the following group takes a big step forward:

Sieloff, Wotherspoon, Ramage, Berra, Knight, Colborne, Agostino, Reinhart, Horak (of course they are not all going to be big contract guys - I am saying one or two of them might be though)

Then maybe 4 years out, you're looking at: Poirier plus this year's top pick

And a guy like Gillies could be in the mix by then

Of course, there is no worries on the cap front for 2 or 3 years, but it will come. And it will come quickly.

Some prudent consideation now wouldn't be the worst idea.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

While it shouldn't be the reason he stays or goes, the contract issue shouldn't be so quickly dismissed.

Contract renegotiations (just looking at young players):

1 year: Galiardi, Bouma (yes, no biggie there, but it all adds up)
2 years: Backlund, Brodie, Baertschi
3 years: Monahan and Gaudreau (if he signs after this season - it would be a 2-year ELC)

Then there is the chance that one or two of the following group takes a big step forward:

Sieloff, Wotherspoon, Ramage, Berra, Knight, Colborne, Agostino, Reinhart, Horak (of course they are not all going to be big contract guys - I am saying one or two of them might be though)

Then maybe 4 years out, you're looking at: Poirier plus this year's top pick

And a guy like Gillies could be in the mix by then

Of course, there is no worries on the cap front for 2 or 3 years, but it will come. And it will come quickly.

Some prudent consideation now wouldn't be the worst idea.

Lets worry about those bridges when its time to cross them.

Frankly if I was Monahan and the Flames chose to send me back to Jr. I would be supremely pissed off at the organization. Whatever excuse they would give me I would know it was a lie (unless they actually told the truth and said it was because they didn't want to burn a year on my "low' entry level contract... and its highly unlikely they would say this to him). The bottom line is that I would probably think that this is probably not such a "class" operation and I would have a lot less loyalty to the organization come contract / UFA time.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Rerun

Lets worry about those bridges when its time to cross them.

Frankly if I was Monahan and the Flames chose to send me back to Jr. I would be supremely pissed off at the organization. Whatever excuse they would give me I would know it was a lie (unless they actually told the truth and said it was because they didn't want to burn a year on my "low' entry level contract... and its highly unlikely they would say this to him). The bottom line is that I would probably think that this is probably not such a "class" operation and I would have a lot less loyalty to the organization come contract / UFA time.

Fist of all, I wasn't arguing for sending him down, just listing some facts

Second, I agree that trying to save a year of the ELC could actually backfire by costing them more in the long run.

However, I don't agree with the bold. It would be complete incompetence to simply not worry about contracts until the time came that they reared their heads.

[devo22]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

While it shouldn't be the reason he stays or goes, the contract issue shouldn't be so quickly dismissed.

Contract renegotiations (just looking at young players):

1 year: Galiardi, Bouma (yes, no biggie there, but it all adds up)
2 years: Backlund, Brodie, Baertschi
3 years: Monahan and Gaudreau (if he signs after this season - it would be a 2-year ELC)

Then there is the chance that one or two of the following group takes a big step forward:

Sieloff, Wotherspoon, Ramage, Berra, Knight, Colborne, Agostino, Reinhart, Horak (of course they are not all going to be big contract guys - I am saying one or two of them might be though)

Then maybe 4 years out, you're looking at: Poirier plus this year's top pick

And a guy like Gillies could be in the mix by then

Of course, there is no worries on the cap front for 2 or 3 years, but it will come. And it will come quickly.

Some prudent consideation now wouldn't be the worst idea.

Friedman said the cap could go up to about $80m in 4 years, so I'm not worried about that at all. Even if he is too optimistic and it's at $75m in 4 years, it's still not a huge problem. We probably have Cammalleri and Stajan come off the books after that season, so the Flames will probably have to scramble to even reach the cap floor. The Flames surely won't have cap problems for a few years.