I agree... The bar has been raised and management needs to get this. It's not Johnnys fault that the flames have made so many bad contracts that they can't afford to pay him a realistic sum for his unusual talents. Johnny sets the bar... I would love to see others on the team meet or exceed this
a. It's not a question of fault. It's just reality.
b. So you want, in a cap world, for "others" to meet or exceed a $7.5-8M salary? How many exactly? Because you need more than 9-10 players on a team.
c. If the bar has been raised it's been in two arguably over-rich contracts for two players with decidedly different bargaining rights.
Real negotiations only just started, it seems. They exchanged offers a while ago, went back to their corners and only now are horse-trading. IMO Gross is a bit out of his league, especially if both Treliving and Edwards are involved. As much as Gross looks good to potential clients if he gets a lot of money for Johnny, he looks bad to the same audience if Johnny sits and loses money and points.
This will get done, and before the first game IMO.
Spoiler!
This is what I imagine is what is going on in NJ as we speak, Gross is definitely out of his league if Brad is as shrewd as his father in negotiations
__________________
"As far as I'm concerned I take it one day at a time because if you look too far down the road that's when you get yourself in trouble. You've gotta enjoy the process and not be burdened by the outcome." - Jon Gillies
Why is the expectation that our best player take a discount? Especially when his best buddy and the team captain didn't? I guess those guys are just greedy, too?
Its laughable that we'll spend big money on guys like Stajan, Wideman, Brouwer, Engelland etc but when time comes to pay our franchise player we all of the sudden go into austerity mode? We had no problem paying Monahan more than all his comps, or signing Gio until he's 40. But we can't pay the guy who runs our entire offense for his prime years? Risk ruining the relationship and this season too save an extra ~1M in cap space we might need in the future?
Its hilarious that some people defend that line of thinking while simultaneously blaming Gaudreau for wanting to be paid what he's worth.
Last edited by Gaudreauvertime; 10-07-2016 at 01:06 PM.
Why is the expectation that our best player take a discount? Especially when his best buddy and the team captain didn't? I guess those guys are just greedy, too?
Its laughable that we'll spend big money on guys like Stajan, Wideman, Brouwer, Engelland etc but when time comes to pay our franchise player we all of the sudden go into austerity mode? We had no problem paying Monahan more than all his comps, or signing Gio until he's 40. But we can't pay the guy who runs our entire offense for his prime years? Risk ruining the relationship and this season too save an extra ~1M in cap space we might need in the future?
Its hilarious that some people defend that line of thinking while simultaneously blaming Gaudreau for wanting to be paid what he's worth?
The Following 35 Users Say Thank You to Huntingwhale For This Useful Post:
His value is obviously different to various posters. Personally I think 6.9/7 is fair value, while you might think that's an dirty filthy insult. Don't confuse fair value with asking for a discount.
Gaudreau has scored 54 goals and 154 points the last two years. Monahan has scored 58 goals and 125 points over the same period. Gaudreau getting 525k per season more than Monahan is fair value, very fair.
Going beyond seven per is into overpayment territory.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to MrMastodonFarm For This Useful Post:
Why is the expectation that our best player take a discount? Especially when his best buddy and the team captain didn't? I guess those guys are just greedy, too?
Its laughable that we'll spend big money on guys like Stajan, Wideman, Brouwer, Engelland etc but when time comes to pay our franchise player we all of the sudden go into austerity mode? We had no problem paying Monahan more than all his comps, or signing Gio until he's 40. But we can't pay the guy who runs our entire offense for his prime years? Risk ruining the relationship and this season too save an extra ~1M in cap space we might need in the future?
Its hilarious that some people defend that line of thinking while simultaneously blaming Gaudreau for wanting to be paid what he's worth?
__________________
Captain James P. DeCOSTE, CD, 18 Sep 1993
Why is the expectation that our best player take a discount? Especially when his best buddy and the team captain didn't? I guess those guys are just greedy, too?
Its laughable that we'll spend big money on guys like Stajan, Wideman, Brouwer, Engelland etc but when time comes to pay our franchise player we all of the sudden go into austerity mode? We had no problem paying Monahan more than all his comps, or signing Gio until he's 40. But we can't pay the guy who runs our entire offense for his prime years? Risk ruining the relationship and this season too save an extra ~1M in cap space we might need in the future?
Its hilarious that some people defend that line of thinking while simultaneously blaming Gaudreau for wanting to be paid what he's worth.
I think you're right.
Will that shut you up?
__________________
Fan of the Flames, where being OK has become OK.
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaudreauvertime
Why is the expectation that our best player take a discount? Especially when his best buddy and the team captain didn't? I guess those guys are just greedy, too?
Its laughable that we'll spend big money on guys like Stajan, Wideman, Brouwer, Engelland etc but when time comes to pay our franchise player we all of the sudden go into austerity mode? We had no problem paying Monahan more than all his comps, or signing Gio until he's 40. But we can't pay the guy who runs our entire offense for his prime years? Risk ruining the relationship and this season too save an extra ~1M in cap space we might need in the future?
Its hilarious that some people defend that line of thinking while simultaneously blaming Gaudreau for wanting to be paid what he's worth.
Why is the expectation that our best player take a discount? Especially when his best buddy and the team captain didn't? I guess those guys are just greedy, too?
Its laughable that we'll spend big money on guys like Stajan, Wideman, Brouwer, Engelland etc but when time comes to pay our franchise player we all of the sudden go into austerity mode? We had no problem paying Monahan more than all his comps, or signing Gio until he's 40. But we can't pay the guy who runs our entire offense for his prime years? Risk ruining the relationship and this season too save an extra ~1M in cap space we might need in the future?
Its hilarious that some people defend that line of thinking while simultaneously blaming Gaudreau for wanting to be paid what he's worth?
We don't know that they didn't take a discount. None of us know what their side asked for initially. And yes, we act like this when it's the kind of money that can really impact the team long term. Stajan and the rest may be overpaid but individually they are not crippling the team. Consider their term to what this contract could be. The team has their long term projections on salary and the cap so they have to make their best effort to get to here they can live with it.
Why is the expectation that our best player take a discount? Especially when his best buddy and the team captain didn't? I guess those guys are just greedy, too?
Its laughable that we'll spend big money on guys like Stajan, Wideman, Brouwer, Engelland etc but when time comes to pay our franchise player we all of the sudden go into austerity mode? We had no problem paying Monahan more than all his comps, or signing Gio until he's 40. But we can't pay the guy who runs our entire offense for his prime years? Risk ruining the relationship and this season too save an extra ~1M in cap space we might need in the future?
Its hilarious that some people defend that line of thinking while simultaneously blaming Gaudreau for wanting to be paid what he's worth.
I care about the team. I'd love to have an all star team of guys and have them all make 3 mil each. I don't care how much they get paid, if anything I want them to be paid as little as possible so the team can afford more good players.
I think you're in the wrong place, this is a Flames forum. You seem to be looking for a Gaudreau forum. Your posts are so crazy that it's hard to tell if you're Johnny, his agent, an oiler fan or an 8 year old. I really wish you didn't post here.
__________________
Fan of the Flames, where being OK has become OK.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Poe969 For This Useful Post:
Why is the expectation that our best player take a discount? Especially when his best buddy and the team captain didn't? I guess those guys are just greedy, too?
Its laughable that we'll spend big money on guys like Stajan, Wideman, Brouwer, Engelland etc but when time comes to pay our franchise player we all of the sudden go into austerity mode? We had no problem paying Monahan more than all his comps, or signing Gio until he's 40. But we can't pay the guy who runs our entire offense for his prime years? Risk ruining the relationship and this season too save an extra ~1M in cap space we might need in the future?
Its hilarious that some people defend that line of thinking while simultaneously blaming Gaudreau for wanting to be paid what he's worth?
You don't see the difference? Good god man, you are blinded. Gio worked his way to that contract, even playing in the KHL to prove his worth. This kid has 2 years of NHL experience, and you are ready to hand him the keys.
Stajan, Wideman, and Engelland have all worked long, and hard, to justify the contracts they signed. Their production today may not justify the spend, making them bad contracts.
Gaudreau will get paid handsomely for the next 7-8 years, and if he maintains his current trajectory will command one of the largest paydays in the league.
Your attitude is a fine example of entitlement displayed by the youth of today. You use words like "worth", but seem to have no idea what that actually means.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Flacker For This Useful Post:
A good contract is whether they earn the money or are overpaid.
Brodie and Elliot fall in the amazing contract status
Wideman and Stajan fall in the dog poop contract status
The point being, is that if every team in the league has bad contracts, Johnny's (and every other player negotiating a contract) upper limit is affected by the existence of bad contracts - something that exists on every team. Posters can't say "if only management hadn't paid so and so too much, Johnny would get more" when that could be said for every other team.
The Following User Says Thank You to D as in David For This Useful Post:
Why is the expectation that our best player take a discount? Especially when his best buddy and the team captain didn't? I guess those guys are just greedy, too?
Its laughable that we'll spend big money on guys like Stajan, Wideman, Brouwer, Engelland etc but when time comes to pay our franchise player we all of the sudden go into austerity mode? We had no problem paying Monahan more than all his comps, or signing Gio until he's 40. But we can't pay the guy who runs our entire offense for his prime years? Risk ruining the relationship and this season too save an extra ~1M in cap space we might need in the future?
Its hilarious that some people defend that line of thinking while simultaneously blaming Gaudreau for wanting to be paid what he's worth.
A. "Worth" is pretty subjective. What matters is market value. And a less-than-RFA can't command what you think he can.
B. Whether you think it's "laughable" that certain players are paid is irrelevant. The only relevance of those contracts is that the Flames have less money to spend now, which doesn't lead to the conclusion you are pushing - it leads to the opposite. Should they make a bad decision because of previous bad decisions (some not by this management)?
C. Monahan is paid a tiny bit more than his comps. Gio is paid less than his, arguably, and its a good bet he will be productive for almost the entirety of that contract. Gaudreau has no identical comparables given his status. He has comparables in production who had more bargaining power at the time they signed.
D. I don't think any side is overly concerned about relationships being ruined, nor is it a realistic danger, but even if it was - it's a two-way street. If that's a risk Gaudreau should think about coming down as much as the Flames should think about moving up.
The Following User Says Thank You to GioforPM For This Useful Post:
Your attitude is a fine example of entitlement displayed by the youth of today. You use words like "worth", but seem to have no idea what that actually means.
Entitlement or Entitled
__________________
Captain James P. DeCOSTE, CD, 18 Sep 1993
