GDT: Game 25 Columbus vs Carolina 11/28 7:00 PM

[Cyclones Rock]

Aren't we fans of the team first and foremost?


It remains to be seen whether Jarmo was shortsighted on Anderson. You are right that Jarmo's stance was "we hold all the cards, now you have to prove it." When Anderson's deal expires, he will still be an RFA (I believe this contract takes him to the edge of free agency). What if Jarmo approaches him with the stance of "good work, we still hold the cards, prove it again."

The point I've been making is given how stubborn the team is in its talent assessments and how they attempt to leverage negotiating power, "prove it again" could absolutely be their stance in 3 years.

Hopefully they don't squander talent and hopefully Anderson becomes better than anyone predicts. But I feel like we have seen this before.

I guess it comes down to I think there's a better way to build the mouse trap. I've linked up the Nashville payroll. I think that when a player has demonstrated extreme competence but is still an RFA, that the best way to use the team's RFA leverage is to get the player to sign a long term deal at a substantial discount to what they will most likely get a few years down the line.

Nashville Predators - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

Poile correctly identified Ellis,Ekholm and Josi as valuable long term pieces and signed them to deals which have turned out to be dynmite for the team. It looks like he's done the same with Arvidsson. He's still using RFA leverage, but instead of doing it in a penal way (which the CBJ did with Johansen and Anderson) he does it in a manner which gives a player long term security, but keeps team costs extremely low.

I believe that the "prove it" card is no more than a PR phrase designed to sway public opinion. Johansen had a 33 goal and 30 assist season prior to his ELC expiring. He'd more than "proved" himself. Players rarely break out like that and regress greatly. Anderson scored 17 goals in very limited TOI and no PP time.- That was a "real deal" performance. He's confirmed that he was no fluke already this season. He is a great physical specimen who skates very well. I don't believe for a minute that Jarmo nor JD nor Torts believed he was a flash in the pan. I just think that their philosophy about RFAs is set in stone and they're not learning from a better application of RFA leverage. Poile's model is far superior to Jarmo's. He had enough cap room to acquire and sign a $6 million/year outstanding #2C in Turris while at the same time shouldering a $9 million Subban and $8 million Johansen. Had he played hardball with his 3 dman who were coming off ELCs, he couldn't have done it.

Jarmo and JD aren't approaching RFAs in the most intelligent fashion. Poile is. They should learn from his successful model instead of continuing their inferior approach. The real leverage with RFAs is signing them to cheap long term deals; not 2 or 3 year penny pinching 'in your face" deals. One of these days, the CBJ FO may wake up and smell the roses on this. But I doubt it.

 

[CBJx614]

I guess it comes down to I think there's a better way to build the mouse trap. I've linked up the Nashville payroll. I think that when a player has demonstrated extreme competence but is still an RFA, that the best way to use the team's RFA leverage is to get the player to sign a long term deal at a substantial discount to what they will most likely get a few years down the line.

Nashville Predators - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

Poile correctly identified Ellis,Ekholm and Josi as valuable long term pieces and signed them to deals which have turned out to be dynmite for the team. It looks like he's done the same with Arvidsson. He's still using RFA leverage, but instead of doing it in a penal way (which the CBJ did with Johansen and Anderson) he does it in a manner which gives a player long term security, but keeps team costs extremely low.

I believe that the "prove it" card is no more than a PR phrase designed to sway public opinion. Johansen had a 33 goal and 30 assist season prior to his ELC expiring. He'd more than "proved" himself. Players rarely break out like that and regress greatly. Anderson scored 17 goals in very limited TOI and no PP time.- That was a "real deal" performance. He's confirmed that he was no fluke already this season. He is a great physical specimen who skates very well. I don't believe for a minute that Jarmo nor JD nor Torts believed he was a flash in the pan. I just think that their philosophy about RFAs is set in stone and they're not learning from a better application of RFA leverage. Poile's model is far superior to Jarmo's. He had enough cap room to acquire and sign a $6 million/year outstanding #2C in Turris while at the same time shouldering a $9 million Subban and $8 million Johansen. Had he played hardball with his 3 dman who were coming off ELCs, he couldn't have done it.

Jarmo and JD aren't approaching RFAs in the most intelligent fashion. Poile is. They should learn from his successful model instead of continuing their inferior approach. The real leverage with RFAs is signing them to cheap long term deals; not 2 or 3 year penny pinching 'in your face" deals. One of these days, the CBJ FO may wake up and smell the roses on this. But I doubt it.

It depends on the players, they handled both the Jones and Wennberg situations perfectly, I wouldnt be surprised to see Werenski get a similar contract to Jones, maybe a little more AAV depending on how this and next season go.


Curious to see how they are going to treat PLD. If he keeps up this 20min TOI and put up some points consistently through his next contract I think he'll be given a long term deal out of his ELC as well. I don't think they want to give out long term contracts except to those who are the core of the team long term.

 

[Monk]

I'm also fine with how they've handled contracts so far. I wonder if Anderson hadn't held out if this discussion would be happening.

EDIT: To be fair though, I'm really enjoying reading this cordial discourse. It's rather refreshing. Please carry on.

 

[Cyclones Rock]

It depends on the players, they handled both the Jones and Wennberg situations perfectly, I wouldnt be surprised to see Werenski get a similar contract to Jones, maybe a little more AAV depending on how this and next season go.


Curious to see how they are going to treat PLD. If he keeps up this 20min TOI and put up some points consistently through his next contract I think he'll be given a long term deal out of his ELC as well. I don't think they want to give out long term contracts except to those who are the core of the team long term.

I'll agree with Jones, but that was a layup. I'm putting Wennberg in the "we'll see" category. My inclination on Wennberg would have been to "bridge" him. Jenner was a wise bridge-he's a hard worker, but his 30 goal year was likely an aberration and he's just not all that talented. Atkinson's case is an interesting one. He signed for $3.5m as an RFA, so it probably would have taken at least $4.5 for him to go to a 5 or 6 year deal. The financial angle is probably close to a wash for what would have been a 6 year deal , but now they have a 33/34/35 year old Atkinson in years 5,6 & 7 and that probably isn't a good thing, but we'll see. They also gave him NMC and NTCs and I am not a huge fan of those. I think that they probably could have hardballed Atkinson and had him drop his demand, but I wasn't there so I can't say that with a great deal of assuredness. LOL

PLD's case is way too early to assess. He's on year 1 of a 3 year deal because he was sent back to juniors last season.

Werenski will be signed longer term based on years 1 & 2 most likely. It seems like most elite (or potentially elite) players get signed early in the final year of their ELCs. If negoitations aren't done by early next season, that would suggest that agent/player and team have widely differening values. I won't fault the FO if signing #8 is a rocky process. He's likely to demand a boatload (I'd say a bit north of $7 million and want 7 or 8 years so it's bound to be a bit contentious.

There's certainly risk in signing younger RFAs long term, but in the cases of a Jones, Werenski, Johansen and Anderson, I think it's the most prudent course of action.