Speculation: Kirill Kaprizov has tentative agreement on 8-figure deal in KHL

[theVladiator]

Apologies if I missed it mentioned, I haven't been following this mostly emotional thread too closely. I see a CBA issue with the Wild negotiating stance, if they are indeed refusing to make an offer of 3 years or less. Basically this would be an encroachment on the UFA age established in the CBA. After all, what meaning would that UFA age have if the teams refused to negotiate contracts that end at that age?

So, because of the CBA, I feel that the 3 year deal must be on the table no matter what, even if it means lower $$$. There is very little reliable info on the negotiations, so maybe it is after all.

Is it really the end of the world for the Wild if Kaprizov signs 3 year deal, if this is indeed what he wants? If at the moment he really plans to leave, just focus on the best 3 year deal you can negotiate, and see if you can change his mind in the next 3 years. If he wants to max his earnings and take the risk of a short term deal, why not let him? Maybe in 3 years the UFA market won't be what he expects it to be. I just get the feeling Guerin is trying too hard to solve all of the Wild problems with this deal, and might be shooting himself in the foot instead.

 

[Bazeek]

Apologies if I missed it mentioned, I haven't been following this mostly emotional thread too closely. I see a CBA issue with the Wild negotiating stance, if they are indeed refusing to make an offer of 3 years or less. Basically this would be an encroachment on the UFA age established in the CBA. After all, what meaning would that UFA age have if the teams refused to negotiate contracts that end at that age?

So, because of the CBA, I feel that the 3 year deal must be on the table no matter what, even if it means lower $$$. There is very little reliable info on the negotiations, so maybe it is after all.

Is it really the end of the world for the Wild if Kaprizov signs 3 year deal, if this is indeed what he wants? If at the moment he really plans to leave, just focus on the best 3 year deal you can negotiate, and see if you can change his mind in the next 3 years. If he wants to max his earnings and take the risk of a short term deal, why not let him? Maybe in 3 years the UFA market won't be what he expects it to be. I just get the feeling Guerin is trying too hard to solve all of the Wild problems with this deal, and might be shooting himself in the foot instead.

As far as I'm aware there's nothing in the CBA that dictates what term/money a team must offer a player, aside from the qualifying offer needed to retain their rights.

A 3 year deal would expire in the middle of the Parise/Suter buyouts when the team will be carrying $15m in dead cap space. This will likely make it impossible to offer any sort of extension, which the team is trying to avoid.

By no means does a 4-5 year deal solve all of the team's problems, it just keeps its options open.

 

[ThatGuy22]

Apologies if I missed it mentioned, I haven't been following this mostly emotional thread too closely. I see a CBA issue with the Wild negotiating stance, if they are indeed refusing to make an offer of 3 years or less. Basically this would be an encroachment on the UFA age established in the CBA. After all, what meaning would that UFA age have if the teams refused to negotiate contracts that end at that age?

So, because of the CBA, I feel that the 3 year deal must be on the table no matter what, even if it means lower $$$. There is very little reliable info on the negotiations, so maybe it is after all.

Is it really the end of the world for the Wild if Kaprizov signs 3 year deal, if this is indeed what he wants? If at the moment he really plans to leave, just focus on the best 3 year deal you can negotiate, and see if you can change his mind in the next 3 years. If he wants to max his earnings and take the risk of a short term deal, why not let him? Maybe in 3 years the UFA market won't be what he expects it to be. I just get the feeling Guerin is trying too hard to solve all of the Wild problems with this deal, and might be shooting himself in the foot instead.

Ya. That's not how any of this works. The Wild are under no obligation by the CBA to make it easy for him to get to his earliest UFA availability.

If Kaprizov is dead set at becoming an NHL UFA at his earliest ability in 3 years, he can. By playing in the KHL for the next 3 years.

 

[Digitalbooya]

Ya. That's not how any of this works. The Wild are under no obligation by the CBA to make it easy for him to get to his earliest UFA availability.

If Kaprizov is dead set at becoming an NHL UFA at his earliest ability in 3 years, he can. By playing in the KHL for the next 3 years.

He can also sign his qualifying offer and take it to arbitration next year and the year after. It quite literally is an easy path to free agency. He loses short term money, but I don’t feel bad when he is turning down $9m per year for 8 years.

 

[ThatGuy22]

He can also sign his qualifying offer and take it to arbitration next year and the year after. It quite literally is an easy path to free agency. He loses short term money, but I don’t feel bad when he is turning down $9m per year for 8 years.

Nope. Qualifying offer's expire. Not sure the exact date this offseason, but in a normal offseason they are active from July 1st, to July 15th. Meaning a player has roughly two weeks to accept their qualifying offer if that's what they plan on doing.

It's surely expired by now.

 

[theVladiator]

As far as I'm aware there's nothing in the CBA that dictates what term/money a team must offer a player, aside from the qualifying offer needed to retain their rights.

A 3 year deal would expire in the middle of the Parise/Suter buyouts when the team will be carrying $15m in dead cap space. This will likely make it impossible to offer any sort of extension, which the team is trying to avoid.

By no means does a 4-5 year deal solve all of the team's problems, it just keeps its options open.

I think I expressed the issue with that sufficiently well. It's not that such an offer would violate any explicit prescription of the CBA, indeed there is none. However, IMO refusing to negotiate only RFA years violates the UFA age clause where a player, if he so chooses should be able to freely negotiate with any NHL team. So coercing to negotiate UFA years during exclusive RFA negotiating period is potentially a CBA violation.

Obviously other contracts have been signed that extend into UFA years, but it seems to be the first time that extra term is not welcome, so we will see how this goes.

 

[Bazeek]

I think I expressed the issue with that sufficiently well. It's not that such an offer would violate any explicit prescription of the CBA, indeed there is none. However, IMO refusing to negotiate only RFA years violates the UFA age clause where a player, if he so chooses should be able to freely negotiate with any NHL team. So coercing to negotiate UFA years during exclusive RFA negotiating period is potentially a CBA violation.

Obviously other contracts have been signed that extend into UFA years, but it seems to be the first time that extra term is not welcome, so we will see how this goes.

Whether or not it's a CBA violation is pretty clear cut: it's a violation if it steps outside the rules in the agreement. This doesn't, so it's not a violation.

Whether or not the CBA is sufficient or ideal is up for discussion, but there's really no grey area here. Beyond the QO the team is under no obligation to offer any particular term or money. Likewise, the player is under no obligation to sign at any particular term or money. Hence, stalemates.

 

[ThatGuy22]

I think I expressed the issue with that sufficiently well. It's not that such an offer would violate any explicit prescription of the CBA, indeed there is none. However, IMO refusing to negotiate only RFA years violates the UFA age clause where a player, if he so chooses should be able to freely negotiate with any NHL team. So coercing to negotiate UFA years during exclusive RFA negotiating period is potentially a CBA violation.

Obviously other contracts have been signed that extend into UFA years, but it seems to be the first time that extra term is not welcome, so we will see how this goes.

No. It's not. There is absolutely nothing in the CBA requiring a team to offer a deal that goes to UFA.

Article 10.1 (a) that discusses Group 3 UFAs, and outlines the age 27 requirement solely deals with age at the expiration of a current contract. Absolutely nothing about it deals with restrictions on negotiating RFA contracts.

Article 11 that discusses rules/regs on standard players contracts offers absolutely nothing that would be a violation.

At the end of the day, neither side is forced to sign a contract they aren't comfortable with. If the Wild aren't comfortable offering less than 4 years, they don't have to offer it.

If Kaprizov isn't comfortable signing more than three years, he doesn't have to sign one.

Each side has a choice, and can live with the consequences. For the Wild it would be the loss of Kaprizov's services, for Kaprizov the opportunity of playing in the NHL.

 

[TheNumber4]

Uh....

No they don't, Kaprizov is better than Svechnikov and should get a better contract.

Nah. Svechnikov is just as good, and most likely better since at his age there’s a way better chance of upward potential.

 

[TheNumber4]

Poor comparison. Kaprizov is much more valuable to Minnesota than Svech is to Carolina; especially if you factor marketing into the equation.

Plus, if contracts are predicated on production, Minnesota is lowballing him. Kaprizov is a PPG player with any reasonable center.

Marketing? Why? Cause Thrill rhymes with Kiril? Svechnikov is the younger player with more potential. Produced essentially the same PpG 2 years ago. More proven. More upward potential. No entitlement issues. No character issues.

 

[theVladiator]

Whether or not it's a CBA violation is pretty clear cut: it's a violation if it steps outside the rules in the agreement. This doesn't, so it's not a violation.

Whether or not the CBA is sufficient or ideal is up for discussion, but there's really no grey area here. Beyond the QO the team is under no obligation to offer any particular term or money. Likewise, the player is under no obligation to sign at any particular term or money. Hence, stalemates.

Yeah, I did not phrase it well. CBA violation would be shut down pretty quickly I am sure. So, CBA issue? CBA loophole? In any case, interesting situation from my point of view.

 

[kp61c]

Nah. Svechnikov is just as good, and most likely better since at his age there’s a way better chance of upward potential.

Nah. Kaprizov is a much better player. And Svechnikiv at his age is basically the same player he was 3 years ago. There is not much potential in him, i'm afraid. It is Kaprizov now and in the future AINEC.

 

[Bazeek]

Yeah, I did not phrase it well. CBA violation would be shut down pretty quickly I am sure. So, CBA issue? CBA loophole? In any case, interesting situation from my point of view.

It's not really a loophole either. The entire RFA framework is built around the idea that, for drafted players, the team has more leverage and control over contract terms earlier in the player's career. Kaprizov's just a weird case because he waited so long to sign his ELC and therefore doesn't have the same rights that most players his age would.

 

[Zine]

He's now attending CSKA practices.

 

[Hanji]

Marketing? Why? Cause Thrill rhymes with Kiril? Svechnikov is the younger player with more potential. Produced essentially the same PpG 2 years ago. More proven. More upward potential. No entitlement issues. No character issues.

Because with their cap problems Minnesota will be the definition of average the next few years, maybe worse. At least having a player of Kaprizov's caliber will help to bring butts into the seats and, at the very least, sell merchandise.

Given their current circumstances this is something Carolina doesn't need Svechnikov to do, nor would/does he at Kaprizov's level.

 

[rynryn]

Now that we signed Jordie Benn he's for sure signing soon.

 

[TheNumber4]

Because with their cap problems Minnesota will be the definition of average the next few years, maybe worse. At least having a player of Kaprizov's caliber will help to bring butts into the seats and, at the very least, sell merchandise.

Given their current circumstances this is something Carolina doesn't need Svechnikov to do, nor would/does he at Kaprizov's level.

Yeh I’m sure Minnie fans will just be lining up to watch a good not great player that tried to lie to extract maximum over value that will hurt the teams overall chances at success.

 

[rynryn]

Because with their cap problems Minnesota will be the definition of average the next few years, maybe worse. At least having a player of Kaprizov's caliber will help to bring butts into the seats and, at the very least, sell merchandise.

Given their current circumstances this is something Carolina doesn't need Svechnikov to do, nor would/does he at Kaprizov's level.

Even with Kirill we can't possibly vie for the "zomg look at our forwards" participation ribbons that some teams with elite talent seem happy with so we go for the "most mediocre" trophy. I fear Kirill will jeopardize that, however, as he's too much fun to watch.

 

[heisenbergsitti]

Yeah, I did not phrase it well. CBA violation would be shut down pretty quickly I am sure. So, CBA issue? CBA loophole? In any case, interesting situation from my point of view.

There's no cba loophole, or cba issues. He's a restricted free agent , a special one at that whose not eligible for offersheet. So, wild or no other teams are under any legal obligation to give him what he wants

 

[McJedi]

Still a bit high in my opinion. Kaprizov’s three RFA years should be at most valued at $7m given the Barzal and Tkachuk deals.

4x $8m would value the single UFA year at $11m. Something more like $9.5m to $10m for the UFA year seems more appropriate imo. Using $7m for the RFA years and $10m for the UFA years would yield:

Four years $31m total: $7.75m AAV
Five years $41m total: $8.2m AAV

Could be. 4 years x $7.5mm. If it goes to 5 years, AAV goes to at least $9mm, but probably higher. I highly doubt Kirill signs for more than 4 years.

 

[Digitalbooya]

Nope. Qualifying offer's expire. Not sure the exact date this offseason, but in a normal offseason they are active from July 1st, to July 15th. Meaning a player has roughly two weeks to accept their qualifying offer if that's what they plan on doing.

It's surely expired by now.

Well, I guess that's his problem for not taking advantage of the option when it was available.

 

[Kshahdoo]

Yeh I’m sure Minnie fans will just be lining up to watch a good not great player that tried to lie to extract maximum over value that will hurt the teams overall chances at success.

Of course they won't, but considering how great Kaprizov is they will.

 

[ClarkBolzano]

You're ignoring the age difference. Svech started playing NHL when he was 19yo. Including that year into his playing averages seems offsides, no? He hasn't even hit his prime yet(he is 21), which is usually from the ages of 22-25yo.

Here's the thing. KK has been offered a lot of money to play for the Wild. Life changing money. More money than players who play the same position, are better, and have an established track record. At this point, he(or his agent) seems more interested in getting a record amount of money for a player of his service time rather than a fair deal.

MN just got out two crappy contracts. I am not in a hurry for them to sign another. KK is a really good player, but he appears to have an inflated sense of his own worth.

Svech had his first NHL season when he Was 18.

 

[peconcan]

Hope he turns into a skinner contract. 1 good season doesn’t make you worth 9+ million. He could sign a huge ticket and come out and do nothing next year

 

[ClarkBolzano]

Nah. Kaprizov is a much better player. And Svechnikiv at his age is basically the same player he was 3 years ago. There is not much potential in him, i'm afraid. It is Kaprizov now and in the future AINEC.

I think you didnt follow h Canes so much. I followed He canes very closely and I can tell you that Svech is a uch better player now than He was 3 years ago.