Parayko Contract

[Skinnyjimmy08]

they gotta sign him long term asap... if they bridge deal him, Blues will be paying HUGE money after those 2 years

 

[2 Minute Minor]

they gotta sign him long term asap... if they bridge deal him, Blues will be paying HUGE money after those 2 years

Why does signing him now vs next off-season have any difference whether its a bridge deal or long term? Answer: it doesn't.

 

[Vincenzo Arelliti]

Why does signing him now vs next off-season have any difference whether its a bridge deal or long term? Answer: it doesn't.

Exactly this. I think we'll sign him the following season to a 4.5Mx8/7 year deal with a Full NTC.

 

[PiggySmalls]

The reason I want him to be signed to his new contract this off-season is to prevent a Dougie Hamilton or Saad incident to happen again. Blues will already be close to the cap with too many contracts needing attention next off season (2017). Whether it is a bridge or long term, I dont care. I'd prefer a long term though.

 

[ManyIdeas]

Exactly this. I think we'll sign him the following season to a 4.5Mx8/7 year deal with a Full NTC.

I think everyone here would be ecstatic about this, but do you think he'll go for it?

 

[Skinnyjimmy08]

Why does signing him now vs next off-season have any difference whether its a bridge deal or long term? Answer: it doesn't.

Id rather sign him to an extension this offseason and hopefully get him a lot cheaper. If he excels even more next year and becomes an even better player(which I fully anticipate), its gonna cost Blues a helluva lot more. If I were Parayko, Id wait.... if I were Blues, Id wanna lock him up as soon as possible in offseason

 

[Skinnyjimmy08]

Exactly this. I think we'll sign him the following season to a 4.5Mx8/7 year deal with a Full NTC.

if he has another unreal season next year, IMO he will demand more than 4.5 mill. Or else he will take 4.5 for only a few years. I just cant see him accepting 4.5 for that long

I think the bar will be set this offseason with other dmen around the league. A lot of good young dmen are up for new contracts and Parayko and his agent will definitely be keeping an eye on what they sign for.

Spurgeon signed a 4 year deal at a cap hit of 5.1ish
Hampus will sign a large deal
Trouba was rumored to be demanding over 7 mill a year(which is absurd)

I would LOVE to see Parayko locked up for only 4.5 mill for 8 years, but that's just wishful thinking IMO. And it would be the biggest steal of a contract ever in a few years!!!

 

[carter333167]

Yep, if he posts another year like this one or an even better year, the price will almost definitely rise. Safest IMO to just see if we can get it done now.

You can judge for yourself the risk of offer sheets if we wait until next summer...they are a polarizing topic but to say it never happens simply isn't true.

If we can get between 3 and 4.5 on a long term deal now--I say take it.

 

[Brian39]

I don't think I've seen a single number on a long term deal that wouldn't cause his agent to laugh Army out of the room.

If I'm Parayko, I don't even entertain an 8 year deal worth less than $45 mil or a 7 year deal worth less than $40 mil. That would put him at $5.625 per year ($5.7 on the 7 year deal). To put this in perspective, here are the D men making $5.5-$5.75 mil this year: Orpik, Sekera, Leddy, Carle, Girardi, Ekman-Larsson, Myers, Wisneiwski, Petry, Keith, M Staal, Niskinan, Markov, Hamilton, and Enstrom.

Ekman-Larsson and Hamilton are on 6 year deals that expire when they are 27 and only bought up 2 UFA years. Keith is on an extremely front loaded long term deal that was outlawed under the current CBA. Is there a single other name on that list you would take over Parayko? I would take Parayko over everyone left on that list right now. He's already a better D man than some of them and his ceiling is higher than just about everyone.

If we are asking him to sign past 30 and pass up 4-5 years of UFA, we are going to need to buck up. Of course Army should extend him ASAP if he can get him for 8 years at $4.5 mil per. But that is almost impossibly unlikely as he would likely be leaving $15-$20 mil on the table by signing that contract. I'm all for going long term with him, but the final number on that deal is almost certainly going to be closer to $7 per year than $4.

 

[Alklha]

I don't think I've seen a single number on a long term deal that wouldn't cause his agent to laugh Army out of the room.

If I'm Parayko, I don't even entertain an 8 year deal worth less than $45 mil or a 7 year deal worth less than $40 mil. That would put him at $5.625 per year ($5.7 on the 7 year deal). To put this in perspective, here are the D men making $5.5-$5.75 mil this year: Orpik, Sekera, Leddy, Carle, Girardi, Ekman-Larsson, Myers, Wisneiwski, Petry, Keith, M Staal, Niskinan, Markov, Hamilton, and Enstrom.

Ekman-Larsson and Hamilton are on 6 year deals that expire when they are 27 and only bought up 2 UFA years. Keith is on an extremely front loaded long term deal that was outlawed under the current CBA. Is there a single other name on that list you would take over Parayko? I would take Parayko over everyone left on that list right now. He's already a better D man than some of them and his ceiling is higher than just about everyone.

If we are asking him to sign past 30 and pass up 4-5 years of UFA, we are going to need to buck up. Of course Army should extend him ASAP if he can get him for 8 years at $4.5 mil per. But that is almost impossibly unlikely as he would likely be leaving $15-$20 mil on the table by signing that contract. I'm all for going long term with him, but the final number on that deal is almost certainly going to be closer to $7 per year than $4.

Roman Josi
Slava Voynov
John Klingberg
Jake Muzzin
Olli Määttä
Ryan McDonagh
John Carlson

That's just off the top of my head. Expecting to get him for 8 years at $4m is being optimistic, but there is enough evidence to think we can get a 6 or, maybe, 7 year deal with something starting with a 4.

 

[Vladys Gumption]

I don't think I've seen a single number on a long term deal that wouldn't cause his agent to laugh Army out of the room.

If I'm Parayko, I don't even entertain an 8 year deal worth less than $45 mil or a 7 year deal worth less than $40 mil. That would put him at $5.625 per year ($5.7 on the 7 year deal). To put this in perspective, here are the D men making $5.5-$5.75 mil this year: Orpik, Sekera, Leddy, Carle, Girardi, Ekman-Larsson, Myers, Wisneiwski, Petry, Keith, M Staal, Niskinan, Markov, Hamilton, and Enstrom.

Ekman-Larsson and Hamilton are on 6 year deals that expire when they are 27 and only bought up 2 UFA years. Keith is on an extremely front loaded long term deal that was outlawed under the current CBA. Is there a single other name on that list you would take over Parayko? I would take Parayko over everyone left on that list right now. He's already a better D man than some of them and his ceiling is higher than just about everyone.

If we are asking him to sign past 30 and pass up 4-5 years of UFA, we are going to need to buck up. Of course Army should extend him ASAP if he can get him for 8 years at $4.5 mil per. But that is almost impossibly unlikely as he would likely be leaving $15-$20 mil on the table by signing that contract. I'm all for going long term with him, but the final number on that deal is almost certainly going to be closer to $7 per year than $4.

There's one main problem with your argument though. Nearly all the names you have listed were UFA when they signed. That makes a large difference on the cap hit of the contract. RFA years are significantly cheaper. I'm not saying it's super realistic to get him to sign for 8 years at 4.5 million, bunand I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility.

 

[Brian39]

Roman Josi
Slava Voynov
John Klingberg
Jake Muzzin
Olli Määttä
Ryan McDonagh
John Carlson

That's just off the top of my head. Expecting to get him for 8 years at $4m is being optimistic, but there is enough evidence to think we can get a 6 or, maybe, 7 year deal with something starting with a 4.

4 of those 7 contracts were signed in 2013 or earlier when the cap was under $65 mil. Even with the struggling Canadian dollar, the cap is projected to be around $73 mil next year, which means there is a very high probability that the cap will be $10 mil more than it was in 2013 by the time Parayko's extension would kick in. Inflation of the salary cap makes those numbers fairly obsolete and any agent is going to (correctly) argue that $5-5.5 mil in 2017 is the equivalent of $4-4.5 mil in 2013. Bringing these contracts to the table as comparables gives Parayko's agent ammo to argue for $5.5+ in salary.

Of the remaining 3, Muzzin's is only for 5 years, and Muzzin signed it when he was 27 after 2 bridge deals. I don't think anyone can argue that he has as much room for improvement as Parayko does. I don't think Maatta has ever been as impressive as Parayko and he signed that deal very soon after a life and career threatening injury. I'm sure that gave him tons of incentive to lock up the most money he could even if it limited his long term earning potential.

The only contract left is the Klingberg deal, which is 1 of the 3 most team friendly D contracts in the NHL. Best case scenario, the Blues can try to talk him under the $5 mil mark by using a small handful of contracts that are universally regarded as extremely team friendly. His agent will come in with a slew of overpayments and argue that $5.5-$6 mil on an 8 year deal is still a bargain for the team.

I think we could get him for $4-$4.5 on a 6 year deal, but if we want to max him out on term, I think we are going to have to pony up.

 

[Chojin]

I said this in another thread, but it's a no-brainer to commit to Parayko long-term. It's just a thing that successful teams have to do now: commit to your best-bet players early to get the cap hit down. There's a sufficiently large body of comparable players that getting him on a 6-7 year deal with a $4-5m AAV shouldn't be difficult.

 

[Brian39]

There's one main problem with your argument though. Nearly all the names you have listed were UFA when they signed. That makes a large difference on the cap hit of the contract. RFA years are significantly cheaper. I'm not saying it's super realistic to get him to sign for 8 years at 4.5 million, bunand I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility.

I agree with you, but an 8 year deal would be buying 5 years of UFA. Given the annual inflation of the salary cap, player salaries also creep upward every year. By 2017 (the year his extension would kick in), it is safe to assume that $5.7 won't buy what it did in 2013-15 (when a lot of these contracts were signed). Inflation and the fact that we would be buying 5 UFA years suggest to me that these current comparables are pretty reasonable.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to get him long term for under $5 mil. I'm just trying to look at this from his agent's perspective. If I were advising Parayko, my opening advice is that he should go for a bridge deal because he will be able to significantly out-earn a long term deal today by waiting 2 years and signing long term when he is on his last year of RFA.

 

[Chojin]

4 of those 7 contracts were signed in 2013 or earlier when the cap was under $65 mil. Even with the struggling Canadian dollar, the cap is projected to be around $73 mil next year, which means there is a very high probability that the cap will be $10 mil more than it was in 2013 by the time Parayko's extension would kick in. Inflation of the salary cap makes those numbers fairly obsolete and any agent is going to (correctly) argue that $5-5.5 mil in 2017 is the equivalent of $4-4.5 mil in 2013. Bringing these contracts to the table as comparables gives Parayko's agent ammo to argue for $5.5+ in salary.

Of the remaining 3, Muzzin's is only for 5 years, and Muzzin signed it when he was 27 after 2 bridge deals. I don't think anyone can argue that he has as much room for improvement as Parayko does. I don't think Maatta has ever been as impressive as Parayko and he signed that deal very soon after a life and career threatening injury. I'm sure that gave him tons of incentive to lock up the most money he could even if it limited his long term earning potential.

The only contract left is the Klingberg deal, which is 1 of the 3 most team friendly D contracts in the NHL. Best case scenario, the Blues can try to talk him under the $5 mil mark by using a small handful of contracts that are universally regarded as extremely team friendly. His agent will come in with a slew of overpayments and argue that $5.5-$6 mil on an 8 year deal is still a bargain for the team.

I think we could get him for $4-$4.5 on a 6 year deal, but if we want to max him out on term, I think we are going to have to pony up.

It absolutely doesn't give him that kind of ammo. The cap only went up 11% from 2013-14 to 2015-16, so even if we're generous and say it will be 15% by the time 2016-17 rolls around, that makes a $4m AAV only rise to $4.6m. And how is he going to justify getting more than Klingberg, who signed his $4.25m AAV deal in April of last year after an insane 40 points in 65 games? His absolute ceiling is $5m, and he only sniffs that if he takes max term.

 

[Alklha]

4 of those 7 contracts were signed in 2013 or earlier when the cap was under $65 mil. Even with the struggling Canadian dollar, the cap is projected to be around $73 mil next year, which means there is a very high probability that the cap will be $10 mil more than it was in 2013 by the time Parayko's extension would kick in. Inflation of the salary cap makes those numbers fairly obsolete and any agent is going to (correctly) argue that $5-5.5 mil in 2017 is the equivalent of $4-4.5 mil in 2013. Bringing these contracts to the table as comparables gives Parayko's agent ammo to argue for $5.5+ in salary.

Of the remaining 3, Muzzin's is only for 5 years, and Muzzin signed it when he was 27 after 2 bridge deals. I don't think anyone can argue that he has as much room for improvement as Parayko does. I don't think Maatta has ever been as impressive as Parayko and he signed that deal very soon after a life and career threatening injury. I'm sure that gave him tons of incentive to lock up the most money he could even if it limited his long term earning potential.

The only contract left is the Klingberg deal, which is 1 of the 3 most team friendly D contracts in the NHL. Best case scenario, the Blues can try to talk him under the $5 mil mark by using a small handful of contracts that are universally regarded as extremely team friendly. His agent will come in with a slew of overpayments and argue that $5.5-$6 mil on an 8 year deal is still a bargain for the team.

I think we could get him for $4-$4.5 on a 6 year deal, but if we want to max him out on term, I think we are going to have to pony up.

Salary cap inflation is easy to adjust for.

John Carlson signed his contract when the salary cap was $70m. Josi is $4.6m adjusted for a $74m cap, Voynov is $4.8m, McDonagh is 5.4m. Muzzin might only be a 5 year deal, at an older age, but he is a top pairing defenseman.

If you think we can get a 6 year deal at around $4.5m, then the most an 8 year deal is going to cost is $5.4m. I don't think there is too much disagreement, it's just a matter of how aggressive we'd like to see Armstrong being. I'd be shocked if we considered a bridge.

 

[Brian39]

It absolutely doesn't give him that kind of ammo. The cap only went up 11% from 2013-14 to 2015-16, so even if we're generous and say it will be 15% by the time 2016-17 rolls around, that makes a $4m AAV only rise to $4.6m. And how is he going to justify getting more than Klingberg, who signed his $4.25m AAV deal in April of last year after an insane 40 points in 65 games? His absolute ceiling is $5m, and he only sniffs that if he takes max term.

The projection for next season is $73 mil, which is already a 13.5% increase from 2013/14. A 15% increase from 13/14 for the 17/18 season would be $74 mil. Expecting the cap to raise even less than it did this season is pretty conservative, not generous. The cap has never increased by less than $1 mil since it was created, so a cap of at least $74 mil is on the low end of expectations.

Assuming a 15% increase in cap, most of the contracts listed don't support us trying to get him signed long term for $4-$4.5 mil.

Josi's $4 mil becomes $4.6, Voynov's $4.166 becomes $4.8, McDonagh's $4.7 becomes $5.4 and Carlson's $3.9 becomes $4.55. So all of these contracts are worth more than $4.5 when adjusted for cap inflation using a conservative increase in the cap by 2017. Additionally, 3 of those are for 6 years and the other is for 7. So we would be asking to buy 1-2 extra UFA years for less dollars when adjusted for the cap. Any competent agent will tell Army that $4.5 may work if we are only doing 6 years like those players, but the cost goes up if we want to buy 2 more UFA years.

As for justifying more than Klingberg, that is widely regarded as a ridiculously team friendly contract. It is an outlier and every player rep knows that. If a team tries to use that as the standard for a longhttp://hfboards.mandatory.com/images/smilies/amazed.gif term deal, the player will say, 'that's fine, it clearly isn't in my interest to sign long term, so what is your offer on a bridge deal.'

I'm not saying that it will be impossible to sign him to a very team friendly deal. I would love for Army to get it done and maybe he can. But this attitude that it should be easy to get him long term for $3-$3.5 is insane. It is not easy to take the 7 most team friendly offers to an agent and say that we are willing to come in at the low end of these, but we want to commit to an even longer term than these players got. If we can get him for 8 years at under $4.5 per, it would be Army's crowning achievement as a GM and would be regarded as one of the best contracts in hockey.

 

[Brian39]

Salary cap inflation is easy to adjust for.

John Carlson signed his contract when the salary cap was $70m. Josi is $4.6m adjusted for a $74m cap, Voynov is $4.8m, McDonagh is 5.4m. Muzzin might only be a 5 year deal, at an older age, but he is a top pairing defenseman.

If you think we can get a 6 year deal at around $4.5m, then the most an 8 year deal is going to cost is $5.4m. I don't think there is too much disagreement, it's just a matter of how aggressive we'd like to see Armstrong being. I'd be shocked if we considered a bridge.

This is exactly my point though. The numbers being thrown around were as low as $3mil on an 8 year deal and the absolute highest number anyone mentioned in this thread on an 8 year deal was $4.5 per. I believe it was you who said an 8 year, $30 mil deal would be tough to walk away from for Parayko (apologies if I'm mixing up posts). These would all be great, but would be extremely difficult to accomplish as a GM.

Edit: I would be very happy with an 8 year deal at $5.4 per. I think that would be one of the best contracts in the game in about 3 years.

 

[Alklha]

This is exactly my point though. The numbers being thrown around were as low as $3mil on an 8 year deal and the absolute highest number anyone mentioned in this thread on an 8 year deal was $4.5 per. I believe it was you who said an 8 year, $30 mil deal would be tough to walk away from for Parayko (apologies if I'm mixing up posts). These would all be great, but would be extremely difficult to accomplish as a GM.

Edit: I would be very happy with an 8 year deal at $5.4 per. I think that would be one of the best contracts in the game in about 3 years.

It was, and I phrased it poorly, should have been starting with thirty. So anything under $5m at that term, and I certainly wouldn't be expecting him to get less that Klingberg.

It's difficult to gauge at this point, because Armstrong isn't going to deal with this until the end of next season. If we trade Shattenkirk, and Pietrangelo misses a significant amount of time next season, then the idea of getting anything starting with a 5 might start to seem optimistic.

 

[Chojin]

The projection for next season is $73 mil, which is already a 13.5% increase from 2013/14. A 15% increase from 13/14 for the 17/18 season would be $74 mil. Expecting the cap to raise even less than it did this season is pretty conservative, not generous. The cap has never increased by less than $1 mil since it was created, so a cap of at least $74 mil is on the low end of expectations.

Assuming a 15% increase in cap, most of the contracts listed don't support us trying to get him signed long term for $4-$4.5 mil.

Josi's $4 mil becomes $4.6, Voynov's $4.166 becomes $4.8, McDonagh's $4.7 becomes $5.4 and Carlson's $3.9 becomes $4.55. So all of these contracts are worth more than $4.5 when adjusted for cap inflation using a conservative increase in the cap by 2017. Additionally, 3 of those are for 6 years and the other is for 7. So we would be asking to buy 1-2 extra UFA years for less dollars when adjusted for the cap. Any competent agent will tell Army that $4.5 may work if we are only doing 6 years like those players, but the cost goes up if we want to buy 2 more UFA years.

As for justifying more than Klingberg, that is widely regarded as a ridiculously team friendly contract. It is an outlier and every player rep knows that. If a team tries to use that as the standard for a longhttp://hfboards.mandatory.com/images/smilies/amazed.gif term deal, the player will say, 'that's fine, it clearly isn't in my interest to sign long term, so what is your offer on a bridge deal.'

I'm not saying that it will be impossible to sign him to a very team friendly deal. I would love for Army to get it done and maybe he can. But this attitude that it should be easy to get him long term for $3-$3.5 is insane. It is not easy to take the 7 most team friendly offers to an agent and say that we are willing to come in at the low end of these, but we want to commit to an even longer term than these players got. If we can get him for 8 years at under $4.5 per, it would be Army's crowning achievement as a GM and would be regarded as one of the best contracts in hockey.

A winning bet always looks like genius in hindsight. At the time of the signing, Klingberg only had 65 games under his belt, and it's exceedingly rare for players to sign a contract of significant length without having played multiple seasons. It was a gamble for Jim Nill that paid off big-time, so yeah, it looks like a total steal now, much like how we traded Stempniak for Steen and Colaiacovo.

If we're signing Parayko this offseason, we'll be in the same position that they were, making a similar gamble (actually a bigger one, given that Klingberg had much better offensive production with fewer zone starts, harder competition, and more minutes). In that situation, there's *no way* Parayko makes more money with the same term. That changes if we sign him after another season, though.

 

[Brian39]

It was, and I phrased it poorly, should have been starting with thirty. So anything under $5m at that term, and I certainly wouldn't be expecting him to get less that Klingberg.

It's difficult to gauge at this point, because Armstrong isn't going to deal with this until the end of next season. If we trade Shattenkirk, and Pietrangelo misses a significant amount of time next season, then the idea of getting anything starting with a 5 might start to seem optimistic.

I'm hopeful that we get a long term extension signed before or shortly after we trade Shatty (if that is in fact the plan).

 

[carter333167]

Stating the obvious here:

1. Prior contracts are helpful in bracketing fair value but obviously aren't dispositive on the actual number to which a particular player will agree.
2. The actual number to which Colton will agree will depend upon him, his agent, his family and their relationship with the Blues.
3. I would go as high as 5.5 mill for a 6-8 year deal.
4. Colton doesn't strike me as the type of kid who will milk every penny out of a deal and I would be surprised if he didn't sign in the range of 4 mil-5.5mil.
5. We definitely want to buy some of the UFA years. I think he's a UFA in 2020?
6. I would avoid a bridge deal at all costs..basically avoid it unless Parayko makes a shockingly high demand.

 

[Brian39]

Stating the obvious here:

1. Prior contracts are helpful in bracketing fair value but obviously aren't dispositive on the actual number to which a particular player will agree.
2. The actual number to which Colton will agree will depend upon him, his agent, his family and their relationship with the Blues.
3. I would go as high as 5.5 mill for a 6-8 year deal.
4. Colton doesn't strike me as the type of kid who will milk every penny out of a deal and I would be surprised if he didn't sign in the range of 4 mil-5.5mil.
5. We definitely want to buy some of the UFA years. I think he's a UFA in 2020?
6. I would avoid a bridge deal at all costs..basically avoid it unless Parayko makes a shockingly high demand.

My target would be $4.5 on a 6 year deal or $5.25 on an 8 year deal. I want to buy up as many UFA years as possible. As we know first hand from all of these Shatty rumors, UFA years are expensive as hell for good D men.

 

[carter333167]

My target would be $4.5 on a 6 year deal or $5.25 on an 8 year deal.

I want to buy up as many UFA years as possible. As we know first hand from all of these Shatty rumors, UFA years are expensive as hell for good D men.

I wouldn't hesitate a second to take the 8 year deal with those two options. Basically, cut the best 8 year deal we can get.

It would be penny-wise, pound foolish for the Blues to seek a bridge deal with a player like Parayko.

Colton could be one of the most important players, if not the most important player, on the team over the next 6-8 years. Don't mess around with this contract...just get it done.

 

[Borderbluesfan]

Blues management stepped up to lock in Tarasenko early. I know his status is different coming from the KHL. But they knew they had someone special and stepped up to sign him long term. I hope the Blues management has the same foresight to see that Parayko is also one of those special players that deserves for the team to go ahead and say we need to make a commitment early because we think he is going to be a top NHL defenseman for a number of years.