Confirmed with Link: PK Subban signed - 8y x 9M$ - Part II Meehan Strikes Back

[PricePkPatch*]

'cause I want to continue this discussion

Click to read more...

 

[Miller Time]

Biggest winner in all of this:

Don Meehan. and its not even close.

 

[Gustave]

Biggest winner in all of this:

Don Meehan. and its not even close.

Judging by the meltdown we had here on HFHabs, I'd say the fans are the biggest winners.

 

[LyricalLyricist]

I think habs can potentially save money in long run.

How?

Well Suppose Subban got say 5.5X5 then UFA at 28. 27.5 mil

I bet at 28 he gets 11-12 mil in open market with cap up for 8 years. 92 mil

When he's 36 i'll assume say 6 mil per, 3 years, 18 mil(hard to say)

Total till 39: 137.5 mil

In our case he got 2.875x2=5.675
8X9=72 mil
UFA at 32 for another either 2 average term deals or 1 7 year at say 8 mil per. 56 mil(again hard to say)

133.675 mil

Of course the number may be higher or lower. Don't know.

Either way: There's a very good chance the total earnings will be in same ballpark

 

[LyricalLyricist]

Judging by the meltdown we had here on HFHabs, I'd say the fans are the biggest winners.

You misspelt whiners.

 

[Andy]

I think habs can potentially save money in long run.

How?

Well Suppose Subban got say 5.5X5 then UFA at 28. 27.5 mil

I bet at 28 he gets 11-12 mil in open market with cap up for 8 years. 92 mil

When he's 36 i'll assume say 6 mil per, 3 years, 18 mil(hard to say)

Total till 39: 137.5 mil

In our case he got 2.875x2=5.675
8X9=72 mil
UFA at 32 for another either 2 average term deals or 1 7 year at say 8 mil per. 56 mil(again hard to say)

133.675 mil

Of course the number may be higher or lower. Don't know.

Either way: There's a very good chance the total earnings will be in same ballpark

The bridge scenario is artificially low because Subban was severely underpaid in those two-years for his contribution. Even on a two year deal we was still playing at a 4-5 million dollar level.

Also, in two years from now, I am not sure if the cap would rise so significantly where Subban could command an extra 3 million in cap hit over the length of the 8 years.

With so many star players re-signing with their teams, it's not a guarantee that Subban bails at 28 on a longer term bridge deal. If Subban wanted to bail, he could do so bridge deal or not. Meehan showed us how it's possible with this whole scenario...head to arbitration and then force another one year deal. If UFA is the end game, the player can force himself there.

All that to say, I still don't think the bridge deal was ever about term control, and as you showed, it makes a marginal difference money-wise. The bridge deal was done because they didn't know what they had in Subban and wanted more time to evaluate.

 

[overlords]

heard a quote recently that i think is apt (from an interview process):

"Candidate has 25 years of experience... yes, but is it 25 years of experience, or 25 x 1 year of experience?"

Don Cherry understands hockey in the "25 x1" sense. Just because one is exposed to something for a long time, even experiences it at a high level, doesn't mean they truly understand it.

I've rarely heard anything come out of Cherry's mouth that reflected a deep understanding of the game... if anything, he has a great understanding of the personalities around the game, of a very narrow part of the culture of the game, and is a very good storyteller.

as far as actual hockey knowledge? from having had hockey conversations with both, i'd suggest that PK has a much deeper understanding of the game of hockey, and it's not even close.

Pretty much this. If cherry was some great hockey mind, it is curious how he never really accomplished anything of note as a player or as management/coaching at a high level. I hear analysis just as profound as cherry's in any bar. What's worse is that at least some vieux mononcle in a bar has being drunk to blame for sounding like an idiot.

And Subban has decades to brush up on anything he needs to learn if that's the path he chooses. How anyone can bet against subban ever being as knowledgable as cherry is mind blowing.

 

[Halifaxhab*]

The bridge scenario is artificially low because Subban was severely underpaid in those two-years for his contribution. Even on a two year deal we was still playing at a 4-5 million dollar level.

Also, in two years from now, I am not sure if the cap would rise so significantly where Subban could command an extra 3 million in cap hit over the length of the 8 years.

With so many star players re-signing with their teams, it's not a guarantee that Subban bails at 28 on a longer term bridge deal. If Subban wanted to bail, he could do so bridge deal or not. Meehan showed us how it's possible with this whole scenario...head to arbitration and then force another one year deal. If UFA is the end game, the player can force himself there.

All that to say, I still don't think the bridge deal was ever about term control, and as you showed, it makes a marginal difference money-wise. The bridge deal was done because they didn't know what they had in Subban and wanted more time to evaluate.

Well, poor PK can console himself soaking in his tub........full of money

 

[HamiltonNHL]

@PricePkPatch - thanks for the article

Subban's greatest value to the Canadiens may be his ability to drive play toward the offensive zone. The percentage of even-strength shots attempted (Corsi-for percentage) by the Canadiens last season when Subban was on the ice compared to when he wasn't was 5.1 percent higher, 10th best among NHL defensemen, according to Extraskater.com.

That shows to what extent Subban had a positive impact on his teammates. In the past two seasons, 13 Canadiens have played a minimum of 300 even-strength minutes with Subban, and the Corsi-for percentage of each of those players dropped when they were on the ice without him, according to stats.hockeyanalysis.com.

The average decline in Corsi-for percentage of those 13 players when they played without Subban was 4.4 percent, but some of Montreal's best players had drops more significant than that: David Desharnais, Max Pacioretty and Lars Eller dipped by 5 percent or more.

Subban is an important player to the Canadiens, and now he will be paid like one.

Thanks for the stats !

 

[icerocket]

I'm just happy we have Subban for 8 more years.

 

[HamiltonNHL]

Judging by the meltdown we had here on HFHabs, I'd say the fans are the biggest winners.

YES !
I think the Fans meltdown impacted the process and Molson and MB pretty much caved.

 

[icerocket]

YES !
I think the Fans meltdown impacted the process and Molson and MB pretty much caved.

I doubt this very much.

 

[HamiltonNHL]

I doubt this very much.

How do you explain the lofty 9mil x 8 ?

 

[Corncob]

How do you explain the lofty 9mil x 8 ?

Do you think 8x9 was Meehan's initial demand?

 

[Ezpz]

How do you explain the lofty 9mil x 8 ?

Not being an idiot and understanding the arbitration process?

 

[Cole Caulifield]

I think habs can potentially save money in long run.

How?

Well Suppose Subban got say 5.5X5 then UFA at 28. 27.5 mil

I bet at 28 he gets 11-12 mil in open market with cap up for 8 years. 92 mil

When he's 36 i'll assume say 6 mil per, 3 years, 18 mil(hard to say)

Total till 39: 137.5 mil

In our case he got 2.875x2=5.675
8X9=72 mil
UFA at 32 for another either 2 average term deals or 1 7 year at say 8 mil per. 56 mil(again hard to say)

133.675 mil

Of course the number may be higher or lower. Don't know.

Either way: There's a very good chance the total earnings will be in same ballpark

And the other side of the coin is that if we had signed Subban to a 5 years 25M deal... now we'd have 4M more in cap space over the next 3 years.

If we had 4M in cap space more, we'd be sitting at 6.6M in cap room. Enough to make an offer for Sharp while the hawks are hurting in cap room, or for Simmonds with the flyers.

 

[417]

The bridge scenario is artificially low because Subban was severely underpaid in those two-years for his contribution. Even on a two year deal we was still playing at a 4-5 million dollar level.

Also, in two years from now, I am not sure if the cap would rise so significantly where Subban could command an extra 3 million in cap hit over the length of the 8 years.

With so many star players re-signing with their teams, it's not a guarantee that Subban bails at 28 on a longer term bridge deal. If Subban wanted to bail, he could do so bridge deal or not. Meehan showed us how it's possible with this whole scenario...head to arbitration and then force another one year deal. If UFA is the end game, the player can force himself there.

All that to say, I still don't think the bridge deal was ever about term control, and as you showed, it makes a marginal difference money-wise. The bridge deal was done because they didn't know what they had in Subban and wanted more time to evaluate.

We can debate the merits of the bridge deal all day, there are obviously pros and cons to any contractual approach

This particular one with Subban, while not without its share of drama, worked out pretty well for the Habs

But the purpose of the bridge deal for any team is to control the salary of players while they are RFA's... Because that's the only time teams really control that process.

 

[LyricalLyricist]

The bridge scenario is artificially low because Subban was severely underpaid in those two-years for his contribution. Even on a two year deal we was still playing at a 4-5 million dollar level.

Also, in two years from now, I am not sure if the cap would rise so significantly where Subban could command an extra 3 million in cap hit over the length of the 8 years.

With so many star players re-signing with their teams, it's not a guarantee that Subban bails at 28 on a longer term bridge deal. If Subban wanted to bail, he could do so bridge deal or not. Meehan showed us how it's possible with this whole scenario...head to arbitration and then force another one year deal. If UFA is the end game, the player can force himself there.

All that to say, I still don't think the bridge deal was ever about term control, and as you showed, it makes a marginal difference money-wise. The bridge deal was done because they didn't know what they had in Subban and wanted more time to evaluate.

I put 11.5 mil, so 2.5 more. I said more UFA pressure as opposed to RFA using arbitration with no possible offer sheets. Add to the fact his resume might increase in quality.

I agree on last part though. People may bust but it's a lot of money to pay for a business. From my perspective if money is same in the end I'd rather go the scenario with less financial risk.

And the other side of the coin is that if we had signed Subban to a 5 years 25M deal... now we'd have 4M more in cap space over the next 3 years.

If we had 4M in cap space more, we'd be sitting at 6.6M in cap room. Enough to make an offer for Sharp while the hawks are hurting in cap room, or for Simmonds with the flyers.

Of course, I don't disagree but years down we'd have less capspace. In the end it balances out. One of the big reasons we were able to acquire Vanek and all that was because of the extra cap we had right now.

Honestly, Sharp will get paid well and so will Simmonds. Very good players but will be overrated on the market. If Bolland gets 5.5, how much does Sharp get, a player with bigger role on same cup team? A player with Olympic gold. A player with several 30 goal seasons, etc... He's older sure but on short term he'd still get paid as a UFA.

 

[Cole Caulifield]

We can debate the merits of the bridge deal all day, there are obviously pros and cons to any contractual approach

This particular one with Subban, while not without its share of drama, worked out pretty well for the Habs

But the purpose of the bridge deal for any team is to control the salary of players while they are RFA's... Because that's the only time teams really control that process.

And that's clearly a CBA tool a team can use to great advantage in some situations.

For example, it would be a good idea for the hawks to do this with Saad and Leddy when they're up for renewal because they badly need cap room right now and they need to retain that cheap quality depth.

For the habs ? We didn't need that cap room in the last 2 years. We will need it more in the next 3 though.

But like I said in another thread, we have a top 5 goalie, a 40 goal scorer and a Norris winner locked up for 20M in cap space for an average of 6.66M. Good value I'd say. Can't win every negotiations.

 

[LyricalLyricist]

YES !
I think the Fans meltdown impacted the process and Molson and MB pretty much caved.

Don't think so. I think Subban at 9 is slightly overpaid but not a big deal. It's my borderline though.

It's like me saying Nonis caved to fan pressure to get Phaneuf signed for 7 mil. Seems ridiculous isn't it? Many people hate phaneuf in leafs land and he still got a lofty settlement(I think he's a very good player as well, not bashing him). Subban was worth about 8-8.5 and got 9.

 

[Andy]

We can debate the merits of the bridge deal all day, there are obviously pros and cons to any contractual approach

This particular one with Subban, while not without its share of drama, worked out pretty well for the Habs

But the purpose of the bridge deal for any team is to control the salary of players while they are RFA's... Because that's the only time teams really control that process.

Perhaps I spoke a little unclear. I meant, in the case of Subban, the bridge deal was never about controlling cost and term, but it was getting more time to evaluate a player they didn't know.

I agree with on the bolded part, but only with respect to 99% of players. When it comes to star players (the 1%), I don't think it applies in the exact same way. For instance, if the Canadiens ever draft a prospect who scores 40 goals in each of his first three years, chances are it will be hard to justify a bridge deal on him.

 

[417]

Perhaps I spoke a little unclear. I meant, in the case of Subban, the bridge deal was never about controlling cost and term, but it was getting more time to evaluate a player they didn't know.

I agree with on the bolded part, but only with respect to 99% of players. When it comes to star players (the 1%), I don't think it applies in the exact same way. For instance, if the Canadiens ever draft a prospect who scores 40 goals in each of his first three years, chances are it will be hard to justify a bridge deal on him.

But what I don't get is why one line of thinking (bridge deal) has to be wrong and the other (long term extension following ELC) has to be right, or vice versa

The goal of either scenario is to get Subban in a Montreal Canadiens uniform for a long time...

There exists 2 different roads to accomplish that, why worry about the journey if the end goal ends up being the exact same?

 

[Cole Caulifield]

Of course, I don't disagree but years down we'd have less capspace. In the end it balances out. One of the big reasons we were able to acquire Vanek and all that was because of the extra cap we had right now.

True we would have less in year 6+. Depends when we expect to contend for the cup the most.

As for deadline acquisitions, Vanek cost us 1.18M in cap space last year.

http://capgeek.com/canadiens/archive/?year_id=2013

Honestly, Sharp will get paid well and so will Simmonds. Very good players but will be overrated on the market. If Bolland gets 5.5, how much does Sharp get, a player with bigger role on same cup team? A player with Olympic gold. A player with several 30 goal seasons, etc... He's older sure but on short term he'd still get paid as a UFA.

Sharp is already signed to a 5.9M deal until 2017. Simmonds signed to a 4M deal until 2019.

I mentionned them because flyers and hawks are in trouble with the cap at the moment. They're 2-3M over it. And it won't get better when Toews and Kane's contracts kick in.

There's an opportunity to acquire these guys for less than they're worth IMO.

 

[overlords]

But what I don't get is why one line of thinking (bridge deal) has to be wrong and the other (long term extension following ELC) has to be right, or vice versa

The goal of either scenario is to get Subban in a Montreal Canadiens uniform for a long time...

There exists 2 different roads to accomplish that, why worry about the journey if the end goal ends up being the exact same?

My main problem with the bridge deal, iirc, wasn't necessarily about the long term cap implications, but that the bridge deal itself, even as a bridge deal, was insultingly low and then there was the hold out...

I also wanted to throw a 10 year contract at subban before the new cba was drawn up.

 

[Halifaxhab*]

But what I don't get is why one line of thinking (bridge deal) has to be wrong and the other (long term extension following ELC) has to be right, or vice versa

The goal of either scenario is to get Subban in a Montreal Canadiens uniform for a long time...

There exists 2 different roads to accomplish that, why worry about the journey if the end goal ends up being the exact same?

This reminds me of the age old rivalry. One that has laid waste to everything in its path leaving anger and diabetes everywhere it was seen......Left twix vs. Right twix. Both end up exactly the same, as a sugar rush, but from a slightly different side of the same package. A shame they cannot settle their delicious diffferences.