Speculation: Tavares Tells Toronto, "I'm YOUR Huckleberry Now". Fans leaguewide mourn.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Note Worthy

History Made
Oct 26, 2011
10,114
3,722
St. Louis, MO
Seguin, Couture, Duchene, Brassard, Henrique & Eric Staal.

Can't be that patient. We need to get a centre this summer, or we might as well just start retooling.

We aren't getting Seguin as Dallas will make it a top priority to sign him and probably wouldn't get Couture either. Those are the only two that would get me excited.
 

Dbrownss

Registered User
Jan 5, 2014
31,359
8,734
Seguin, Couture, Duchene, Brassard, Henrique & Eric Staal.

Can't be that patient. We need to get a centre this summer, or we might as well just start retooling.
If Tavares is willing to come to St. Louis, then he has to be wearing the Blue Note, no excuses. Blues overpaid for Stastny, they better overpay for Tavares. He is going to give this team its best shot at a cup over the next 3-5yrs(other core players contracts ending).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alklha

EastonBlues22

Registered User
Nov 25, 2003
14,807
10,496
RIP Fugu ϶(°o°)ϵ
The entire idea of a sign and trade from Tavares' perspective is that there is the same bidding war but on an 8 year deal instead of 7. For example, let's say the 'UFA bidding war' drives the cost to $14 mil AAV at 7 years for a total value of $98 mil. Tavares then makes it known to all the teams he'd be willing to sign with that $14 mil is an exceedingly fair number and that he'll accept a deal with whatever team is willing to do a sign and trade where he is making $14 mil AAV for 8 years instead of 7. That's $14 mil more for Tavares, which is by no means trivial.

From the player's standpoint, this isn't about taking a lesser AAV over 8 years instead of 7. It's about getting an extra year at the same/similar AAV. If Tavares is open to the sign/trade idea, it is because he is trying to maximize his earnings by either getting the same AAV for an extra year, or coming down slightly on the AAV in order to reach a grand total that wouldn't be feasible under a 7 year deal.
Any argument based on maximal earnings needs to consider his next contract as well.

He'll get a better deal on his next contract if he's negotiating it at age 34 than he'll get at 35. At the very least, he'll almost certainly be making something significant in that age 35 year, regardless, so it's not $14 million or nothing...it's $14 million or whatever he gets in the first year of his next contract. That is still going to be high number, probably $8 million at least.

Let's say he plays through at 38 and look at some hypothetical (but plausible) frameworks for his next two contracts covering that span:

14 x 8 plus 7 x 3 = $136 million

14 x 7 plus 8.5 x 4 = $132 million

14 x 6 plus 10 x 5 = $134 million

All those scenarios end up pretty close in total value, so in which one of those scenarios is he in the best position to leverage additional value above what is predicted if that's his desire?

IMO, he can most easily do that by taking a shorter deal now and attempting to negotiate another monster deal at age 32 or 33, when he'll still have enough high production years left that he can easily command a hefty AAV, and there will still be enough suitors that he can ask for (and will receive) a near max term contract. He won't have anywhere near the same leverage or market if he's attempting to negotiate his next deal at age 35, especially if his play is already starting to show signs of slipping by then.

You can argue that getting more money up front means more security, but when you're already banking $70-84 million even on the "short" contract, security isn't really an issue.

I guess my big points here are that the extra year at $14 million still likely isn't all that valuable in the grand scheme of things, and arguably isn't his best path to maximizing his career value if that's ultimately his primary focus.

Here's something to consider: Would you rather make $88 million and live/play at your top choice, or make $100 million and go someplace that is less attractive to you? Does that answer change if you've already made $44 million?

At some point he is probably going to reach a place where other factors start to matter more than milking every last dollar from the stone, if he isn't there already. We tend to ignore that in conversations like these, but I think more often than not these uber-compensated athletes start to care about a lot more than just the dollars involved. They want to be happy, and that often involves things like playing where you want to play, living where you want to live, not having to deal with unnecessary stresses, and generally controlling your own fate.

Is there any real incentive for Tavares to pick from the teams that are willing to do an 8 year sign-and-trade if his top choice among anticipated UFA suitors isn't one of those teams? I don't think there is, personally. I just don't see the offer of an 8th year being a strong influencing factor on where he signs.
 

Brian39

Registered User
Apr 24, 2014
7,027
12,734
Any argument based on maximal earnings needs to consider his next contract as well.

He'll get a better deal on his next contract if he's negotiating it at age 34 than he'll get at 35. At the very least, he'll almost certainly be making something significant in that age 35 year, regardless, so it's not $14 million or nothing...it's $14 million or whatever he gets in the first year of his next contract. That is still going to be high number, probably $8 million at least.

Let's say he plays through at 38 and look at some hypothetical (but plausible) frameworks for his next two contracts covering that span:

14 x 8 plus 7 x 3 = $136 million

14 x 7 plus 8.5 x 4 = $132 million

14 x 6 plus 10 x 5 = $134 million

All those scenarios end up pretty close in total value, so in which one of those scenarios is he in the best position to leverage additional value above what is predicted if that's his desire?

IMO, he can most easily do that by taking a shorter deal now and attempting to negotiate another monster deal at age 32 or 33, when he'll still have enough high production years left that he can easily command a hefty AAV, and there will still be enough suitors that he can ask for (and will receive) a near max term contract. He won't have anywhere near the same leverage or market if he's attempting to negotiate his next deal at age 35, especially if his play is already starting to show signs of slipping by then.

You can argue that getting more money up front means more security, but when you're already banking $70-84 million even on the "short" contract, security isn't really an issue.

I guess my big points here are that the extra year at $14 million still likely isn't all that valuable in the grand scheme of things, and arguably isn't his best path to maximizing his career value if that's ultimately his primary focus.

Here's something to consider: Would you rather make $88 million and live/play at your top choice, or make $100 million and go someplace that is less attractive to you? Does that answer change if you've already made $44 million?

At some point he is probably going to reach a place where other factors start to matter more than milking every last dollar from the stone, if he isn't there already. We tend to ignore that in conversations like these, but I think more often than not these uber-compensated athletes start to care about a lot more than just the dollars involved. They want to be happy, and that often involves things like playing where you want to play, living where you want to live, not having to deal with unnecessary stresses, and generally controlling your own fate.

Is there any real incentive for Tavares to pick from the teams that are willing to do an 8 year sign-and-trade if his top choice among anticipated UFA suitors isn't one of those teams? I don't think there is, personally. I just don't see the offer of an 8th year being a strong influencing factor on where he signs.

I agree with most of what you're saying, which is why I don't think a sign+trade is likely. I think it is unlikely he values an 8th year and maximizing value on this contract more than other considerations, but my analysis was making the assumption that it did matter to him. One thing that I think you're analysis downplays though is the security of the 8th year, especially if it allows his agent to make it even more buyout proof or guarantees more money in the event of a buyout. There will be a new CBA in the middle of this deal and predicting what new/modified rules come with that is incredibly difficult. It is also impossible to predict what his level of play will be at in 7 years and what the rest of the league looks like. It's certainly not a given that a new CBA and 7 years of unknowns could have him looking at a contract worth well below $8 mil. I don't think too many people thought Eric Staal would be taking a $5 mil paycut when his big contract expired, but that's what happened. I don't think too many people thought Nash would take a monster paycut after his huge contract, but that is likely what will happen. A lot can happen in 7 years and there is no guarantee that he's looking at $7+ mil AAV deals as a 34 year old.

I don't expect Tavares' play to plummet and force him to take an AAV below $6 mil after a 7 year deal. But it is certainly within the realm of possibility and getting an 8th year now eliminates a lot of that risk.
 

EastonBlues22

Registered User
Nov 25, 2003
14,807
10,496
RIP Fugu ϶(°o°)ϵ
I agree with most of what you're saying, which is why I don't think a sign+trade is likely. I think it is unlikely he values an 8th year and maximizing value on this contract more than other considerations, but my analysis was making the assumption that it did matter to him. One thing that I think you're analysis downplays though is the security of the 8th year, especially if it allows his agent to make it even more buyout proof or guarantees more money in the event of a buyout. There will be a new CBA in the middle of this deal and predicting what new/modified rules come with that is incredibly difficult. It is also impossible to predict what his level of play will be at in 7 years and what the rest of the league looks like. It's certainly not a given that a new CBA and 7 years of unknowns could have him looking at a contract worth well below $8 mil. I don't think too many people thought Eric Staal would be taking a $5 mil paycut when his big contract expired, but that's what happened. I don't think too many people thought Nash would take a monster paycut after his huge contract, but that is likely what will happen. A lot can happen in 7 years and there is no guarantee that he's looking at $7+ mil AAV deals as a 34 year old.

I don't expect Tavares' play to plummet and force him to take an AAV below $6 mil after a 7 year deal. But it is certainly within the realm of possibility and getting an 8th year now eliminates a lot of that risk.
What risk?

He'll have earned well over $100 million by then, perhaps over $125 million, and that's not even counting any outside income he might have. If he's feeling insecure about his future and is worried about his potential earnings in his mid-to-late 30s in spite of that, then adding one extra year to his contract and an extra $14 million sure isn't going to suddenly put him at ease. Would you be sweating how much you'll be paid in 8-10 years if you won $100 million in the lottery tomorrow? I rather tend to doubt it.

Once he signs this next contract, regardless of term or the final dollars, he is set for life...if he isn't already (and he probably should be).
 

Brian39

Registered User
Apr 24, 2014
7,027
12,734
What risk?

He'll have earned well over $100 million by then, perhaps over $125 million, and that's not even counting any outside income he might have. If he's feeling insecure about his future and is worried about his potential earnings in his mid-to-late 30s in spite of that, then adding one extra year to his contract and an extra $14 million sure isn't going to suddenly put him at ease. Would you be sweating how much you'll be paid in 8-10 years if you won $100 million in the lottery tomorrow? I rather tend to doubt it.

Once he signs this next contract, regardless of term or the final dollars, he is set for life...if he isn't already (and he probably should be).

And you could say the exact same thing about his future if he signed a deal worth $35 mil over 7 years. But he is going to push for much more than that because he is worth more. I'm not talking risk as in, "I might go bankrupt if I sign for 7 instead of 8 years." I'm talking risk of losing out on millions of dollars, which every professional athlete absolutely cares about. $5 mil isn't as big of a deal to someone with $70 mil in the bank as it is to you or me. But you're lying to yourself if you think $5 mil is insignificant to a multimillionaire athlete.

Going with a 7 year deal instead of an 8 year deal leaves money on the table. There is almost no chance that his career earnings will be as high if he signs a 7 year deal now instead of an 8 year deal at the same AAV. Best case scenario, the next contract bridges that gap and winds up just leaving $2 mil or so on the table when all is said and done. Worst case scenario (career ending injury) it leaves $12+ mil on the table and the realistic range is probably somewhere around $5 mil when all is said and done.

Like I said, I think a sign and trade is unlikely because I don't believe that Tavares is simply trying to maximize value. If I were him, I'd be more than willing to take on the risk of leaving $2-12 mil on the table through my career since my guaranteed career earnings would already be north of $100 mil. once you have that type of bank account, it is easier to leave money on the table to put yourself in an ideal situation. But with that said, leaving that money on the table is a risk. it's not a risk of bankruptcy or financial ruin, but it is absolutely a risk that you are giving up maximum earning potential in exchange for putting yourself in the best hockey/living situation.

All other things being equal, he is better off getting an 8 year deal than a 7 year deal. The debate is about what sacrifices he should/will be willing to make in order to get that better deal. I don't think he will think it's worth it if his new team has to pay a massive cost to make it happen. I don't think that he would sweat his new team having to give up something to make that happen. If I were him, I would absolutely be comfortable with the Blues giving up Winnipeg's 1st rounder if it meant I got an 8th contract year at the same AAV.
 

Celtic Note

Living the dream
Dec 22, 2006
16,836
5,557
At some point, when you are making $100M, your money should be earning you more than any reasonable difference in salary. So, 5-15M over the long haul shouldn’t matter much.
 

EastonBlues22

Registered User
Nov 25, 2003
14,807
10,496
RIP Fugu ϶(°o°)ϵ
And you could say the exact same thing about his future if he signed a deal worth $35 mil over 7 years. But he is going to push for much more than that because he is worth more. I'm not talking risk as in, "I might go bankrupt if I sign for 7 instead of 8 years." I'm talking risk of losing out on millions of dollars, which every professional athlete absolutely cares about. $5 mil isn't as big of a deal to someone with $70 mil in the bank as it is to you or me. But you're lying to yourself if you think $5 mil is insignificant to a multimillionaire athlete.

Going with a 7 year deal instead of an 8 year deal leaves money on the table. There is almost no chance that his career earnings will be as high if he signs a 7 year deal now instead of an 8 year deal at the same AAV. Best case scenario, the next contract bridges that gap and winds up just leaving $2 mil or so on the table when all is said and done. Worst case scenario (career ending injury) it leaves $12+ mil on the table and the realistic range is probably somewhere around $5 mil when all is said and done.

Like I said, I think a sign and trade is unlikely because I don't believe that Tavares is simply trying to maximize value. If I were him, I'd be more than willing to take on the risk of leaving $2-12 mil on the table through my career since my guaranteed career earnings would already be north of $100 mil. once you have that type of bank account, it is easier to leave money on the table to put yourself in an ideal situation. But with that said, leaving that money on the table is a risk. it's not a risk of bankruptcy or financial ruin, but it is absolutely a risk that you are giving up maximum earning potential in exchange for putting yourself in the best hockey/living situation.

All other things being equal, he is better off getting an 8 year deal than a 7 year deal. The debate is about what sacrifices he should/will be willing to make in order to get that better deal. I don't think he will think it's worth it if his new team has to pay a massive cost to make it happen. I don't think that he would sweat his new team having to give up something to make that happen. If I were him, I would absolutely be comfortable with the Blues giving up Winnipeg's 1st rounder if it meant I got an 8th contract year at the same AAV.
Brodziak has a career earning of over $10 million. Pretty safe bet that an extra $5 million means a lot more to him than it does to McDavid or Crosby.

We're not simply talking about multimillionaire athletes...we're talking about athletes who will clear well over $100 million by the time it's all said and done...often closer to $150 million, or even more.

Guys at that level are a lot more apt to leave money on the table than "lesser" multimillionaires, and one can point to Crosby and McDavid as examples of high profile players who could demand whatever they wanted doing just that. Others at that level haven't, but I don't think it's controversial to say that it's far more common at that stratified level of compensation than it is at lower ones.

We're simply going to have to agree to disagree here, I think.
 

byrath

Registered User
Jan 28, 2008
1,246
647
St. Louis, MO
Gotta say I'm surprised how many are happy with the idea of paying Tavares 11m+, never mind giving up a 1st+ on top of it. That'll be a bad contract from day one, and will only get worse. He's barely hanging on to PPG with a very offensively minded team and has been mediocre the past couple months, leading to the Isles dropping well out of playoff contention. I'd be excited to have him but I just don't see it as a smart long-term move.
 

Dbrownss

Registered User
Jan 5, 2014
31,359
8,734
Gotta say I'm surprised how many are happy with the idea of paying Tavares 11m+, never mind giving up a 1st+ on top of it. That'll be a bad contract from day one, and will only get worse. He's barely hanging on to PPG with a very offensively minded team and has been mediocre the past couple months, leading to the Isles dropping well out of playoff contention. I'd be excited to have him but I just don't see it as a smart long-term move.
As opposed to......No 1C? He will absolutely be overpaid, but he will make this team better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RoarBacon

Ranksu

Crotch Academy ftw
Sponsor
Apr 28, 2014
19,661
9,296
Lapland
Seguin, Couture, Duchene, Brassard, Henrique & Eric Staal.

Can't be that patient. We need to get a centre this summer, or we might as well just start retooling.
I just don't belive we can get Tavares and Stastny has been florishing at Jets I don't see why would he come back in here? Maybe if he wins Stanley Cup in Jets this season, so his cup thirty is over and want to share that feeling with Blues. :D

Isn't this most likely scenario that we miss Tavares and Stastny?

Shouldn't we discuss more of then what are other options for this summer and even 2019 UFA market? Knowing how bad UFA market are going to be this off-season, I think we should discuss retool option too.
 

Tryblot

Registered User
Oct 4, 2009
8,124
2,871
Gotta say I'm surprised how many are happy with the idea of paying Tavares 11m+, never mind giving up a 1st+ on top of it. That'll be a bad contract from day one, and will only get worse. He's barely hanging on to PPG with a very offensively minded team and has been mediocre the past couple months, leading to the Isles dropping well out of playoff contention. I'd be excited to have him but I just don't see it as a smart long-term move.

As long as the blues can afford it and don't lose any core pieces due to salary issues, I don't see a problem with it.

I mean sure, we'll lose berglund, steen, sobotka, Gunnarson and bouwmeester, along with Allen - I don't really see that as that bad. Those are all replaceable players.
 

byrath

Registered User
Jan 28, 2008
1,246
647
St. Louis, MO
As long as the blues can afford it and don't lose any core pieces due to salary issues, I don't see a problem with it.

I mean sure, we'll lose berglund, steen, sobotka, Gunnarson and bouwmeester, along with Allen - I don't really see that as that bad. Those are all replaceable players.

Agreed, and I would be all in favor of a 2yr/24m Tavares deal... but Pie, Schwartz, Schenn, Tank all need to be re-signed eventually too ... can we put together a Cup-worthy roster with those 5 players taking 45 mil or more in cap space? If Tavares is pretty much Stastny in years 3-8 of his contract?
 

DatDude44

Hmmmm?
Feb 23, 2012
6,142
2,899
If Tavares is willing to come to St. Louis, then he has to be wearing the Blue Note, no excuses. Blues overpaid for Stastny, they better overpay for Tavares. He is going to give this team its best shot at a cup over the next 3-5yrs(other core players contracts ending).
Move berg, soby, bouw(maybe ltir) at the draft and sign tavares. Roll Tavares, Schenn, Thomas, brodziak/Barbs down the middle. around Schwartz, tarasenko, Fabbri, steen, Soshnikov, Kyrou(possibly), Kostin(possibly), Thompson etc...etc.... not to mention we'd still have a ton of cap room to go after a JVR or someone else if we want.
 

Alklha

Registered User
Sep 7, 2011
16,875
2,751
I just don't belive we can get Tavares and Stastny has been florishing at Jets I don't see why would he come back in here? Maybe if he wins Stanley Cup in Jets this season, so his cup thirty is over and want to share that feeling with Blues. :D

Isn't this most likely scenario that we miss Tavares and Stastny?

Shouldn't we discuss more of then what are other options for this summer and even 2019 UFA market? Knowing how bad UFA market are going to be this off-season, I think we should discuss retool option too.
If we don't get Tavares or Stastny, then we need to make a trade this summer. That means our position in the likes of Kostin and Thompson is probably going to need to relax.

Talking about 2019 FA's is pretty pointless at this stage because most will be extended.
Agreed, and I would be all in favor of a 2yr/24m Tavares deal... but Pie, Schwartz, Schenn, Tank all need to be re-signed eventually too ... can we put together a Cup-worthy roster with those 5 players taking 45 mil or more in cap space? If Tavares is pretty much Stastny in years 3-8 of his contract?
You cross those bridges when you come to them.

Fact is that if we have Tavares, and if Thomas develops as we hope, then losing Schenn isn't the end of the world.

Tarasenko is 32 the year his deal ends, who knows what the situation is then. He has already signed on deal that was very team friendly, in terms of taking 8 years.

Schwartz is important and is injury prone, but let's see where we are.

An elite centre is the most difficult piece to get in the League, and a winger is by far the easiest. If we have the chance to get Tavares, even if it takes $12m long term, we unquestionably have to do it.

You worry about long term down the road, it's about winning.
 

Ranksu

Crotch Academy ftw
Sponsor
Apr 28, 2014
19,661
9,296
Lapland
If we don't get Tavares or Stastny, then we need to make a trade this summer. That means our position in the likes of Kostin and Thompson is probably going to need to relax.

Sorry, my bad english, but do you mean we need to trade one of those prospects Kostin and Thompson for top6 center? Or not?
 

wannabebluesplayer

Registered User
Apr 16, 2012
1,359
466
Sorry, my bad english, but do you mean we need to trade one of those prospects Kostin and Thompson for top6 center? Or not?

In your scenario @Ranksu, yes, the Blues will most likely have to give up at least one of Thompson, Thomas, Kyrou, or Kostin in order to secure a top 6 C this summer in the event Stastny or Tavares doesn't come here. That's the only way a team's going to trade a young top 6 here, unless you create a larger hole on defense by moving Parayko or Pietrangelo.

@Alklha is right in that if Tavares costs you 12 million a year, you need to do it. You can work on continuously building a team around him after clearing other contracts off the books. The cap is more than likely going up and there are a few assets on this team that can be moved. Gunnarsson is definitely one. Sobotka is another that doesn't have a NTC. Brodziak, Upshall, and Hutton are all UFAs who could not be signed again. You could also probably find takers for Steen, Berglund, and Bouwmeester if you really wanted to and I do mean takers they'd waive for a trade. Edmundson and Fabbri are the two RFAs who are due raises this season and Fabbri's will be minimal since his injury problems. Edmundson will probably get between 3.5 and 4.5 million a year.

Say you just move on from the UFAs and trade Gunnarsson and Sobotka, that's 16.275 million in space to work with and it's not counting the cap going up, which it probably will, so you're looking at an additional 3-5 million on top of that. If you really needed to move some more space, as I said, you could approach Steen, Berglund, and Bouwmeester and see who they would waive their NTC to join.

Tavares is a long shot, and everyone here knows that but it's a long shot that Doug Armstrong has to take. If he hits the open market, or he's willing to do a sign and trade, you have to find a way to make it happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ranksu

wannabebluesplayer

Registered User
Apr 16, 2012
1,359
466
Adding on, why is it on the main boards, so many think Tavares would pick San Jose? They have like 2/3 of their forwards hitting UFA either this year or next year. Why would he sign long term to a team that doesn't really have a core in place? Pavelski is 32, Thornton is on his way out, Couture is 28 or 29, Burns is in his early 30s. Martin Jones has had a regression to the mean the last two seasons. I don't see why Tavares would pick San Jose? Hell, if the Kings could fit the salary, I think they'd be a better spot than San Jose. I don't get the San Jose love. I didn't want to insult San Jose fans so I thought I'd ask this here.
 

Note Worthy

History Made
Oct 26, 2011
10,114
3,722
St. Louis, MO
Adding on, why is it on the main boards, so many think Tavares would pick San Jose? They have like 2/3 of their forwards hitting UFA either this year or next year. Why would he sign long term to a team that doesn't really have a core in place? Pavelski is 32, Thornton is on his way out, Couture is 28 or 29, Burns is in his early 30s. Martin Jones has had a regression to the mean the last two seasons. I don't see why Tavares would pick San Jose? Hell, if the Kings could fit the salary, I think they'd be a better spot than San Jose. I don't get the San Jose love. I didn't want to insult San Jose fans so I thought I'd ask this here.

Everybody on the main board seems to think that he will sign in Vegas. That I definitely don't see. They're having a great run this year but he's going to sign long term with a brand new expansion team? Doubtful.
 

PiggySmalls

Oink Oink MF
Mar 7, 2015
6,107
3,516
Yeah I don’t see Vegas as a landing spot. They have a bunch of players that are gonna be UFA this summer. There are going to be such a high roster turnover that it signals a lot of unknowns.
 

Halak Ness Monster

Registered User
Nov 11, 2010
2,531
1,447
St. Louis, MO
Yeah no chance he goes to Vegas unless it is for the money. I know Las Vegas is a playoff team now but you can't look at them and say they are sure fire long term contenders.

The Blues, meanwhile, can say to JT that he is the missing puzzle piece to us being in the Stanley Cup Final. Our core is very good and in their prime and our solid prospect depth will help fill the holes.

San Jose...ehh. As others have said, most of their key guys are old. Burns, Pavelski, Thornton, and Vlasic are all 31 years old or older next season. Jones, Couture, Meier and Hertl are young, though, and give SJ a decent core for the next 4-5 years. So they'll have a chance. I think the Blues core is much better going forward, though.
 

67Blues

Got it for Bobby
Mar 22, 2013
4,551
4,894
Section 111
Vegas has roughly 20 guys on prove it contracts with chips on their shoulders. I expect that not only will their roster look much different (and worse) next year, but they will also regress to the norm as a lot of those players are having great if not career years.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->