Confirmed with Link: 6 more years for Gallagher

[VirginiaMtlExpat]

Is it possible that this deal was done not only to lock in Gallagher, but as a prelude to signing Galchenyuk to a similar deal?

I don't see Gallagher as a priority compared to Galchenyuk, so in this perspective the inversion makes sense.

 

[Brainiac]

Not rumor according to my source, but I do realize that posting without credible links is not permitted. My source is a personal one and no I am not making it up.

Ha ha! Yeah, sure...

 

[Sorinth]

Is it possible that this deal was done not only to lock in Gallagher, but as a prelude to signing Galchenyuk to a similar deal?

I don't see Gallagher as a priority compared to Galchenyuk, so in this perspective the inversion makes sense.

It takes two people to make a deal. It's likely Bergevin approached both and Gallagher was simply easier/amenable to sign.

But you have to assume this will be used as a comparable in negotiations. Whether it actually makes a difference is unknown.

 

[jaffy27]

Subban is an exceptional case with an exceptional contract. He's a long-term franchise investment. Habs were either going to pay sooner or later -- with or without that bridge deal there were no cheap options.

My point was that Gallagher's deal is great and affordable, but Bergevin couldn't copy-paste it onto every contract even if the players agreed. There's no room for too many long-term deals, even if they're relatively good deals. Right now, Habs have $11.6M cap space next year, and we need to sign 7 or 8 players for 2015/16: Galchenyuk, Beaulieu, Tinordi, Bournival, replace at least one of the older defensemen who'll be leaving, plus another forward. It's do-able, but we either have to rely heavily on rookies and prospects to stay within budget, or we bridge Galchenyuk to open space for a trade/UFA.

Well said....some people here are Mr. Knowitalls...absolutely laughable, to sit here and pretend like you know more about hockey, the cap, projected cap, management, the players, the league, agents,and to know all this plus the 1000 other things that involve running a Billion $$ hockey team better than Bergevin, Dudley, Molson and the dozens of other people involved in the decision making that goes with it is absolutely absurd!!!! We're not talking Millbury here or Charles Wang, these guys are the creme of the creme and if Bergevin, Dudley and Co. think it's a great idea to sign Gallagher to a 6 year extension, or Pacioretty to a 6 year extension, or Price to 6 years or bridge Subban, then give the guy the benefit of the doubt, I think they've earned that right...you guys are questioning art philosophies with Picasso.... keep it up Bergevin

 

[OldCraig71]

Ha ha! Yeah, sure...

Ok, I knew I'd get laughed at....I will give you some more news later in the season.

 

[kgboomer]

Interesting breakdown of this contract. Gallagher will be paid 5.5 next season, and 4.5 on the 2nd year.

15-16: 5.5
16-17: 4.5
17-18: 2.750
18-19: 3
19-20: 4
20-21: 2.750

He has chosen to be paid up front. And on the last 2 years of his contract, he'll get paid 1.750 up front as signing bonus, probably on Jul 1st. No bridge contract, but definitely 2 years in there acting somewhat like it.
Source: capgeek

 

[WhiskeySeven*]

Interesting breakdown of this contract. Gallagher will be paid 5.5 next season, and 4.5 on the 2nd year.

15-16: 5.5
16-17: 4.5
17-18: 2.750
18-19: 3
19-20: 4
20-21: 2.750

He has chosen to be paid up front. And on the last 2 years of his contract, he'll get paid 1.750 up front as signing bonus, probably on Jul 1st. No bridge contract, but definitely 2 years in there acting somewhat like it.
Source: capgeek

Money now is always worth more than money later. If he's making 3m after tax, he can take 1m them and invest in something and then have significantly more by year 6.

 

[hoc123]

Now just sign Chucky to the same before he explodes under a new coach.

AH HA the real reason for keeping Therrien. Making the players seem worse so they sign cheaper and will be under the salary cap.

 

[Brainiac]

Ok, I knew I'd get laughed at....I will give you some more news later in the season.

Ha ha! Yeah, sure.

 

[Rapala]

Money now is always worth more than money later. If he's making 3m after tax, he can take 1m them and invest in something and then have significantly more by year 6.

Yep,
You can bet AG's agent wants more money now...
Hell he may end up with a bridge deal.

 

[Whitesnake]

Pretty sure he's learned his lesson.

Everyone talks about how Max has a great deal and we'd have said the same if he got PK at 5 x 5. Everyone can see the Subban thing was mishandled at this point.

The man has learned from his mistakes and that's great to see. Because I know we've had GMs in the past who would've dug their heels in and clung to the whole "bridge deals are team policy" standard. Good for MB.

True. All great for GM to adapt to situations. My response was just directed to people who was claiming that it was a great strategy to ALWAYS go through a bridge no matter who you are. It's not a good strategy. And in the end, Bergevin is showing that it's not either.

 

[Whitesnake]

Subban is an exceptional case with an exceptional contract. He's a long-term franchise investment. Habs were either going to pay sooner or later -- with or without that bridge deal there were no cheap options.

Depends. The "cheap" option, if it existed, would have been that instead of the bridge +9M$, a 5'5M$ for 6 years would have existed, it would have meant 33 M$ instead of the 41M$ we'll pay. But then, you might be right where the 9M$ for the following years could mean 11M$ or 12M$ depending of where the market is headed. Yet, that's something we don't know. And if you have a problem addressing the quality of the player, it gives you more time to do so.

Now....is Galchenyuk another exceptional case? Are you actually going the bridge contract way for him too?

 

[WhiskeySeven*]

Depends. The "cheap" option, if it existed, would have been that instead of the bridge +9M$, a 5'5M$ for 6 years would have existed, it would have meant 33 M$ instead of the 41M$ we'll pay. But then, you might be right where the 9M$ for the following years could mean 11M$ or 12M$ depending of where the market is headed. Yet, that's something we don't know. And if you have a problem addressing the quality of the player, it gives you more time to do so.

Now....is Galchenyuk another exceptional case? Are you actually going the bridge contract way for him too?

I think Galchenyuk will get a bridge deal because he hasn't hit his potential yet and it would be in both parties interests to let that happen before a huge commitment. Also if Therrien gets fired, that would be neart too.

 

[Whitesnake]

Well said....some people here are Mr. Knowitalls...absolutely laughable, to sit here and pretend like you know more about hockey, the cap, projected cap, management, the players, the league, agents,and to know all this plus the 1000 other things that involve running a Billion $$ hockey team better than Bergevin, Dudley, Molson and the dozens of other people involved in the decision making that goes with it is absolutely absurd!!!! We're not talking Millbury here or Charles Wang, these guys are the creme of the creme and if Bergevin, Dudley and Co. think it's a great idea to sign Gallagher to a 6 year extension, or Pacioretty to a 6 year extension, or Price to 6 years or bridge Subban, then give the guy the benefit of the doubt, I think they've earned that right...you guys are questioning art philosophies with Picasso.... keep it up Bergevin

Oh the professionnals know it all, we don't know **** theory. Fine. Close the board. Like right now. And from now on, NOBODY can whine about Therrien anymore. He is a professionnal too. And was hired by Bergevin, the one that deserves the benefit of the doubt. And nobody whines on Allen, Weaver and Co, DD's and Emelin contracts, Moen's contract..... All Bergevin's decisions. Can't wait to see this board change in the next minute....

There's just problem with your theory. Bergevin is already adressing HIMSELF mistakes he ALSO made (Brière, Moen..). The guy that we should give the benefit of the doubt too is not always giving the benefit of the doubt to himself....Bergevin is a very good GM. But he also makes mistakes. He is human. This Gallagher contract is incredibly great. But he's still human and we bring up, what we think, were mistakes. Might not have been as we are not on the inside but then, close this board if the only thing we can do is discuss things we know from the inside...

 

[Miller Time]

kudos to MB for learning from his mistakes.

low risk - high reward deal for the habs. With the work ethic and compete level that gallagher has, barring career disrupting injury, he's a very safe bet to be an asset at that cap hit for the duration… and if he continues to improve (arguably a given considering his age and track record), the deal is a steal for years to come.

up next, galch… let's hope his agent is as easy to deal with!

 

[Goldorak]

Let me put it this way for you instead since you're so deceptive of his point per salary number...

Stop using words you don't understand.

and Gally would have the 41st best contract in the league last year (over 82 games) which is still pretty good.

I can't believe you STILL don't get it even after I explained to you how a stat you introduced to this thread is calculated. His new contract is not even top 200 in the league, let alone 41st. Can you really not see how everyone else's cost per point is going to go down when measured over 82 games rather than over 20-25?

Please stop, it's embarrassing.

 

[DAChampion]

Goldorak,

The best contracts ib the league for points per salary belong to rookies playing for $800, 000 and fourt liners who score 10 points for $500, 000.

Kyle Chipchura plays at a 22 point pace for $875, 000/year ... that's $40, 000 a point. Sidney Crosby plays at a 114 point pace for 8.7 million/year... that's $76, 000/point.

Do you notice anything odd?

The statistic that should matter is not points but points above replacement. In that sense Crosby doesn't get paid for the 114 points, but the 74 points or so he produces above the replacement level.

What Brenden Gallagher does well is produce offense at 5on5. That offense includes goals. He produces on his own rather than leeching off other players: that's worth a fair deal.

 

[Goldorak]

DAChampion, I've expressed no opinion on this contract or the stat in question.

All I've done is correct another poster's abhorrent misuse of math and the stat to belittle other posters.


I have no strong feeling about this deal either way. I agree with you the stat has many issues.

 

[Runner77]

22.5m/6 years (3.75 AAV) i love it

Slightly overpaid for a 40-45 pts guy but wtv.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about...83k/point is a great deal. It would rank his contract as the 23rd best if he consistently gets 40-45pts every year.

Right now he has the 16th best contract in terms of salary/point

How is the points per cost an awful statistic if the guy specifically said a 40-45pt guy isn't worth 3.75m. It would be an awful statistic if contracts were simply based off of points only and not intangibles, but if you read the poster I replied to then you would see his issue with the contract was Gallagher's point production.


I simply proved him wrong saying his points are actually well worth his contract, did I say that's all that matters in a contract? No. You were just here to subtly to push your DD fangirl agenda like people do in every other habs thread, then you ask why the david one-dimensional desharnais gets **** on all the time.

Again, look at the guy I replied to. He said 3.75m is too much for a guy who gets a 40-45pt point production.

I immediately proved him wrong saying no its not. I made no mention of saying that's all a contract is based on, I realize there are other factors such as age, intangibles, position, etc.

You guys are misquoting me here, so in a non-rude way I'm asking you to quote me from now on if you're always going to be interpreting one of my posts incorrectly.

I've been reading the thread and saw ottawa's intial points/dollars comment and clearly, he was responding to a poster who was arguing Gallagher on that basis.

At no time is ottawa suggesting that this is how a player should be valued.

In fact, he goes on repeatedly about how he was only responding to that initial poster.

I don't know ottawa, nor owe him anything. I believe he went overboards with his DD comment re "fangirls", but not on the points/dollars issue where he never made it an absolute method of player valuation, only brought it up specifically in respect of that one poster's comment, as the above shows. If you want to call ottawa on his DD comment, that would be much more deserved than all the bashing he's getting on the points/dollars comment, IMHO.

 

[Kriss E]

Well said....some people here are Mr. Knowitalls...absolutely laughable, to sit here and pretend like you know more about hockey, the cap, projected cap, management, the players, the league, agents,and to know all this plus the 1000 other things that involve running a Billion $$ hockey team better than Bergevin, Dudley, Molson and the dozens of other people involved in the decision making that goes with it is absolutely absurd!!!! We're not talking Millbury here or Charles Wang, these guys are the creme of the creme and if Bergevin, Dudley and Co. think it's a great idea to sign Gallagher to a 6 year extension, or Pacioretty to a 6 year extension, or Price to 6 years or bridge Subban, then give the guy the benefit of the doubt, I think they've earned that right...you guys are questioning art philosophies with Picasso.... keep it up Bergevin

So why are you on a forum??

 

[WhiskeySeven*]

So why are you on a forum??

And I don't know why Dudley is considered the crème de la crème... Or Mellanby or Lapointe or the rest of those cronies for that matter.

It's still a good deal but I don't understand how the man who refused to sign Subban to a 5year 25mil contract when he had the chance is revered.

 

[CanadienShark]

Such a great deal that will look outstanding (a là Pacioretty) in a few years.

 

[MXD]

Interesting breakdown of this contract. Gallagher will be paid 5.5 next season, and 4.5 on the 2nd year.

15-16: 5.5
16-17: 4.5
17-18: 2.750
18-19: 3
19-20: 4
20-21: 2.750

He has chosen to be paid up front. And on the last 2 years of his contract, he'll get paid 1.750 up front as signing bonus, probably on Jul 1st. No bridge contract, but definitely 2 years in there acting somewhat like it.
Source: capgeek

20-21 is a possible lock-out year, right?

Except quite a few long-term deals with signing bonuses handed on July 1st 20-21 on otherwise "diving" deals.

 

[CanadienShark]

Decent deal, but I find it a bit long considering his stature, his style of play, history of concussions, etc.

Might turn out great though.

Maybe for other players, it's a bigger issue. With Gallagher, he's a stocky little ****er, and in better shape than most guys. I think he'll be fine. The other issues pose a more realistic problem.

 

[ottawa]

I've been reading the thread and saw ottawa's intial points/dollars comment and clearly, he was responding to a poster who was arguing Gallagher on that basis.

At no time is ottawa suggesting that this is how a player should be valued.

In fact, he goes on repeatedly about how he was only responding to that initial poster.

I don't know ottawa, nor owe him anything. I believe he went overboards with his DD comment re "fangirls", but not on the points/dollars issue where he never made it an absolute method of player valuation, only brought it up specifically in respect of that one poster's comment, as the above shows. If you want to call ottawa on his DD comment, that would be much more deserved than all the bashing he's getting on the points/dollars comment, IMHO.

Lmaooo

I feel like your whole post was sarcasm but I will say that I took it too far with the DD 'fangirling' comments. I replaced it with supporters that same night but I still shouldn't have gone there. But people need to understand DD constantly being shoved down peoples throats is annoying and gets too much sometimes