Confirmed with Link: Antti Raanta Extended (3 years/4.25AAV)

[hbk]

Other than several million dollars. I think that's Del's point.

We had the range at $3.5-$4.5M though months ago and after all his complaining and fear mongering months later Del by his own admission believes Raanta is worth exactly what we forecasted. That's where the "what did we really risk?" Comment comes from.

I honestly think the bigger issue is the raise in the cap.

 

[rt]

Other than several million dollars. I think that's Del's point.

Eh. I said 4x4 then. If it ends up 4.5x4 now, that’s 2m over 4 years. Eh.

 

[RemoAZ]

IF is the big word. I'll be happy if it's anywhere close to 4. If he goes FA, I have to believe some GM with more cap/budget room than brains will give him something closer to a Mike Smith type deal. Remember, it only takes one team to price him right out of our broke ass budget. The organization obviously loves him. They should have come in strong before the deadline and just locked him up.

 

[moosemeister]

IF is the big word. I'll be happy if it's anywhere close to 4. If he goes FA, I have to believe some GM with more cap/budget room than brains will give him something closer to a Mike Smith type deal. Remember, it only takes one team to price him right out of our broke ass budget. The organization obviously loves him. They should have come in strong before the deadline and just locked him up.

Agreed, but it is what it is.

If there is any rumor to his wife being unhappy, try to find a compromise. Bring in a Finnish player with a Finnish family to give them some familiarity

Get Truly Nolan as a sponsor, and make sure they hit the Raanta household once a month. Even have Raanta make some crappy athlete commercials with Truly. Give him a f***ing mouse car he can drive to and from the stadium in. I don't give a shit.

Make this man happy outside of money too.

A lot of us are still in shock about Mike Smith. In all fairness, even though Smith got paid after one solid year, the past few years he was one of our best players. Was he overpaid by a bit? Sure! But he wasn't a Scott Gomez, David Clarkson type deal. Smith was still one of our best players.

 

[hbk]

I was advocating for a Smith buyout myself. Getting anything in a trade was a bonus.

 

[RemoAZ]

I think the deal Smith got was going to be paid by someone so I don't think he was necessarily over paid. I just don't know if Barroway will sign off on that kind of deal going to Raanta with the injuries this year and him never logging a #1 season's worth of starts. I think there's a good chance someone will though.

 

[_Del_]

There are still those that believe the intent of any negotiation is to put the screws to the other party.

That's not it at all. The idea is to attempt to negotiate before you're feeling the heat to make a deal. Not after.

By his own admission predeadline, Chayka through Morgan said the "hope" is to start negotiations after the deadline. That's stupid no matter how many times you try to parse it.

We are completely without the ability to put the screws to Raanta. Trying to dismiss criticism as some type of putting the screws to Raanta rings hollow because everyone in the world knows we couldn't if we tried.

Waiting and hemming and hawing instead of making a bold decision to sign or cut bait only hurts us. He was either our guy, or he was easily replaceable. He was either worth his ask, or he wasn't. Boom, bold decision time. And it was at the deadline. There was never going to be a more favourable time to ink a deal for us. His ask was never going to come down from that moment. Nothing about trying to make a deal or moving on is "putting the screws" to Raanta. He would never feel any heat. Why would he? He's the one holding all the cards. All we had to do was choose to dance to his invitation or decide to find another partner.

There is zero reason for him to sign instead of waiting 80 something days and seeing if someone else will do something stupid. He's got a limited window for financial gains. More power to him.

So yes, it might cost us a million or so more, but we've got a huge budget, right? It might cost us more term, but goalies are the most consistent asset you can spend money on, right? The wisest decisions are always made by young GM's when their feet are up against the fire to get a deal done or match a bad deal or lose the asset for nothing and look like an inexperienced rube, right? That's when I can most trust the wealth of experience and the reputation of John Chayka as a people-person to come through and get a better deal for us than predeadline, right?

It was dumb. The agent played on his inexperience. I'm sure Raanta would be happy with his next contract whenever he had signed it. Because noone is putting or can put the screws to him. Whether he signs here or elsewhere is still obviously a matter of debate after we waited until now to start the negotiating process.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

The funny thing is that when I was looking over the thread back around the trade deadline, it seems like there was a sizable block of people saying that we needed to trade Raanta while we could get the assets for him. So to get on Chayka's case now for not signing the guy at the deadline seems a tad disingenuous to me.

 

[Jakey53]

Other than several million dollars. I think that's Del's point.

You can't say that without knowing what was discussed before TTD. What we assume Raanta is worth and what the Coyotes think he is worth could be a difference of millions over the term of the contract, either way.

 

[_Del_]

I didn't want him to trade him. I wanted him to sign him OR trade him and get assets. That's a big boy decision and the right time to make it was predeadline.

We still have to answer the same question (is he worth his ask, or should we move on), but we get nothing from the walkaway now, the price has gone up, and Raanta has nothing to lose by listening to other bids which actually decreases our chance of signing him.

The odds of Chayka doing something foolish have increased because he did something foolish.

 

[rt]

Raanta > 54th pick

If gambling the 54th pick by being patient and persistent leads to us having Raanta instead of the 54th pick, that’s a big boy decision.

Pissing your panties over the prospect of losing another measly pick and dumping your potentially elite goalie to mitigate that utterly inocuos risk is little girl stuff.

Same big boy logic applies to a whoopdie doo 0.500mil per year difference in salary on a long term contract for a guy who’s just plain earning it. I’m not going to light the torches a grab the pitch forks because we waited so long that our fantastic goalie showed us how good he is and how much he’s worth. There are worse problems. Like literally all of our other problems for example.

 

[_Del_]

And if it leads us to signing Khudobin or Bernier instead? Great non-move hesitation still? We'll still be glad we didn't pay $4M to Raanta at the deadline or pick up assets?

 

[rt]

And if it leads us to signing Khudobin or Bernier instead? Great non-move hesitation still? We'll still be glad we didn't pay $4M to Raanta at the deadline or pick up assets?

I don’t understand your question. Is losing all hope of Raanta so you can have Khudobin and a 2nd better than trying to keep Raanta, doing all you can and ending up with Khudobin and no pick? No. No I don’t think so. It’s certainly not the ballsy move you’re making it out to be. That’s bunting with a guy on first and two outs in the bottom of the ninth when you’re down by two.

Panicking at the TDL and trading Raanta is dickless. There’s no question about that. Argue that it’s dumb. That it’s more astute to go with the safe bet. That’s fine. Don’t act like it’s somehow more brave to cut bait and accept defeat.

 

[RABBIT]

Chances are neither Raanta's side or the Coyote's side were ready to commit to a dollar amount in late February. I'm sure they had talks, but I doubt the Coyotes had a chance to sign him for 4M per year but balked at it.

 

[_Del_]

His price was never coming down from that moment. That's why it was time to cut bait if they didn't like his number. You were never going to be closer to a favourable deal than then. And if he was committed to testing the market or actually priced himself out of the market, you could always take a swing at him again after the season. If he didn't price himself out of the market, then it was dumb not to decide he was your guy and hitch your wagon.

 

[Jakey53]

And if it leads us to signing Khudobin or Bernier instead? Great non-move hesitation still? We'll still be glad we didn't pay $4M to Raanta at the deadline or pick up assets?

I'm sure Chayka has a pretty good idea what will get Raanta signed, but if Raanta wanted to wait until after the year to sign it was out of Chayka's hands. We have no idea what the Coyotes have Raanta valued at. It might be 4M or 6M a year or anywhere in between. Just because you and I think anything over 4M is over payment, doesn't mean it is.

 

[Jakey53]

His price was never coming down from that moment. That's why it was time to cut bait if they didn't like his number. You were never going to be closer to a favourable deal than then. And if he was committed to testing the market or actually priced himself out of the market, you could always take a swing at him again after the season. If he didn't price himself out of the market, then it was dumb not to decide he was your guy and hitch your wagon.

Ok, so we cut bait and trade Raanta at the TTD for a second or third. Where are we then? We would be in the same spot then as we are now if we don't sign him after the season.We would have no Raanta with not a chance of ever signing him. We have a much better chance of signing him by not trading him than if we would have traded him. Raanta knows he is the #1 here, other teams he could be a back up. Raanta has it good here and he knows it. He will be signed.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

Chances are neither Raanta's side or the Coyote's side were ready to commit to a dollar amount in late February. I'm sure they had talks, but I doubt the Coyotes had a chance to sign him for 4M per year but balked at it.

My feeling is that at the TDL both sides were still too unsure about each other's direction to sign anything. Chayka didn't know if Raanta could recover enough from his injuries to play a significant portion of the season, and Raanta didn't know if Tocchet could figure out a way to turn the team around. Chayka, though, most likely saw Raanta's potential (otherwise he wouldn't have traded for him) and didn't want to give up on an asset without a thorough evaluation, so he didn't trade him.

If that's the case, then I'd have to think that Chayka giving Raanta a chance to prove himself is going to be a plus in the GM's ledger as they talk extension. But my suspicion is that it was never going to be as easy as either extending or trading at the deadline.

 

[Mosby]

How many games do we win since the trade deadline if Raanta is an Islander right now?

 

[rt]

How many games do we win since the trade deadline if Raanta is an Islander right now?

Undermines the entire point of bothering to acquire Stepan, Hjalmarsson, and Demers in the first place. The idea was to let the kids grow on a competitive team. Without Raanta, we wouldn’t have been that for them.

 

[AZviaNJ]

Does Chayka go 5x5....is that the final number?

 

[RABBIT]

Does Chayka go 5x5....is that the final number?

If we had to, i'd say pull the trigger. We signed Smith to a 6 year, 5.7M contract when he was 31 years old and we were able to live with it because we finally solidified goaltending.
If we have to sign a 28 year old starting goalie for 700k less/1 year less than we signed Smith for to make it happen, then do it. It's a priority.

Freddy Andersen is probably the goalie that Raanta's camp will be referencing when talking numbers. Same age, same circumstances, etc. Andersen got 5x5.

 

[Jamieh]

If we had to, i'd say pull the trigger. We signed Smith to a 6 year, 5.7M contract when he was 31 years old and we were able to live with it because we finally solidified goaltending.
If we have to sign a 28 year old starting goalie for 700k less/1 year less than we signed Smith for to make it happen, then do it. It's a priority.

Freddy Andersen is probably the goalie that Raanta's camp will be referencing when talking numbers. Same age, same circumstances, etc. Andersen got 5x5.

Not sure I would use Smith as an example of why we should step up?? That didn't exactly work out. Raanta will be 2 years older than Andersen when deal signed, less games per year to compare to, and smaller. It would be a comparable as to why Raanta should ask for close but not get as much in salary as Andersen.

 

[RABBIT]

Not sure I would use Smith as an example of why we should step up?? That didn't exactly work out. Raanta will be 2 years older than Andersen when deal signed, less games per year to compare to, and smaller. It would be a comparable as to why Raanta should ask for close but not get as much in salary as Andersen.

I used Smith as an example for the sole purpose of pointing out that most of us on this forum adapted to it because it filled a need. And I agree, Andersen will probably have an edge when it's all said and done, but i feel that is probably one of the closest contracts they will use as a bargaining chip.

If we had the opportunity to sign Raanta for 4.8M x 4 years today, would you guys do it?

I'm guessing it will be somewhere between Talbot's 4.17M x 3 years and Andersen's 5M x 5.

 

[Jakey53]

Not sure I would use Smith as an example of why we should step up?? That didn't exactly work out. Raanta will be 2 years older than Andersen when deal signed, less games per year to compare to, and smaller. It would be a comparable as to why Raanta should ask for close but not get as much in salary as Andersen.

With the cap going up everyone wants more.