Confirmed with Link: BINNINGTON RE-SIGNED 2YR, 4.4AAV

[67Blues]

If you have a sub to the Athletic, there is a great article with Liut, Binny, and Army all talking about how they got where they are today with the contract. It really answers a lot of the questions/concerns on this thread.

How quick negotiations led Jordan Binnington, Blues to a...

 

[BlueDream]

If you have a sub to the Athletic, there is a great article with Liut, Binny, and Army all talking about how they got where they are today with the contract. It really answers a lot of the questions/concerns on this thread.

How quick negotiations led Jordan Binnington, Blues to a...

Yep, good article.

Accepting 1 year really made no sense on Binnington’s side. If he has a “sophomore slump” then he screws himself. So this deal makes a lot of sense.

Liut also makes a great point that I try making to people that are worried about taking players to UFA. If a player wants to get out of a city, they’ll find a way to do it one way or another. They can always negotiate contracts to get there. But as long as the player just simply doesn’t want out and likes where he’s at, then we can always just re-sign him. That’s one thing that can’t totally be avoided either way and we only have so much control over that. For a guy like Binnington, I have no reason to believe he’d want out. We are basically giving him the keys for the next 2 years and saying “if you can handle this, then name your price next time.” We would have no reason to let him walk if he keeps it up.

 

[Brian39]

Assuming Blues opted for 1 year in arbitration, didn’t Binnington retain the right for another arbitration hearing next year which MUST be a 1 year deal? Maybe Armstrong had less flexibility than it appeared, if Binnington was bound and determined to get to UFA.

We’ll see how this shakes out, but Armstrong seems to be betting on not having difficulty with the next contract.

Yes, he would have had those rights.

However, a 1 year deal also would have allowed us to work out an extension starting January 1 this season instead of having to wait until July 1. A 1 year deal would have given us the chance to say, "you've been great in the first half of this season, here is a 4 or 5 year deal now that you've proven you can keep it up even after teams have an offseason of tape to scout you." Now we can't do that until July 1 and another good playoff run gives his agent every reason to say, "just go to UFA next summer. Your resume is now good enough that even a down year in 2020/21 shouldn't completely cripple your earning potential." Our strongest time to negotiate a long term deal with him was mid season this season. That is now gone.

Additionally, if he does end up busting completely, we are locked into paying him $4.4 mil in 2020/21 while trying to find another guy. We would not have been committed to that on a 1 year deal.

If he was hell bent on going UFA in 2 years no matter what, I'd rather have the increased flexibility of two 1 year deals than one 2 year deal. At the end of the day, a 2 year deal carries the exact same amount of "you could lose him in 2 years" risk as a 1 year deal. But with the added negatives of delaying our chance to work out a long term deal and locking us into $4.4 mil AAV on the off chance he busts completely. It's the worst of both worlds.

I hope he plays well and we extend him next July. But buying no UFA years and passing up the option of doing a 1 year deal signals to me that it is unlikely. GMs are generally completely unwilling to walk guys directly to their first UFA year when they are viewed as part of the long term plan. Best case scenario, this 2 year deal accomplished us needing to increase our offer in order to stay. That's not great.

This contract effectively eliminated all leverage the Blues had for buying a number of UFA years. And it did so without buying a single one of them.

 

[Brian39]

If you have a sub to the Athletic, there is a great article with Liut, Binny, and Army all talking about how they got where they are today with the contract. It really answers a lot of the questions/concerns on this thread.

How quick negotiations led Jordan Binnington, Blues to a...

Really good article, but I'm really not any less concerned about us having to either give out a bad contract to keep him or watch him walk in UFA.

"...I’ve been with the St. Louis Blues for eight years,” he said. “Obviously, it hasn’t been my choice the whole time, but it was worth being patient and continuing to build, and I think (it) made me stronger in the end. I’ve been here the whole time, so yeah, if it feels right, I’ll be here.”

Sounds to me like he is a guy with a good head for business who is going to be more than happy to hear offers from around the league to figure out the very best fit instead of rushing to an extension with the Blues next summer. With the cost of doing business in the UFA market, it very well might not make sense for the Blues to offer him the kind of money and years to be that most attractive option.

My comments are probably sounding more doom and gloom than I really feel. I don't think he is guaranteed to walk, but everything about this contract signals that he wants to explore that option sooner than later. Him having the ability to go UFA at 27 isn't the end of the world, but I still hate the decision to make it as easy as possible for him to do so without gaining any real benefit. The article estimates an arbitration award somewhere between $3 and $4 mil.

I don't like paying more than that to get no real benefit other than not having to do a hearing.

 

[Brian39]

Why are you so certain he won't be here after 2021 and someone else will give him a great contract and not us? Allen's contract comes off the books so say Binnington does have a great couple years we can sign him to a pretty nice contract and get a cheap backup. I don't see the issue.

I'm not certain of it, but I think it is the more likely outcome. I didn't feel that way a week ago. If Binny has a great couple years, we are probably looking at an 8 year deal at $10+ mil per year to keep him. I don't think Army signs that. This contract puts us in the weakest negotiating position possible and eliminates almost all risk Binny has of simply playing out the string if he is doing well.

I'm not saying that I think that Binny is actively trying to get out of St. Louis ASAP. If he is, this contract made it incredibly easy for him and we just lost any and all hopes of keeping him. More likely than not, he isn't actively trying to get out, but this contract just made it much easier for him to price himself out of what Army will be willing or should be willing to pay. I firmly believe that Carey Price is one of the best 5 goaltenders of his generation. I also firmly believe that he is one one of the worst 5 goalie contracts in the league. Same thing with Luongo of 5+ years ago. There is a breaking point where you shouldn't pay a goalie what the market will bear, no matter how good he is. This contract is more likely to get us to that point that a 1 year deal would have and provides none of the team benefit that a 3 year contract would have. If Binny is the next elite goalie in the league, I think we could have extended him long term at a reasonable price had we gone with a 1 year deal. I don't think we will be able to anymore. If he is an elite guy, I think our only hope of keeping him after this is on a contract that is going to hut very badly.

 

[Note Worthy]

I'm not certain of it, but I think it is the more likely outcome. I didn't feel that way a week ago. If Binny has a great couple years, we are probably looking at an 8 year deal at $10+ mil per year to keep him. I don't think Army signs that. This contract puts us in the weakest negotiating position possible and eliminates almost all risk Binny has of simply playing out the string if he is doing well.

I'm not saying that I think that Binny is actively trying to get out of St. Louis ASAP. If he is, this contract made it incredibly easy for him and we just lost any and all hopes of keeping him. More likely than not, he isn't actively trying to get out, but this contract just made it much easier for him to price himself out of what Army will be willing or should be willing to pay. I firmly believe that Carey Price is one of the best 5 goaltenders of his generation. I also firmly believe that he is one one of the worst 5 goalie contracts in the league. Same thing with Luongo of 5+ years ago. There is a breaking point where you shouldn't pay a goalie what the market will bear, no matter how good he is. This contract is more likely to get us to that point that a 1 year deal would have and provides none of the team benefit that a 3 year contract would have. If Binny is the next elite goalie in the league, I think we could have extended him long term at a reasonable price had we gone with a 1 year deal. I don't think we will be able to anymore. If he is an elite guy, I think our only hope of keeping him after this is on a contract that is going to hut very badly.

Fair enough. I was a little surprised to see him get a 2 year deal right to UFA as well but I don't share the concerns as deep as you do. I think if he does happen to pan out and be a great or good goalie for the next couple years that we will re-sign him and be okay.

But I understand what you're saying.

 

[67Blues]

Not to beat a dead horse, but I'd be interested to see the reaction when we gave Allen the 4 year deal he currently has and how people felt about it coming off of his playoff performance that year. Who has better google-foo skills than me who can find that thread?

 

[MoPucks]

So we went from a year ago worrying about how to get rid of a goalie to now worrying about how to keep a goalie. Huh. Nice problem to have around here for once.

 

[Ranksu]

Not to beat a dead horse, but I'd be interested to see the reaction when we gave Allen the 4 year deal he currently has and how people felt about it coming off of his playoff performance that year. Who has better google-foo skills than me who can find that thread?

Here,



Confirmed with Link: - Jake Allen (4 years @ $4.35m)

Majority liked Allen contract, but I didnt.

 

[Brian39]

Not to beat a dead horse, but I'd be interested to see the reaction when we gave Allen the 4 year deal he currently has and how people felt about it coming off of his playoff performance that year. Who has better google-foo skills than me who can find that thread?

I'm not going to dig through years of threads, but I know that my reaction was positive. I liked it because it felt like a low-risk, high reward gamble. I felt that the 'worst case scenario' was that if he didn't live up to the contract, it was still short enough to allow us to transition to our stud goalie prospect over the last couple years of the deal and get Allen off the books before his salary prevented us from giving that other goalie the raise he was due. However, I was basing that on the assumption that Husso was the guy who'd take his job, and that 2019/20 was the earliest Husso could potentially be ready to steal a job and not just be a backup. Pretty far off there.

All in all, I still don't hate the Allen contract as much as others. Allen the goalie has been a dud and his contract is an overpayment. But at the end of the day, the contract isn't preventing us from retaining Binny and we should have a decent (albeit expensive) tandem next year. The last year will need to get moved next summer, but that should be pretty doable. In terms of actual damage to the franchise, the contract hasn't hurt us much. Allen's play did, but I don't think him being a UFA last summer instead of being under contract would have helped us much. Even without the benefit of hindsight with Binny coming in and playing great, there aren't too many UFA guys or low-asset trade targets that I would have been happy with. Allen's play hurt the organization, but so far I just don't see the damage that the contract has done. I still think it was a pretty low risk gamble, even if Allen played about as poorly as you could have ever guessed.

 

[Ranksu]

Pfff, almost forget how bih fanboys @TheDizee and @TruBlu were about Allen. Jeesus tuhat thread is gold read.

 

[parliamentlite]

I really, really don't like Army's strategy here. Outside of going 5+ years at big, big money I think a 2 year deal was literally the worst outcome for the Blues (regardless of AAV, which again, I don't have an issue with where we landed). I'm really annoyed that Binny playing as well as we all hope this season will likely mean that we're looking for a new goalie in 2021. That sucks, hard.

In a vacuum, I would have preferred a one year term for Binnington. However, given the way our cap situation is unfolding over the next few years, I think the two-year deal makes a great deal of sense.

Imagine if Binny has a huge year next season on a one-year contract. In that event, the Blues would be trying to re-sign Pietrangelo, Schenn, Dunn, and Binnington next offseason and Binny's cap hit would be much higher than his current one. That combined with what is likely to be another relatively small increase in the cap would likely prevent us from having any chance to bring back both of the UFAs or even sign a capable replacement if necessary. Frankly, I view that as the worst-case scenario.

This two-year deal is going to end at the same time as both Steen's and Bozak's (and Allen's, if he is still around) contracts, and I don't see us bringing either back unless it's at a significantly lower rate. The only other potentially large deals we will have to do that offseason are for Schwarz and Thomas coming off his ELC. In addition, we may shed a salary in the expansion draft. To top all of this off, the new American broadcast rights deal is going to take effect that offseason and that is expected to lead to a very large increase in the cap.

It's not a stretch to say we will have a full roster with somewhere around $15 million in cap space to use on Binnington that year. Money won't be the issue that offseason, not the way it will be after this coming season.

Another way to look at it is from the angle of age. At the end of this 2 year deal, he will be heading into his age 28 season and we will have a 3 season sample size of his play. Provided he proves himself to be the player we hope he is, the Blues can effectively lock him up for the rest of his career on a long term contract at that point, just as well as we could on a one year deal but with less of a sample size. I know you weren't personally advocating this, but if we had signed him to a four- to six-year deal this offseason, we would have been in the uncomfortable situation of either having to let him go with several good years of his career left or signing him to a potentially too long contract that would take him out to his late thirties.

 

[Ranksu]

Hey @Brian39 still haven't heard your excuses why Binny get 50k more than Allen? And what about your prediction of 1-year deal? I knewed you would crawl back your foxhole after Binny's contract announced.

 

[Brian39]

Hey @Brian39 still haven't heard your excuses why Binny get 50k more than Allen? And what about your prediction of 1-year deal? I knewed you would crawl back your foxhole after Binny's contract announced.

I've literally made several posts in this thread. I know reading can be super tough, but give it a go. They are on this page and the preceding page.

I don't like this contract, but my predictions were still I hell of a lot closer than your prediction of $5+ mil at 4 or 5 years. Or your absurd $50 mil prediction.

This contract is not "proven goalie" money. This is a prove it deal that walks him directly to UFA. I wouldn't have given him this contract and think it is not a good one. Luckily, it is still no where close to the $5+ mil long term deal you thought he was getting. This deal likely indicates that we are comfortable moving from Binny to Husso (or someone else) in 2 years. For someone who wanted the Blues to commit to Binny long term as a proven goalie, why on Earth would you think this is a good signing and in any way an indication that he is getting paid like a proven goalie?

 

[67Blues]

I'm not certain of it, but I think it is the more likely outcome. I didn't feel that way a week ago. If Binny has a great couple years, we are probably looking at an 8 year deal at $10+ mil per year to keep him. I don't think Army signs that. This contract puts us in the weakest negotiating position possible and eliminates almost all risk Binny has of simply playing out the string if he is doing well.

I'm not saying that I think that Binny is actively trying to get out of St. Louis ASAP. If he is, this contract made it incredibly easy for him and we just lost any and all hopes of keeping him. More likely than not, he isn't actively trying to get out, but this contract just made it much easier for him to price himself out of what Army will be willing or should be willing to pay. I firmly believe that Carey Price is one of the best 5 goaltenders of his generation. I also firmly believe that he is one one of the worst 5 goalie contracts in the league. Same thing with Luongo of 5+ years ago. There is a breaking point where you shouldn't pay a goalie what the market will bear, no matter how good he is. This contract is more likely to get us to that point that a 1 year deal would have and provides none of the team benefit that a 3 year contract would have. If Binny is the next elite goalie in the league, I think we could have extended him long term at a reasonable price had we gone with a 1 year deal. I don't think we will be able to anymore. If he is an elite guy, I think our only hope of keeping him after this is on a contract that is going to hut very badly.

I think it will come down to something that I've said on the main boards..."everyone asked what would happen if the Blues finally got above average goaltending". Now we see the result. The Blues don't need to sink a ton of cap space into Price or Brodeur Part Deux (see what I did there). At times, Binnington was great, but he was for the most part above average. If Husso, Fitzpatrick, or another darkhorse comes up, that could weigh heavily on Binnington's future. You can't sink 12% of your cap space on a goalie and hope to survive in the cap era.

I suspect that Binnington will come down to earth and be an above average goalie (not elite) over the next year and will re-up for somewhere in the $6-7m range and not the Price money that some people fear here. Now if the Blues go on to another Cup, the band will be broken up because a lot of folks will be using that as leverage on their next contracts that are coming up in the next 2 years.

 

[Zamadoo]

I'm happy for Binner. His comments about being patient for 8 years when it wasn't his control to stay with the organization combined with the fact that he was overlooked and cast off to Providence (not to mention the Copley debacle) should make it a blessing that he's with us for two more years.

Hell yeah Binner! You do you. Make the man pay you your money, and set yourself up for UFA. If he walks I hope he has some smartass comments on his way out the door! Hahaha

 

[Zezel’s Pretzels]

I'm happy for Binner. His comments about being patient for 8 years when it wasn't his control to stay with the organization combined with the fact that he was overlooked and cast off to Providence (not to mention the Copley debacle) should make it a blessing that he's with us for two more years.

Hell yeah Binner! You do you. Make the man pay you your money, and set yourself up for UFA. If he walks I hope he has some smartass comments on his way out the door! Hahaha

I know rewarding past performance and sentiment should not influence the way an NHL franchise does business, but a part of me thinks the 2 yr deal rather than a 1 yr prove yourself again deal is a reward for overcoming all the shiznit he dealt with along the way. He not only stood on his head in multiple games in the regular season and the Cup run, but he did so after overcoming three goalies ahead of him on the depth chart. Those are not normal circumstances, and we all know this was not a normal contract negotiation to baseline.

In this way, I think the way that Army and the Blues approached it might be secretly genius; it walked the line between overcommitment and under commitment, gave a career minor leaguer a life changing pay day, AND gave him a chance to earn a boatload in FA at a prime age. The Blues didn’t HAVE to do that. I am sure Binny will remember that if his star grows (and he will not take a bargain contract from us, of course, but it doesn’t hurt in any way).

 

[simon IC]

I am another one that is not keen on a contract leading straight to UFA, but as others have pointed out, a one year deal would have put Binnington in the driver's seat anyway, so it really doesn't matter. I think it is fair that he makes more than Allen now, but at the same time we are not locked in to a bad contract if he disappoints. Win-win in my opinion.

 

[Mafisen]

The togetherness and comraderie the Cup win brought sure didn't last long, did it.

 

[Xerloris]

The togetherness and comraderie the Cup win brought sure didn't last long, did it.

I don't think your post has any point or context so please elaborate.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

I don't think your post has any point or context so please elaborate.

I think he’s referring to Ranksu calling out posters by name in an attempt to shame them or something, for participating in speculation about Binnington’s contract, and those posters’ responses. It’s the same old same old.

 

[Xerloris]

I think he’s referring to Ranksu calling out posters by name in an attempt to shame them or something, for participating in speculation about Binnington’s contract, and those posters’ responses. It’s the same old same old.

Ohhh I thought he was referring to Binnington and that had me very confused.