Speculation: Colton Parayko's next contract

[Vladys Gumption]

Well, we've gotten out of the danger zone for a while...have some time to make him an A, have him become a leader on the team and really get to love the city.

I have a feeling that the next contract is going to be very expensive.

The next one was going to be very expensive anyway. UFA at 29 or 30 sets him up for a massive deal. The only positive is that if we do extend him long term after this contact is over, he's still very much in his prime and should get a lot of quality play out of him.

 

[PitchDoug]

AAV literally exactly what I was expecting, but don't like the term. Wanted 6 years for that price.

Yeah, 6+ would have been incredible. And I agree, I sorta of thought 5.5 would get 6 years. But DA got something done that keeps building a good core. I feel like we have a nice window over the next 3/4 seasons to do something special.

 

[bleedblue1223]

His next contract will be when he is 29, so Parayko definitely wanted to be able to give him time for a good next contract as well. Definitely comfortable with extending him at that point, instead of extending him when he's 31 or 32.

 

[Vladys Gumption]

His next contract will be when he is 29, so Parayko definitely wanted to be able to give him time for a good next contract as well. Definitely comfortable with extending him at that point, instead of extending him when he's 31 or 32.

Agreed. That's the silver lining in this. If we extend him for a8 years, it shouldn't be an albatross at the end. This is a phenomenal contract for Parayko himself. He gets a healthy chunk of change now and set himself up for a massive payday after.

 

[Majorityof1]

This is exactly my thought.

Again, I thought Rutherford was wrong when he stated that Armstrong was attempting to retain 5% of the cap for "late addition signings" but the fact that we have made it all the way to the hearing makes me think Rutherford and Timmerman might be correct. If Armstrong truly only wants to budget $4 million of the available $7.6 million for Parayko's first year, I can see why Parayko might take it as an affront.

Blues' arbitration brief reads as follows: "He's a true cornerstone player but, ya know, we had to sign Berglund and Sobotka and we also want to retain $3.2 million to pick up the new version of Steve Ott for the coming season, sooooo........the cornerstone player needs to wait on his pay day."

Just joking of course but Armstrong's actions don't seem to be matching his words.

Its called negotiation. If I ever have to negotiate for....well, anything, can you be on the OTHER SIDE of the table?

Parayko: I want $5.5M per on a 6 year deal.
Carter: Ok, but we want to make sure you are really happy. You'll take $6M a year.
Parayko. Wow. Ok, that is generous, where do I.....
Carter: Fine, you still aren't happy enough, how's $6.5 millions?
Parayko: I was happy at $6 but ok, that's ama....
Carter: You are really twisiting my arm here Colton....Look, I'll level with you. We only have $7.6M in cap space. Let's do 5 years at $7.6M. Then I'll trade away every player that makes over league minimum to clear salary for you to make $50 million on your next contract.

 

[Majorityof1]

AAV literally exactly what I was expecting, but don't like the term. Wanted 6 years for that price.

Agreed. This trend from Armstrong to sign our best RFAs to shorter term contracts to save a few bucks really sucks. Granted, I don't know how much that extra year would have cost. However, I'd rather go a good bit more to get 1-2 more years. Slavin who is an excellent comparable got less money for 2 more years. Its so much so a better deal, I'd almost rather have Slavin on that deal than Parayko on ours, just for those 2 extra years. Edmonton now knows when they will get their franchise #1D, in '22-23.

Don't get me wrong, it isn't the end of the world, and I am glad to have him locked up. But still don't like sacrificing control of stud players (Schwartz/Parayko), so we can have multiple $3.25M+ 3rd liners.

 

[Vladys Gumption]

Agreed. This trend from Armstrong to sign our best RFAs to shorter term contracts to save a few bucks really sucks. Granted, I don't know how much that extra year would have cost. However, I'd rather go a good bit more to get 1-2 more years. Slavin who is an excellent comparable got less money for 2 more years. Its so much so a better deal, I'd almost rather have Slavin on that deal than Parayko on ours, just for those 2 extra years. Edmonton now knows when they will get their franchise #1D, in '22-23.

Don't get me wrong, it isn't the end of the world, and I am glad to have him locked up. But still don't like sacrificing control of stud players (Schwartz/Parayko), so we can have multiple $3.25M+ 3rd liners.

Keep in mind though, Carolina only bought one extra year of UFA. Slavin is a full year younger. In general though, I agree with your premise.

 

[Majorityof1]

Keep in mind though, Carolina only bought one extra year of UFA. Slavin is a full year younger. In general though, I agree with your premise.

Slavin's deal doesn't start until next year, when he will be the same age as Parayko, as he has 1 year remaining on his ELC. They have him locked up for 8 years. It bought 4 years UFA, 3 RFA. Parayko's is 3 RFA and 2 UFA for $200k more

 

[carter333167]

Its called negotiation. If I ever have to negotiate for....well, anything, can you be on the OTHER SIDE of the table?

Parayko: I want $5.5M per on a 6 year deal.
Carter: Ok, but we want to make sure you are really happy. You'll take $6M a year.
Parayko. Wow. Ok, that is generous, where do I.....
Carter: Fine, you still aren't happy enough, how's $6.5 millions?
Parayko: I was happy at $6 but ok, that's ama....
Carter: You are really twisiting my arm here Colton....Look, I'll level with you. We only have $7.6M in cap space. Let's do 5 years at $7.6M. Then I'll trade away every player that makes over league minimum to clear salary for you to make $50 million on your next contract.

Admittedly, I am not good at negotiating for something that I want badly. That's a pretty accurate description for how it probably would have gone down....Best to keep me out of the room...lol.

 

[carter333167]

Agreed. This trend from Armstrong to sign our best RFAs to shorter term contracts to save a few bucks really sucks. Granted, I don't know how much that extra year would have cost. However, I'd rather go a good bit more to get 1-2 more years. Slavin who is an excellent comparable got less money for 2 more years. Its so much so a better deal, I'd almost rather have Slavin on that deal than Parayko on ours, just for those 2 extra years. Edmonton now knows when they will get their franchise #1D, in '22-23.

Don't get me wrong, it isn't the end of the world, and I am glad to have him locked up. But still don't like sacrificing control of stud players (Schwartz/Parayko), so we can have multiple $3.25M+ 3rd liners.

My guess is that the extra year to make it six years started with a six (which Armstrong didn't like) or that Parayko simply wouldn't go 6 years.

I definitely agree with your premise, but one subtle positive spin on it is that a contract starting with a six may have been a slight political problem in the locker room. Going this route still leaves Petro the clear salary leader, puts a little less pressure on Parayko and leaves time for sequencing an extension for Petro followed by an extension for Parayko. In this vein, I would like to see Parayko given an "A."

In any case, though, I do agree with your thoughts.

 

[BlueDream]

You can only do so much. It makes a lot more sense for Parayko to take 5 years than 6.

You can complain all you want but like I said, you can't force players to sign for the amount of years you want. If you're fine with overpaying, whatever, but I think people would start complaining about the cap hits if the team actually did that.