Lets not also forget it was team elected arbitration. Chevy was the one who put the plan in place to start with. I'm still a big Chevy fan, but IMO he got bested by a hard nose agent on this one. As he did with the Pavs deal. I just hope/trust he has been learning his lessons when the really important negotiations start this summer with Buff and Ladd.
Speculation: Jets - General Rumour, Trade, Free Agent and Waiver Speculation 14-15 Part XI
- Thread starter JC Numminen
- Start date
- Status
Lets not also forget it was team elected arbitration. Chevy was the one who put the plan in place to start with. I'm still a big Chevy fan, but IMO he got bested by a hard nose agent on this one. As he did with the Pavs deal. I just hope/trust he has been learning his lessons when the really important negotiations start this summer with Buff and Ladd.
- Jun 10, 2014
- 57,394
- 29,212
You just are not going to admit to even the faintest, infinitesimal, not quite zero possibility that Maybe Chevy didn't do absolutely the best possible in the universe job of negotiating with Walsh are you? OK, have it your way. There is zero chance that Walsh outmaneuvered him (like that could ever happen). There is zero chance (not near zero, all the way to none) that Walsh might have blinked if Chevy had played out his hand to the end.
Aavco Cup
"I can make you cry in this room"
- Sep 5, 2013
- 37,630
- 10,440
You just are not going to admit to even the faintest, infinitesimal, not quite zero possibility that Maybe Chevy didn't do absolutely the best possible in the universe job of negotiating with Walsh are you? OK, have it your way. There is zero chance that Walsh outmaneuvered him (like that could ever happen). There is zero chance (not near zero, all the way to none) that Walsh might have blinked if Chevy had played out his hand to the end.
All I'm trying to say is those two days or whatever it was were irrelevant. Negotiations had obviously reached an impasse. It's pretty simple to me. An impasse is an impasse. There was no point in dragging it out.
I don't know why I would think Chevy didn't do his best? I think he's competent. I reserve judgement on the outmanoeuvring part because without knowing the details it's pretty hard to say if one side or the other was unreasonable in their expectations.
Hunter368
RIP lomiller1, see you in the next life buddy.
- Nov 8, 2011
- 26,994
- 23,634
Agreed.
I think we're seeing Chevy learn on the job. He's done some good and bad things. He's done some things quietly well and totally dropped the ball on others.
His first job as a GM and it shows, but he's learning.
Negotiations are only at an impasse until someone blinks (takes offer on table) or someone bails (walks away) or a compromise is reached. Every player eventually signs a deal. I doubt Walsh was going to budge no matter what Chevy did, but letting the heat rise on both parties was his best option IMO. Very Likely Frolik wanted no part of arbitration, not many players do. By taking it to the last minute you have the possibility of Fro telling his agent to take the offer on the table or throw out an acceptable counter offer. By Chevy blinking first no doubt he preserved the good feelings, Walsh got what he wanted, but Chevy was no closer to signing his player.
mcpw
WPG
- Jan 13, 2015
- 10,024
- 2,072
Wow, that Frolik debate is running in circles... anyway,
I completely understand what you're saying. However, there are two different aspects of a Byfuglien trade:
- first, we want to acquire a piece or multiple pieces that could turn into part of the "core" moving forward, as you write
- second, we need to make the cap work. Forgetting for a moment that the Flyers aren't interested in him, and not considering value, a trade along the likes of "Byfuglien for 1st + Sanheim" pretty much won't work with any team. I don't know whether there is a team which is the position to acquire a one-year-rental, while at the same time being able to acquire 5.2M cap while sending 0M cap back. We will take salary back. And we should ensure that it's a useful player coming back with the cap hit. No Clarkson, no Lecavalier. The player coming back should fulfill a need for the team. Our two main needs (let's forget about goaltending for a second, as that will only derail the discussion) are middle-six forwards and LHD who are upgrades on Chiarot/Stuart. Now, let's look at the main board trade offers I've posted:
DET: Darren Helm, Teemu Pulkkinen or Tomas Jurco, Brendan Smith
Here, the part of our future core is clearly Pulkkinen/Jurco. Helm is a 28yo third liner, filling our forward depth, returning some salary. Useful player, fills a need. Brendan Smith is the player which decides whether the offer is good or not. If you think he can be a part of the core, it's a pretty good offer. If you don't think so, and he's just a band-aid for our LHD depth, the offer it bad, because Pulkkinen/Jurco are nice, but not top-end prospects. Sure, I'd rather see Ouellet offered. Will it happen? I don't know.
TBL: Matt Carle, Vladislav Namestnikov, third round pick.
Part of the future core: Namestnikov. The salary band-aid coming back is definitely on the upper end of band-aids, and can stabilize our left side for quite some time to get Morrissey ready. Because it's such a good band-aid, we only get a third round pick as an add-on.
So, the question is what we want to come back as "part of the future core". We should be realistic here: We've seen
Yandle (50% retained), Summers (fringe player), 2016 4th
for
2016 1st, 2015 2nd, Duclair (good forward prospect with some red flag), John Moore (24yo Dman, third pairing today, maybe second pairing upside)
That's a (probably late) 2016 first, a late second, a Brendan-Smith-like band-aid roster player, and a forward prospect who's supposed to be a third-round steal, but who also struggled a bit this season, doesn't seem to score a lot in the QMJHL. And that was at the deadline (-> high value), for 1 year and the rest of 14/15 (-> as opposed to 1 year of Byfuglien). And 50% salary retention. Yandle had 41 points in 63 games for the Coyotes at that point (Byfuglien: 45 points in 69 games this season).
Honestly, we should stop asking for a top-10 pick, or top-end prospects, Byfuglien won't get that. Namestnikov, Jurco, Khokhlachev, Marincin. That's the tier of prospects we can get. NHL-ready, but still raw. Plus a useful roster player, and some add-on.
I completely understand what you're saying. However, there are two different aspects of a Byfuglien trade:
- first, we want to acquire a piece or multiple pieces that could turn into part of the "core" moving forward, as you write
- second, we need to make the cap work. Forgetting for a moment that the Flyers aren't interested in him, and not considering value, a trade along the likes of "Byfuglien for 1st + Sanheim" pretty much won't work with any team. I don't know whether there is a team which is the position to acquire a one-year-rental, while at the same time being able to acquire 5.2M cap while sending 0M cap back. We will take salary back. And we should ensure that it's a useful player coming back with the cap hit. No Clarkson, no Lecavalier. The player coming back should fulfill a need for the team. Our two main needs (let's forget about goaltending for a second, as that will only derail the discussion) are middle-six forwards and LHD who are upgrades on Chiarot/Stuart. Now, let's look at the main board trade offers I've posted:
DET: Darren Helm, Teemu Pulkkinen or Tomas Jurco, Brendan Smith
Here, the part of our future core is clearly Pulkkinen/Jurco. Helm is a 28yo third liner, filling our forward depth, returning some salary. Useful player, fills a need. Brendan Smith is the player which decides whether the offer is good or not. If you think he can be a part of the core, it's a pretty good offer. If you don't think so, and he's just a band-aid for our LHD depth, the offer it bad, because Pulkkinen/Jurco are nice, but not top-end prospects. Sure, I'd rather see Ouellet offered. Will it happen? I don't know.
TBL: Matt Carle, Vladislav Namestnikov, third round pick.
Part of the future core: Namestnikov. The salary band-aid coming back is definitely on the upper end of band-aids, and can stabilize our left side for quite some time to get Morrissey ready. Because it's such a good band-aid, we only get a third round pick as an add-on.
So, the question is what we want to come back as "part of the future core". We should be realistic here: We've seen
Yandle (50% retained), Summers (fringe player), 2016 4th
for
2016 1st, 2015 2nd, Duclair (good forward prospect with some red flag), John Moore (24yo Dman, third pairing today, maybe second pairing upside)
That's a (probably late) 2016 first, a late second, a Brendan-Smith-like band-aid roster player, and a forward prospect who's supposed to be a third-round steal, but who also struggled a bit this season, doesn't seem to score a lot in the QMJHL. And that was at the deadline (-> high value), for 1 year and the rest of 14/15 (-> as opposed to 1 year of Byfuglien). And 50% salary retention. Yandle had 41 points in 63 games for the Coyotes at that point (Byfuglien: 45 points in 69 games this season).
Honestly, we should stop asking for a top-10 pick, or top-end prospects, Byfuglien won't get that. Namestnikov, Jurco, Khokhlachev, Marincin. That's the tier of prospects we can get. NHL-ready, but still raw. Plus a useful roster player, and some add-on.
sully1410
#EggosForEleven
I don't care if we sign Frolik. IMO, he's not really a part of the future of this team. Hes probably not going to be with the jets long term anyways.. Pretty much a stop gap
If that is what Fro wanted then good on Walsh, but if Feo wanted to stay long term than he dropped the ball.
Anyways I'm fully in support of Chevy having a limit in negotiations and sticking to them providing they are reasonable. It shows other agents that we won't buckle and overpay on future deals.
Huffer
Registered User
- Jul 16, 2010
- 16,707
- 6,375
Thanks for the reply.
I understand your points, and agree that salary is going to be an issue. I just don't think it's as simple as adding another depth LHD like Smith or Carle on top of Chariot, Stuart, Harrisson, Clitsome (maybe), Pardy (maybe) and Morrissey, calling it "depth" and calling it a day. Now the Jets need to make supplemental moves to make it all work because now we can't keep all of those guys on the roster.
And while salary will likely be an issue in a potential move, I don't believe that the Jets need to figure out a way to take back Buff's equivalent to make it happen. Just looking at Detroit for example, they can let Cleary, Morrow, Zidlicky (replaced by Buff), and Gus go next season and have 10.85 in space. Some of those lost players can be replaced by younger players in their system for cheaper. Sure we will take some $ back in a deal, I don't see why the Jets need to take as much back as you are suggesting though.
For me, if we're needing to take back as much salary as you are implying to make a trade work, and getting average prospects back as well as a lesser player than Buff, it might make more sense just to re-sign Buff and try him on the left.
Buff>Yandle. Imo.
Therefore, I'd want a 2015 (or 2016) 1st+roster player+top prospect, or I'm not moving him.
He could fetch that as a rental, with somthing 'minor' added to him, say Burmi's rights.
If a team is getting a full year of Buff, and option to move him again at the deadline, his value should be reasonably high. He was voted an all-star dman this past year.
A team desperate for size, physicality and scoring from their d would love to get Buff. Keep showing the Kopitar+Doughty hits to reinforce that. So if he's moved, a team in the East close to contending like Philly, Boston, Tampa or Pittsburgh may be willing to make a deal. Cap crunches for teams can be managed over the summer.
Therefore, I'd want a 2015 (or 2016) 1st+roster player+top prospect, or I'm not moving him.
He could fetch that as a rental, with somthing 'minor' added to him, say Burmi's rights.
If a team is getting a full year of Buff, and option to move him again at the deadline, his value should be reasonably high. He was voted an all-star dman this past year.
A team desperate for size, physicality and scoring from their d would love to get Buff. Keep showing the Kopitar+Doughty hits to reinforce that. So if he's moved, a team in the East close to contending like Philly, Boston, Tampa or Pittsburgh may be willing to make a deal. Cap crunches for teams can be managed over the summer.
You just are not going to admit to even the faintest, infinitesimal, not quite zero possibility that Maybe Chevy didn't do absolutely the best possible in the universe job of negotiating with Walsh are you? OK, have it your way. There is zero chance that Walsh outmaneuvered him (like that could ever happen). There is zero chance (not near zero, all the way to none) that Walsh might have blinked if Chevy had played out his hand to the end.
I think whether they went to arbitration or not was pretty irrelevant. He and Walsh both are playing his hand out to the end and that's Frolik getting to UFA.
Not sure what outcome besides giving in to Walsh's salary demand there was besides letting it play out to UFA?
Hank Chinaski
Registered User
Well no, he's probably not going to be with the Jets long term because he's a UFA this year and wants a big payday. Stop gap is an odd term to use; who is he stop-gapping for? How many prime age forwards with Frolik's two-way prowess are readily available? Chevy may not see him as part of the future of this team, but IMO that would be a huge mistake.
There is much more risk associated with giving Ladd and/or Byfuglien golden parachute contracts than there is offering an overpayment for Frolik. Another consideration is that those two still have some significant trade value. We're getting nothing for Frolik at this point, maybe a 5th/6th rounder for negotiating rights.
scelaton
Registered User
- Jul 5, 2012
- 3,652
- 5,582
All of the above is inextricably intertwined.
If Frolik gets an overpayment (eg, $25M over 5 years, for the sake of discussion), it automatically influences the contract extension discussions with Ladd and Buff this summer. Conversely, if Chevy can demonstrate fiscal prudence in signing all his players for the sake of a stronger team within budgetary constraints, Buff and Ladd are less likely to ask for the moon. Both of them, IMO, would rather win a SC with a powerful team Jets than make a few million more dollars elsewhere that they will never be able to spend.
Hank Chinaski
Registered User
I see where you're coming from, but IMO it's from a perspective that is overestimating what Byfuglien and Ladd are really going to be worth to this team down the road.
A player of Frolik's age and acumen represents precisely the type of player that should be extended to significant money and term. Buff and (to some extent) Ladd are not. This is not to start a war over their relative merits, it's just the inarguable fact that both are approaching the end of their prime years, and will be in their mid 30s at the end of their next deal.
If Buff and Ladd and their agents go into negotiations expecting to get appreciably more than Frolik does in this hypothetical overpayment, I hope to goodness that Chevy doesn't break. The situation with Frolik is a bit exceptional by UFA standards, in that whichever team acquires him is going to be receiving two or three years of his prime play; that's important. Compare that to most other UFA situations, where teams offer up money/term for players that are typically nearing or on the wrong side of 30.
I think what we are starting to see and will see more of moving forward is a distinct salary grid. Star players will make a lot and this will squeeze other players. What we have seen with teams that are getting into cap trouble is the overpaying of complimentary players. While Frolik is a good hockey player, he is still just a mid high 30's low 40 point complimentary player on a contending team. These are precisely the players you avoid opening a wallet for IMO. Of Walsh is asking for 5 million I'm fine with walking as a player line Burmie might bring most of what Frolik does for half the price.
A 'top prospect' is a highly rated prospect, close to NHL ready, IMO. Near the top of that team's prospect pool. Not a throw away B-level guy who might end up being a career minor leaguer. Some guys like Reinhart are untouchable, like Ehlers. But, for illustration, let's say Morrissey is available. He would be a top prospect, that's available.
The Flyers are a fit in a Buff trade scenario in many ways. And until Buff is moved somewhere else or signed long-term here, they are an option, IMO. Maybe the Jets were asking for something that just didn't work for Hextall, but if presented with something that would work for Ron, maybe he pulls the trigger.
And it's my opinion. You can choose to disagree, but my opinion isn't changing.
mcpw
WPG
- Jan 13, 2015
- 10,024
- 2,072
"We are not going to throw away our future to try to win the Stanley Cup next year," he said. "I can assure you of that. Are we going to try and win the Stanley Cup? Yes, yes we are - along with the 29 other teams. But we are not going to trade top young players for 29-30-year-olds to try to take a one-year run at the Cup. That is not going to happen."
(Hextall)
Flyers are a bad fit. How do you build a contending roster with Grossmann, Lecavalier, Umberger, and MacDonald on your payroll?
(Hextall)
Flyers are a bad fit. How do you build a contending roster with Grossmann, Lecavalier, Umberger, and MacDonald on your payroll?
Huffer
Registered User
- Jul 16, 2010
- 16,707
- 6,375
Agreed, The Sam Reinharts of the world are not happening for sure.
What about Shea Theodore? Granted Buff had a bad series against the Ducks. But I have to think GM's and Scouts have also watched him the last 3 or 4 years. The Ducks have a pretty great left hand side already. Lindholm, Fowler, Stoner, Despres, Beauchemin (UFA), etc. That's pretty good. On the right they have Vatanen and Wiz.
One or both of Theodore and Morrissey could play in the AHL next season, and going forward we would have 4 young D, and two on each side.
Add Sekac (who they didn't play in the playoffs) as well to play on our 3rd line (especially if we don't sign a few of our FA's). Heck, he's from Kladno! I think it's mandated he's obligated to play here.
Losing salaries for Fleishman, Souray, and LaBarbra alone provide more than enough cap space for Buff.
Maybe if the Ducks don't win the cup this year they want one more kick in the 2015-2016 season after which Kesler is a UFA, and Lindholm, Rakell, Palmieri, Sekac (if on the team), Lindholm, Vantanen, and Despres need raises?
Derrick Pouliot? If the Pens re-sign Martin, they could have Martin, Maataa (if healthy), and maybe start using guys like Harrington and Dumolin on the left as well. On the right after Letang, it looks barren.
The Pens have said they are not moving Malkin, so that seems like they are still looking to go for it. Adding Buff's salary is a little trickier, but assume 4 million is coming off the books with Ehrhoff. The Jets could retain a bit in this instance, and possibly ask for a prospect like Oskar Sundqvist.
Pouliot is likely ready to play on the 2nd pair next year (probably with some growing pains), and he's the kind of LHD I would try to make room for regarding our other LHD (besides Enstrom).
I could be wrong, but both of those asks don't seem outrageous. Both Theodore and Pouliot were 1st round picks, Sekac wasn't drafted, and Sundqvist was a 3rd round pick. That seems in line with a "1st and a prospect" type request. I personally think we could get a little more, but I think Theodore and Pouliot are pretty well thought of prospects, so I don't want to get greedy.
- Jun 10, 2014
- 57,394
- 29,212
You don't know if you have an impasse or not until you go back to your office and wait for the phone to ring. I'm not saying that they both have to stay locked in the same room for 2 days not saying anything to each other. What Chevy did was like being down 2 going into the 3rd period so you tell the other coach that you aren't going to bother playing the rest of the game.
Last time I bought a car I thought negotiations were over. I wasn't playing some bargaining game. I thought we were done. I went home. A week later the salesman called. He offered me a better equipped car for $500 less. In the end he came up with another $500. I love the car.
All I'm saying is that we don't and can't ever know what would have happened if it was done differently. We know it worked out badly for the Jets so was there really anything to lose by playing it out?
I understand what you are saying but that scenario still involves one party caving
(i.e the dealer needing a sale). The two days are pretty irrelevant to me as well, if either party was willing to give it would have happened over the last year when both sides understood each other better and still had room to negotiate.
scelaton
Registered User
- Jul 5, 2012
- 3,652
- 5,582
I should probably stop getting sucked in to these circular discussions, but I'll try once more, and that is it...for now
.There was something to lose by playing it out, something small but significant.
Let's assume Chevy is a smart man, who knew, as arbitration approached, that there was 0 chance he would meet Frolik's salary demands last year. Frolik knew he'd lose nothing by asking for the moon and waiting for UFA if he did not get it. If that was the case, and I believe it was, then the "third period" was not last year, but is just coming up now. Chevy realized that, and also knew his best chance to nab Fro was to behave like a mensch in the interim and hope that Frolik chose to stay with a great organization, all other things being equal. Arbitration is a negative, potentially divisive force in that scenario.
The number of false analogies used to critique Chevy's approach is amazing.He is not a desperate car salesman looking for a sale at any price. What he is selling comes at a relatively fixed price, backed up by a great organization and team. That has value to many players...maybe not to Frolik...but it the right strategy and only viable strategy available in this situation.
When the dust clears, and we do sign our UFAs, pay attention to what they say. I suspect it won't be that, "Chevy drives a hard bargain and I blinked because I wanted to play here so badly..." It'll be more like, "Maybe I could have made a bit more money elsewhere, but this organization is so classy and player-friendly, and the team so tight that I chose to stay here..."
The ones that just want the most money won't come/stay here. Frolik's decision will speak louder than words and will reflect his values, rather than Chevy's competence as a negotiator.
Stay tuned.
- Jun 10, 2014
- 57,394
- 29,212
He's not going to be with the Jets long term because we haven't been able to sign him long term. If he would sign for 5 years there is no problem making use of him. He's clearly the cream of the crop among our UFAs. If we only sign one it should be him first. If we sign none we are down 5 of the 12 F we finished the season with, 4 of them top 9. Add to that a rookie on the 4th line and one on defense along with 3 second year players and 2 third year players. That is quite a youth movement. No team with that many rookies in one year is going to the playoffs.
- Jun 10, 2014
- 57,394
- 29,212
Playing it out to the end means, at minimum going to 5 seconds before the arbitration hearing begins. That is the very, rock bottom minimum.
We assume that Chevy had made his last, best offer and Walsh turned it down. If, at the last minute Walsh makes a new counter offer maybe Chevy budges, just a little and they compromise. Maybe. If they go through the arbitration hearing maybe Walsh decides he doesn't want to accept what he expects the arbitrator to hand down so he budges before the ruling. It happens. The one thing we know for sure is that the outcome doesn't get reversed after one side surrenders.
- Jun 10, 2014
- 57,394
- 29,212
The trouble with that line of reasoning is that Burmi and Frolik are not tied together in any way. It is not either or. Never mind that Burmi is way short of Froliks value because he won't get half of 5 mil either. Not in the first year at any rate. Unless we sign a bunch of FAs we need both Burmi and Frolik.
- Status
