Speculation: Pietrangelo Discussion: Should we move on if he refuses an offer in the range of 8x$8.25m?

[TruBlu]

This is a rebuttal to Ranksu's spec thread. Whereas Ranksu left an open wallet, my opinion is that too much is too much. I think 8.25 is fair at 8 years. Let me know what you think.

Click to read more...

 

[Alklha]

Make this the new main Pietrangelo thread. Tried to ride the last one out, but it's way about the 1k posts now and the other poll has been answered.

 

[BlueKnight]

Elliotte Freidman talked about the Pietrangelo situation on his 31 thoughts podcast. He says it's an very, very intense game of poker. Here is a brief synopsis. Most of it is what we already know.

-Current offer 8x8
-Blues not budging on bonuses and nmc and not willing to make exceptions
-Friedman said they are going to try and make another run but the chances of getting a deal done is nil.
-Friedman didn't mince words, It's gotten personal. It's clear Petro isn't happy and feels disrespected. Also he says Petro isn't jelous at Faulk,Schenn or Scandella because they got their deals right away. And says those deals are at market value or above. He feels he isn't getting a fair deal.
-The emotion gotten into all of this and the emotion is no one is budging on every side
-Vegas is the frontrunner to sign Petro if he get's to free agency

After listening to this, Yeah it's getting ugly and I don't see how they can get a deal done. Say your goodbyes to Petro

 

[Alklha]

I'd go higher. We're invested to win in the next 5 years, so getting overly hung up on what years 6-8 might look like isn't a huge issue for me. The late years of the Schenn and Faulk contracts are more likely to be garbage years. We can deal with that when we need to.

If Armstrong seen something like $8.4m as the cut off? I wouldn't be particularly happy with how it all played out, but I could understand that position. $8.4m x 8 is equivalent to $9.6m x 7. If what Friedman is saying about Pietrangelo wanting signing bonuses on the back end of the deal is true, we should be able to do that for him.

 

[Ranksu]

I would fine pay Pietro ~10mill.$ AAV x 8 years. Full NMC and bonus. He deserve it. He should retire as Bluenote. Get statue front of Enterprice Center and retire #27. Have most memoriable number retirement show.

Excatly like this type of statue for Pietro.

There won't be another franchise face like Pietro. Guys like Bozak, Steen, Faulk, Scandella doesn't matter or make diffference for this team. Get rid off players which doesn't matter and pay what make this team Stanley Cup champ.

 

[MissouriMook]

Elliotte Freidman talked about the Pietrangelo situation on his 31 thoughts podcast. He says it's an very, very intense game of poker. Here is a brief synopsis. Most of it is what we already know.

-Current offer 8x8
-Blues not budging on bonuses and nmc and not willing to make exceptions
-Friedman said they are going to try and make another run but the chances of getting a deal done is nil.
-Friedman didn't mince words, It's gotten personal. It's clear Petro isn't happy and feels disrespected. Also he says Petro isn't jelous at Faulk,Schenn or Scandella because they got their deals right away. And says those deals are at market value or above. He feels he isn't getting a fair deal.
-The emotion gotten into all of this and the emotion is no one is budging on every side
-Vegas is the frontrunner to sign Petro if he get's to free agency

After listening to this, Yeah it's getting ugly and Petro is gone.

Was it Freidman or Petro that characterized the Faulk, Schenn and Scandella deals as "market value or above"? Because I think all three of them could be considered below market.

I can't begrudge Petro for feeling that 8 x $8M is not a "fair" deal, but it is unquestionably a good deal, especially given all of the economic uncertainty with the league and in the world in general, though I don't disagree with the idea that one of the other 30 teams could certainly offer him more money in addition to the bonuses and NMC protection. Those other players referenced signed the deals they signed because they wanted to be here. I don't agree with the team not budging on the bonuses and NMC, mainly because I think it puts us at a disadvantage to other teams in the league, but I can't say that the deal the team is offering is awful because those elements aren't in it. Petro just has to decide if he wants to be here enough to sweat something in the agreement other than money.

If Petro goes to market and later decides he wants to stay, he is costing himself some serious money by pushing it that far. I can't see Army going any higher than $8.5M on a 7 year deal if he is stuck at $8M on an 8 year deal, and at those figures Petro is leaving $4.5M (maybe more) on the table he probably won't be able to earn when he is 37.

 

[BlueKnight]

I'd go higher. We're invested to win in the next 5 years, so getting overly hung up on what years 6-8 might look like isn't a huge issue for me. The late years of the Schenn and Faulk contracts are more likely to be garbage years. We can deal with that when we need to.

If Armstrong seen something like $8.4m as the cut off? I wouldn't be particularly happy with how it all played out, but I could understand that position. $8.4m x 8 is equivalent to $9.6m x 7. If what Friedman is saying about Pietrangelo wanting signing bonuses on the back end of the deal is true, we should be able to do that for him.

I agree. I said this in the previous thread, If the first 5 years yields another cup or 2 or 3 then great it will be money well spent. Friedman did say in his podcast that Petro wants a bonus on the back end . They should be able to do that. That's good faith. If Army's cut off is 8.4/5x8 and Petro leaves and signs else where for $8.4/5x8 and gets his bonus on the back end of the deal well I wouldn't be too particularly happy either with how it all played out.

But after listening to Friedman's podcast and if its true, It does not look good with the way the negotiations are going.

 

[Celtic Note]

I am not sure if there is a hard point on the AAV, at least not based on the current “known” range. I really do think structure is the make or break at this point. Now if we were talking about $10M for 8 years, then AAV is a breaking point.

I would be willing to go to $8.75M on an 8 year deal with no NMC in the last 3 years and some bonuses. Alternatively, I would go to $9.5M on a 5 year contract with a full NMC, but minimal bonuses.
There are obviously a number of combinations somewhere in between.

What I am not willing to do is have a full NMC in the last two year of an 8 year deal with significant bonuses on an $8+AAV contract.

I would rather try to work out a deal where the contract does something like this (baring these number work within the CBA structure):
Year 1 - NMC - $9M
Year 2 - NMC - $9M
Year 3 - NMC - $10.5M
Year 4 - NMC - $10.5M
Year 5 - Full NTC - $9.5M
Year 6 - Full NTC - $7.5M
Year 7 - NTC 20 - $6M
Year 8 - NTC 20 - $6M
Cap hit = $8.5M AAV

 

[BlueKnight]

Was it Freidman or Petro that characterized the Faulk, Schenn and Scandella deals as "market value or above"? Because I think all three of them could be considered below market.

I can't begrudge Petro for feeling that 8 x $8M is not a "fair" deal, but it is unquestionably a good deal, especially given all of the economic uncertainty with the league and in the world in general, though I don't disagree with the idea that one of the other 30 teams could certainly offer him more money in addition to the bonuses and NMC protection. Those other players referenced signed the deals they signed because they wanted to be here. I don't agree with the team not budging on the bonuses and NMC, mainly because I think it puts us at a disadvantage to other teams in the league, but I can't say that the deal the team is offering is awful because those elements aren't in it. Petro just has to decide if he wants to be here enough to sweat something in the agreement other than money.

If Petro goes to market and later decides he wants to stay, he is costing himself some serious money by pushing it that far. I can't see Army going any higher than $8.5M on a 7 year deal if he is stuck at $8M on an 8 year deal, and at those figures Petro is leaving $4.5M (maybe more) on the table he probably won't be able to earn when he is 37.

It was Friedman who said those deals were market value and above.

 

[Alklha]

I agree. I said this in the previous thread, If the first 5 years yields another cup or 2 or 3 then great it will be money well spent. Friedman did say in his podcast that Petro wants a bonus on the back end . They should be able to do that. That's good faith. If Army's cut off is 8.4/5x8 and Petro leaves and signs else where for $8.4/5x8 and gets his bonus on the back end of the deal well I wouldn't be too particularly happy either with how it all played out.

But after listening to Friedman's podcast and if its true, It does not look good with the way the negotiations are going.

I didn't really hear too much bad in what Friedman said. I certainly didn't hear him say that the chances of a deal getting done are close to nil. He said that teams are trying to work out if he'll really hit free agency and "I think there is a chance". So he doesn't see it as a foregone conclusion.

I wouldn't be overly negative on the prospect of something getting worked out. Pietrangelo involved the media to try and put pressure on Armstrong, there is no point in using that tactic if the sides are a million miles apart. If Pietrangelo simply wanted to alert teams of his availability then there are plenty of ways to do that behind the scenes. If he's determined to leave, it's best to just let this play out quietly. He went down that road because he believes there is a chance that something can still be worked out.

Everyone is saying we've offered 8 x $8m. The early hints were that the big issue was that Armstrong wanted him to agree to take that without knowing the structure, that would suggest the money is close. He'll unquestionably have a NTC, both Schenn & Faulk got that (dropping to a 15 team NTC from year 6 on)... getting that bumped to a NMC shouldn't be insurmountable. Then it's the signing bonuses, and Friedman implies that it's the back end of the deal that he's wanting them. Not the entire deal. If, and it's a big if, all of that is accurate? Then it would be easy to see why Pietrangelo thought a deal could still get done.

 

[simon IC]

I would go as high as 9x8. Just under Josi. Perhaps we can bring it down with a NMC. I honestly feel Pietrangelo is worth that. As others have posted, if we can get even one more Cup it will be worth it. I think Alex's style of play will age well, so a full NMC doesn't bother me that much.

 

[Bluesnatic27]

I'd rather pay more to maximize the chances of competing for the Cup then fall into years playing catch-up trying to get back to the spot the Blues are already in. Anything less than $9 million is well worth a player of Pietrangelo's talents (and if I'm being honest, I still wouldn't care up until $9.25). What will happen if the contract looks ugly in 5 - 6 years? I don't know nor do I care. That is far too off into the future to worry about and far to paranoid to use as a reason to not sign a franchise player that is considered a top-10 player at his position.

I appreciate that Armstrong has had a very stubborn negotiation philosophy in order to minimize the chances of getting caught up in bad contracts. But Pietrangelo, as a player, isn't equatable to any player that Armstrong has negotiated terms for outside of maybe Tarasenko. I don't care if the Blues have never given signing bonuses nor NMCs to any player if that rule is going to apply to Pietrangelo. As Easton succinctly said, the Blues need Pietrangelo a lot more than Pietrangelo needs the Blues.

 

[Spektre]

I’m going to guess, and I could certainly be completely wrong but, it feels like Pietrangelo’s camp is at or above 10m/year. If that’s the case I can’t see how Army is the big bad wolf for not signing him. I know there’s plenty of fans who say to meet his demands at any cost but Army has to be fiscally responsible.

The Blues are definitely in a win now mode and losing Pietrangelo is a major blow but we all know keeping Pietrangelo doesn’t guarantee another Cup.

There’s plenty of bad contracts handed out based on a player’s past performance. I’m probably in the minority but I have to give some kudos to Army for determining what he thinks is a fair price and sticking to it. There’s been lots of pressure put on him for details being leaked and so far he’s not budging.

I think 10 million per year is too much even for Pietrangelo.

 

[Ranksu]

There’s plenty of bad contracts handed out based on a player’s past performance. I’m probably in the minority but I have to give some kudos to Army for determining what he thinks is a fair price and sticking to it.

Hey was Faulk contract given past performance? Faulk didn't play single game in Bluenote and yet he got 6.5mill.$ x 7 year contract.

Army sticking good price? Eh

Army of lovers fan club!

 

[DeuceNine]

I have a hard time believing Stillman wouldn't shell out what he wants. I'm guessing he's ducking this and leaving it up to Army, who we know can be mysteriously tight in cases where he shouldn't be and vise-versa.

 

[BlueKnight]

I’m going to guess, and I could certainly be completely wrong but, it feels like Pietrangelo’s camp is at or above 10m/year. If that’s the case I can’t see how Army is the big bad wolf for not signing him. I know there’s plenty of fans who say to meet his demands at any cost but Army has to be fiscally responsible.

The Blues are definitely in a win now mode and losing Pietrangelo is a major blow but we all know keeping Pietrangelo doesn’t guarantee another Cup.

There’s plenty of bad contracts handed out based on a player’s past performance. I’m probably in the minority but I have to give some kudos to Army for determining what he thinks is a fair price and sticking to it. There’s been lots of pressure put on him for details being leaked and so far he’s not budging.

I think 10 million per year is too much even for Pietrangelo.

There's common ground on the term at least from what i hear. The main issue right now is how its structured. (ie. signing bonuses,no movement stuff like that)

 

[LetsGoBooze]

It would be tough, but i would go upto 9mil aav. Like other posters have stated, we need to be all in on the next 4-5 years, and losing Petro would throw this team back in the murky middle. Eat the bullet take another half decade run at the cup, and just realize at the end of these core contracts we'll prolly be hot garbo.

 

[BlueKnight]

I listened to an audio clip from Toronto radio that i saw on Twitter. Carlo was taking about Petro. I know Carlo and Petro are bffs. Carlo is shocked that it has gone this far.

Carlo said he's been talking to Petro and Petro is starting to wrap his head and is really coming to grips that he may not play in St. Louis next season.

 

[Spektre]

Hey was Faulk contract given past performance? Faulk didn't play single game in Bluenote and yet he got 6.5mill.$ x 7 year contract.

Army sticking good price? Eh

Army of lovers fan club!

The contracts I’m talking about are the ones that hamper the payroll of the team. Doughty at 11m, Karlsson at 11.5m, those contracts hurt the organization more than the benefit of having the player.

Faulk is at 6.5 and he’s also 28 years old. We all know Faulk hasn’t lived up to his billing so far but I won’t condemn him yet so how would I then condemn Army for the contract. I’m expecting a bounce back year from Faulk but we shall see.

Is there a limit you put on paying Pietrangelo? Would you pay 12 or 13 million a year for Pietrangelo? If you say no than you have to rationalize it. I could easily play devils advocate and say Pietrangelo is as good if not better than Karlsson all things considered. If he’s making 11.5 factor in inflation and if I’m the agent I say 12 million.

I don’t belong to a fan club of Army. I certainly believe he’s a big reason why the Blues won a Cup. I have criticized Army for deals he’s signed and trades he didn’t make sooner (Stewart) but so far at least he recognized them and got them off the books, Berglund, Lehtera, and Allen were all bad at the time they were signed.

I have stated openly the Blues will not be as good without Pietrangelo but I’m just a fan. I have watched better players than Pietrangelo leave the organization under much worse circumstances. I’m not going to get emotional about it, it’s just what it is.

 

[Spektre]

There's common ground on the term at least from what i hear. The main issue right now is how its structured. (ie. signing bonuses,no movement stuff like that)

I know what’s been leaked out but I’m not accepting that as facts.

 

[Blueston]

Hey was Faulk contract given past performance? Faulk didn't play single game in Bluenote and yet he got 6.5mill.$ x 7 year contract.

Army sticking good price? Eh

Army of lovers fan club!

Blues only pair Faulk like $3.1mm last year. So we effectively got him for 8 years at $6mm average.

 

[67Blues]

I would go as high as 9x8. Just under Josi. Perhaps we can bring it down with a NMC. I honestly feel Pietrangelo is worth that. As others have posted, if we can get even one more Cup it will be worth it. I think Alex's style of play will age well, so a full NMC doesn't bother me that much.

9x8 means that another team would have to do 10.28x7 to match the overall contract earnings, but that is a big chunk that even Petro isn't worth on AAV over 7 years. I'd do a max of 8.75x8 which means any other team is giving him a 10m AAV contract which is still insane given today's conditions.

 

[BlueKnight]

Here is a transcript whatElliotte Friedman said on his podcast today about the Pietrangelo situation.If anyone is interested.

 

[Celtic Note]

I am really not sure why we should care what people spouting opinions are saying. Again, this is all click bait and it’s a second hand, twitter account of it at that.

Friedman literally has a 31 thoughts production where he gives 31 he has to generate each week.

Unless we are getting direct quotes from the people involved in the negotiations, everything we are hearing is fodder. Even those quotes can be misconstrued, so we have to be careful not to misunderstand the context from which they were made and taken.

 

[Zizzle]

So is the big issue just the bonuses and NTC or NMC and the minor things like that? That seems ridiculous that Army is being kinda petty if that is the case! I can see were Pietro could easily get frustrated with the Blues when all the details arent spelled out.