Subban Contract Talk

[Lafleurs Guy]

If they did it, we'd be in the McDavid lottery, with their first pick.

Leafs with Subban instantly become better than us without him.

 

[Winter Eclipse]

How can you not understand that the goal is keep Subban with the team for as long as possible. Giving him that supposed 5M for 5 years contract mean you stand a much greater to lose him as a UFA at the age of 28. I'd much rather have him at $9M for 8 years than at $5M for only another 3 years.

Why would we have a much greater chance to lose him to FA at 28 years old? I find it ironic (and not a shade hypocritical) for you to accuse the anti-bridge argument of using "assumption and hearsay" and then immediately base your argument on a future event being fact

What supports your position that Subban would be more likely to leave at 28 had he received a 5 x 5 contract?

There isn't a single argument made by LG, Kriss E, or Andy that has come remotely close to changing my mind about the bridge deal being a good thing, as most of their points are based on assumptions and hearsay. No one knows what went on during that contract negotiation and, for all we know, it might have been Subban that insisted on the bridge contract (which would have made a lot of sense for him).

So in the same post in which you accuse your opposition of assumptions and hearsay, your counterargument involves using a completely invented scenario in which a professional athlete demands a lower salary with a decreased term?

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

How can you not understand that the goal is keep Subban with the team for as long as possible. Giving him that supposed 5M for 5 years contract mean you stand a much greater to lose him as a UFA at the age of 28.

Not at all.

 

[Winter Eclipse]

Wow what a rant. Lol.

So u know what kind of contract Meehan and Subban were after? And Gorges is traded because Subban? Bold statements.

Gorges being traded was publically called a business decision, not a hockey one. I wonder what large, pressing business concern would prompt the sending off of Gorges?

Is it a fact that the two are connected? No.

Is it a huge stretch? Not really. And to be frank, I have yet to hear any reasonable retort to the argument, just a bunch of what appears to be desperate hand-waving away of it from people who seem fixated on being right about the infallibility of management.

What are some reasonable arguments against the idea that Gorges is being shopped as a result of cap issues stemming from Subban's RFA status?

 

[groovejuice]

Gorges being traded was publically called a business decision, not a hockey one. I wonder what large, pressing business concern would prompt the sending off of Gorges?

Is it a fact that the two are connected? No.

Is it a huge stretch? Not really. And to be frank, I have yet to hear any reasonable retort to the argument, just a bunch of what appears to be desperate hand-waving away of it from people who seem fixated on being right about the infallibility of management.

What are some reasonable arguments against the idea that Gorges is being shopped as a result of cap issues stemming from Subban's RFA status?

The truth may be, as it usually is, somewhere in the middle. Looks like Toronto made MB an offer couldn't refuse. Gorges wouldn't play ball, and now the relationship is soured.

There is plenty of cap space for PK, but likely MB wants to improve via FA. As we all know, nothing's cheap today....

 

[417]

Gorges being traded was publically called a business decision, not a hockey one. I wonder what large, pressing business concern would prompt the sending off of Gorges?

Is it a fact that the two are connected? No.

Is it a huge stretch? Not really. And to be frank, I have yet to hear any reasonable retort to the argument, just a bunch of what appears to be desperate hand-waving away of it from people who seem fixated on being right about the infallibility of management.

What are some reasonable arguments against the idea that Gorges is being shopped as a result of cap issues stemming from Subban's RFA status?

I say it's because of the Emelin deal... Thats the narrative I'm choosing to use

Actually, I changed my mind...trading Josh Gorges is a direct result of the David Desharnais contract

 

[groovejuice]

Steve Simmons? Seriously? Besides, can the Leafs afford that?

Simmons is a moron. Using an offer sheet as a preemptive weapon has a good chance of failing and would definitely bite your butt hard down the road.

 

[Winter Eclipse]

The truth may be, as it usually is, somewhere in the middle. Looks like Toronto made MB an offer couldn't refuse. Gorges wouldn't play ball, and now the relationship is soured.

There is plenty of cap space for PK, but likely MB wants to improve via FA. As we all know, nothing's cheap today....

I say it's because of the Emelin deal... Thats the narrative I'm choosing to use

See? Two perfectly plausible alternatives in a matter of minutes! Why name calling had to be the preface to these I don't know

The Gorges "too good offer" seems to have gained a lot of traction, and it does makes sense, given how rare it is to have inter-Divisional deals; add on the fact that Toronto has a history of making horrendous trades to Divisional foes, and I could see this being a large part of the equation...it'd REALLY help to know what the offered return on JG was/is...

I understand the logic behind pointing to the Emelin deal, but again, having PK on a 5 x 5 right now would nullify Emelin's inflated cap hit, wouldn't it?

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

The truth may be, as it usually is, somewhere in the middle. Looks like Toronto made MB an offer couldn't refuse. Gorges wouldn't play ball, and now the relationship is soured.

There is plenty of cap space for PK, but likely MB wants to improve via FA. As we all know, nothing's cheap today....

Difference between the 5 PK was asking for and what he'll probably get is probably less than a million off from what Gorges is making today.

 

[Scintillating10]

If they did it, we'd be in the McDavid lottery, with their first pick.

Habs already stated they will match any offer on Subban within 5 minutes.

 

[Fozz]

Why would we have a much greater chance to lose him to FA at 28 years old? I find it ironic (and not a shade hypocritical) for you to accuse the anti-bridge argument of using "assumption and hearsay" and then immediately base your argument on a future event being fact

What supports your position that Subban would be more likely to leave at 28 had he received a 5 x 5 contract?

Simple: RFA vs UFA

So in the same post in which you accuse your opposition of assumptions and hearsay, your counterargument involves using a completely invented scenario in which a professional athlete demands a lower salary with a decreased term?

I use the words "might have", while you guys state your assumptions as fact. If you can't compute that difference, then there's no point in having this discussion.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Simple: RFA vs UFA

Doesn't matter. If the guy wants to leave, he'll leave and if wants to stay he'll stay. The guy wants to be here anyway, so reciprocate... give him a fair deal and he'll be more likely to want to stay. Him being RFA doesn't mean jack. If he wants to leave he can demand a trade or sign a short term deal now. We accomplished nothing with that other short term deal man. I don't see how you can't understand this.

You think that we've somehow got him trapped and can make him sign longer now? We can't. It's up to him entirely. So we're better off not pissing him off the first time. 5 x 5 is win-win. We get him longer cheaper, he makes money up front and gets longer term. He's happy, we're happy. Instead we decided to have the Mexican standoff and now we're at the point where other teams can make offers for him...

 

[King Niinimaa*]

Leafs with Subban instantly become better than us without him.

Leafs with Subban's 10+ is ****ed capwise.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Leafs with Subban's 10+ is ****ed capwise.

Well, they're ****ed capwise anyway.

If a team does make an offer, it isn't going to be Toronto. There's just no way I see that happening.

 

[Winter Eclipse]

Simple: RFA vs UFA

As LG pointed out, being an RFA in no way forces a player to sign a long-term deal.

I use the words "might have", while you guys state your assumptions as fact. If you can't compute that difference, then there's no point in having this discussion.

How is the following quote in any way indicative of me stating my argument is a fact? Indeed, the quote I've highlighted for you pretty explicitly says my argument IS NOT a fact...

Gorges being traded was publically called a business decision, not a hockey one. I wonder what large, pressing business concern would prompt the sending off of Gorges?

Is it a fact that the two are connected? No.

You seem intent on proving your point by demonizing your opponents and, to be blunt, by fabricating statements from them.

 

[Fozz]

Doesn't matter. If the guy wants to leave, he'll leave and if wants to stay he'll stay. The guy wants to be here anyway, so reciprocate... give him a fair deal and he'll be more likely to want to stay. Him being RFA doesn't mean jack. If he wants to leave he can demand a trade or sign a short term deal now. We accomplished nothing with that other short term deal man. I don't see how you can't understand this.

You think that we've somehow got him trapped and can make him sign longer now? We can't. It's up to him entirely. So we're better off not pissing him off the first time. 5 x 5 is win-win. We get him longer cheaper, he makes money up front and gets longer term. He's happy, we're happy. Instead we decided to have the Mexican standoff and now we're at the point where other teams can make offers for him...

You explained it all for me in your post: if he doesn't want to sign as an RFA you can trade him and get a return on him. If that happens when he's UFA, you get nothing in return. I don't understand how that's so difficult to grasp.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

You explained it all for me in your post: if he doesn't want to sign as an RFA you can trade him and get a return on him. If that happens when he's UFA, you get nothing in return. I don't understand how that's so difficult to grasp.

Does it have to be explaind more s l o w l y for you here?

He can sign a two year deal now if he wants it to take him to UFA. It's up to him. If he wants to go UFA, there's nothing you can do to stop him. Signing him for two years instead of five last time does nothing to change this simple fact.

 

[Winter Eclipse]

You explained it all for me in your post: if he doesn't want to sign as an RFA you can trade him and get a return on him. If that happens when he's UFA, you get nothing in return. I don't understand how that's so difficult to grasp.

So you'd rather risk trading him now as an unsigned RFA than risk having him hit UFA status after a 5 x 5 deal?

 

[Agnostic]

Does it have to be explaind more s l o w l y for you here?

He can sign a two year deal now if he wants it to take him to UFA. It's up to him. If he wants to go UFA, there's nothing you can do to stop him. Signing him for two years instead of five last time does nothing to change this simple fact.

Wow, condescending and ignorant.

Montreal has many options, they have control of the player. They will not let Subban get to free agency in 2 years.

If Montreal doesn't get a long term deal they will trade or let him sit as an RFA. Offer sheets, bring em on. Subban can elect arbitration, which will bring with it a 1 year deal.

Montreal will come out of this with a player signed long term, a top player from a trade, draft picks, or the right to match whatever another team puts to paper on an offer sheet.

And there's nothing Subban can do about that. Who's in control again?

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Wow, condescending and ignorant.

Montreal has many options, they have control of the player. They will not let Subban get to free agency in 2 years.

If Montreal doesn't get a long term deal they will trade or let him sit as an RFA. Offer sheets, bring em on. Subban can elect arbitration, which will bring with it a 1 year deal.

Montreal will come out of this with a player signed long term, a top player from a trade, draft picks, or the right to match whatever another team puts to paper on an offer sheet.

And there's nothing Subban can do about that. Who's in control again?

They can't force him to sign a longterm deal. Spin it all you wish, it's up to him.

 

[King Niinimaa*]

Well, they're ****ed capwise anyway.

If a team does make an offer, it isn't going to be Toronto. There's just no way I see that happening.

That would make it super-****ed. All the players they had to buy out and trade for peanuts to fit him.

 

[Kriss E]

How can you not understand that the goal is keep Subban with the team for as long as possible. Giving him that supposed 5M for 5 years contract mean you stand a much greater to lose him as a UFA at the age of 28. I'd much rather have him at $9M for 8 years than at $5M for only another 3 years.

There isn't a single argument made by LG, Kriss E, or Andy that has come remotely close to changing my mind about the bridge deal being a good thing, as most of their points are based on assumptions and hearsay. No one knows what went on during that contract negotiation and, for all we know, it might have been Subban that insisted on the bridge contract (which would have made a lot of sense for him).

Oh the irony...

Your argument is based on the belief that PK would absolutely be gone for free agency after a longer deal.
You are the one making the assumptions, based on absolutely jack crap.
Why couldn't PK have been signed to 4 years which would have made him a RFA by the end of it again?
Why would PK absolutely leave for free agency instead of re-signing here like Markov, or plenty of other players throughout the NHL?

If you have a functioning brain, you look at the reports that came out saying PK wants something around a 5x5 mark, you look at the fact there was a hold out, you look at the fact PK said all he wants is his fair value during an exclusive interview, you look at the fact he said he needs to discuss his future with his family prior to caving in, you look at the low amount he got. Then you conclude that PK didn't get what he was after. Trying to argue that he might have been the one after a bridge deal when everything points the other way is just ridiculous.

Stop assuming PK was going to leave after a longer deal, and if he was thinking about reaching UFA status 2 years ago, I'd bet you anything he still is thinking UFA status. Nothing will prevent him from being an UFA if that's what he wants.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

That would make it super-****ed. All the players they had to buy out and trade for peanuts to fit him.

I'll be shocked if TO made any kind of offer.

 

[Flockyhockey]

I am sure we are beating a dead horse,Subban was no question given a weak contract last year.Any Habs fan or at least most put Subban in the top 3/4 in the entire league yet the Habs management either are too blind to see it or they just don't like him.

Here is the deal i have with the way they treated him.They have been oh so quick to give terrible hockey players big time money yet played hard ball with Subban.Not often do you get a kid who loves to play for the Habs,a true Habs fan with ALL the skills,these guys come around once in a lifetime.Chelios was the last,that is how long the Habs wait for such a D man.

When you sign floaters like Vanek and washed up guys like Kaberle you had better treat your true hard working players like Subban with a LOT more respect.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

I am sure we are beating a dead horse,Subban was no question given a weak contract last year.Any Habs fan or at least most put Subban in the top 3/4 in the entire league yet the Habs management either are too blind to see it or they just don't like him.

Here is the deal i have with the way they treated him.They have been oh so quick to give terrible hockey players big time money yet played hard ball with Subban.Not often do you get a kid who loves to play for the Habs,a true Habs fan with ALL the skills,these guys come around once in a lifetime.Chelios was the last,that is how long the Habs wait for such a D man.

When you sign floaters like Vanek and washed up guys like Kaberle you had better treat your true hard working players like Subban with a LOT more respect.

Good post and welcome to the forum.