The Most Predatory Offer Sheet [Article]

[Insomniac99]

WGR Article link

A new twist on the RFA market, and how to hurt your opponent

...
A predatory GM should sign Jack Eichel (or anyone else) to an offer sheet that gets the player to unrestricted free agency as soon as possible. In Jack's case, that'd be four years. If a team decided to sign Eichel to a 4 year, 48 million dollar deal, we would not celebrate. The Sabres would match because the money is close enough to what they'd offer anyway. The Sabres would match because they don't want to lose the player. However, the Sabres would hate matching, because the asset that they have the right to protect under restricted free agency would be pulled out from under them, in a predatory offer sheet.
...

Interesting take on the offersheet. After reading that, it seems like an even nastier way to damage a team long term.

Click to read more...

 

[Calendal]

WGR Article link




Interesting take on the offersheet. After reading that, it seems like an even nastier way to damage a team long term.

In a league with 31 teams trying to damage someone (even division rival) seems too high a risk. Who's to say you won't get retaliated in kind?

 

[Insomniac99]

In a league with 31 teams trying to damage someone (even division rival) seems too high a risk. Who's to say you won't get retaliated in kind?

There was no retaliation against Edmonton after offer-sheeting Vanek. Will GM's be sore? Sure. But they also know that if they hold grudges, it can only hurt their team.

 

[Calendal]

There was no retaliation against Edmonton after offer-sheeting Vanek. Will GM's be sore? Sure. But they also know that if they hold grudges, it can only hurt their team.

They know holding grudges will hurt their team but that doesn't actually mean they won't hold one. How sure can you really be that they hold no ill will? 90% sure? 99% sure? With 31 teams you would need to be about 97% certain of this in order to end up even against the average, if playing odds strictly.

Even then this kind of actions might affect the level of trust between GMs in any future negotiations even if there is no intentional grudge held.

 

[Lempo]

Nice, except for the fact that the team with a potentially Offer Sheetable RFA-to-be has pretty much a year to come into terms with the player during the last season of the expiring SPC before he hits the RFA status. The team probably won't let it come to that if it is in their power, and if there's no new SPC when July 1st approaches, it's probably because the player is looking for reaching the RFA status and the Offer Sheets.

Compensation of 4 x 1st (because the salary bracket will be to that tune) may start look enticing at that point to the team, and if it was only a bluff by the player to get bigger salary with no actual will to sign an Offer Sheet, it will come out then and temper the salary expectations accordingly.

The Offer Sheeting team should also think hard if four years of Eichel who'll be UFA at expiry is worth the compensation in picks they'll have to pay. That's going without four 1st during the next 5 years, so you better wish the other GMs feel like trading with you.... oh.

 

[BruinLVGA]

There was no retaliation against Edmonton after offer-sheeting Vanek. Will GM's be sore? Sure. But they also know that if they hold grudges, it can only hurt their team.

If GMs would really start trying to eff up other teams like this, it would be a matter of time before things would escalate. The reason why offer sheets are rare is probably related to this. Otherwise, why not try to pilfer a young established star? Beats getting someone at the draft and hoping he becomes a star in 1-3 years or so. GMs are not stupid, they know it's better if they don't trample each other's feet.

 

[Paris in Flames]

Well. That's one way to start a barn fight.

 

[Armourboy]

Not sure it was ever made official, but I remember hearing the Preds owners nixed a trade with Philly ( his name is slipping my mind atm, got traded to LA, was drafted originally by Tampa ahead of Legwand ) due to the Offer sheet with Weber.

 

[varano]

To do that out of spite would be bad business.

Typically offer sheets don't happen anymore. Usually GM's will talk about the potential
of an offer sheet or the intent to offer sheet a player before it actually happens and try
to work on a deal instead.

The fear of damaging future trade relationships is a big reason why offer sheets happen seldomly

 

[nmbr_24]

This is not the way GMs operate. They do not try to hurt other teams even if it is Boston and Montreal. I remember reading an interview with a GM who said that even making trades they want it to be equitable for both teams. If it's not, there would be no more trades. I am guessing that applies to offer sheets as well. All it takes is for this to happen one time and you have the next big issue in the next CBA.

 

[WhatTheDuck]

GMs can't go around driving prices up to screw each other, that's how we get lockouts.

 

[Insomniac99]

GMs can't go around driving prices up to screw each other, that's how we get lockouts.

This is how we get lockouts.

 

[La Cosa Nostra]

This is how we get lockouts.

No. The best player in the world (or soon to be after Crosby) getting that deal doesn't lead to lockouts. Giving a 7/50 mil contract to a secondary scorer like Thomas Vanek back in 2007 who was coming off an ELC is how we get lockouts. The Oilers are the reason there are no more bridge deals along with the fact that young stars get paid like they are UFAs right off the bat is why things are the way they are. It's too bad there are no more cost controlled players or bridge deals to make players prove they deserve big $. If a young player even just puts up ~20 goals and 50+ points on the last year of his ELC after being mediocre the first two years of his ELC is he is automatically signed for 8 years @ 5-6+ mil.

 

[Steve]

what if you get Eichel and it costs you 4 first round picks and he bolts at free agency?

 

[BenningHurtsMySoul]

GMs can't go around driving prices up to screw each other, that's how we get lockouts.

There 100% was a back and forth offer sheet war by the Blues and Canucks about 7-8 years ago.

Gillis offer sheeted Backes and Davidson got pissed off and sent a retaliatory sheet to Steve Bernier a few days later IIRC

 

[ZeroPucksGiven]

This is why offer sheets rarely happen:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hOOGWLshtE

 

[kaiser matias]

Not sure it was ever made official, but I remember hearing the Preds owners nixed a trade with Philly ( his name is slipping my mind atm, got traded to LA, was drafted originally by Tampa ahead of Legwand ) due to the Offer sheet with Weber.

There is literally only one person who was drafted ahead of Legwand, and you can't be bothered to figure out who it was?

 

[Rick74*]

To my knowledge theirs been 1 offer sheet since the lockout and that GM was blacklisted from the rest of the league and no longer works in the NHL...

 

[Fugazy]

what if you get Eichel and it costs you 4 first round picks and he bolts at free agency?

Then you're probably screwed.

 

[Insomniac99]

To my knowledge theirs been 1 offer sheet since the lockout and that GM was blacklisted from the rest of the league and no longer works in the NHL...

If you're talking THE lockout (04-05) there's been 8 offer sheets signed(don't know how many have been sent out and not signed) from 6 different teams.

Kesler - Flyers
Vanek - Oilers
Penner - Oilers
Backes - Canucks
Bernier - Blues
Hjalmarsson - Sharks
Weber - Flyers
O'Reilly - Flame

 

[TOGuy14]

No. The best player in the world (or soon to be after Crosby) getting that deal doesn't lead to lockouts. Giving a 7/50 mil contract to a secondary scorer like Thomas Vanek back in 2007 who was coming off an ELC is how we get lockouts. The Oilers are the reason there are no more bridge deals along with the fact that young stars get paid like they are UFAs right off the bat is why things are the way they are. It's too bad there are no more cost controlled players or bridge deals to make players prove they deserve big $. If a young player even just puts up ~20 goals and 50+ points on the last year of his ELC after being mediocre the first two years of his ELC is he is automatically signed for 8 years @ 5-6+ mil.

Owners will still grumble and be upset about the McDavid contract. Talent levels aside, the RFA system was meant to keep leverage with the owners early in a players career to get favorable contracts. Giving a guy - even one as good as McDavid - an 8 year, $100M contract after the second year of his ELC will make other owners irate.

 

[Tripod]

Owners will still grumble and be upset about the McDavid contract. Talent levels aside, the RFA system was meant to keep leverage with the owners early in a players career to get favorable contracts. Giving a guy - even one as good as McDavid - an 8 year, $100M contract after the second year of his ELC will make other owners irate.

It shouldn't, because no one else has a McDavid. Not even the Leafs with Matthews.

Teams can still do bridge deals if they want. Nothing says they can't. In fact, I bet a few of the young guys you expect to follow McDavids lead, will get bridge deals. And here is why:

McDavid set the bar. No one is going over that unless they prove they are better....which seems unlikely at this point.
If you think Matthews is going to get 11 million next summer because of what McDavid signed, that isn't likely to change much in 2 years later due to a bridge deal.

In fact, if I was the Leafs, I would sit down with Matthews, Marner, and Nylander, and tell them ALL, that they are only going to get 2 year bridge deals. Tell them that the reason is cap space and the window to win. By having them all on bridge deals at a lesser amount, it increases the chance to win a Cup. Now I tell them that they are not going to be squeezed into crap contracts, but lesser ones....in the 5-7 million mark. That also keeps them as Maple Leafs longer as well.....none become UFA's at age 29...but rather when they are in their 30's.

So now the Leafs window to win before the big 3 get big deals, is open longer due to them getting bridge deals.

 

[Lempo]

It shouldn't, because no one else has a McDavid. Not even the Leafs with Matthews.

Teams can still do bridge deals if they want. Nothing says they can't. In fact, I bet a few of the young guys you expect to follow McDavids lead, will get bridge deals. And here is why:

McDavid set the bar. No one is going over that unless they prove they are better....which seems unlikely at this point.
If you think Matthews is going to get 11 million next summer because of what McDavid signed, that isn't likely to change much in 2 years later due to a bridge deal.

In fact, if I was the Leafs, I would sit down with Matthews, Marner, and Nylander, and tell them ALL, that they are only going to get 2 year bridge deals. Tell them that the reason is cap space and the window to win. By having them all on bridge deals at a lesser amount, it increases the chance to win a Cup. Now I tell them that they are not going to be squeezed into crap contracts, but lesser ones....in the 5-7 million mark. That also keeps them as Maple Leafs longer as well.....none become UFA's at age 29...but rather when they are in their 30's.

So now the Leafs window to win before the big 3 get big deals, is open longer due to them getting bridge deals.

In two years, what are you going to pay them for four or so UFA years to lock them until their 30's, and now, what will you offer to those 45-point UFAs you probably want to have in some role?

 

[TOGuy14]

It shouldn't, because no one else has a McDavid. Not even the Leafs with Matthews.

Teams can still do bridge deals if they want. Nothing says they can't. In fact, I bet a few of the young guys you expect to follow McDavids lead, will get bridge deals. And here is why:

McDavid set the bar. No one is going over that unless they prove they are better....which seems unlikely at this point.
If you think Matthews is going to get 11 million next summer because of what McDavid signed, that isn't likely to change much in 2 years later due to a bridge deal.

In fact, if I was the Leafs, I would sit down with Matthews, Marner, and Nylander, and tell them ALL, that they are only going to get 2 year bridge deals. Tell them that the reason is cap space and the window to win. By having them all on bridge deals at a lesser amount, it increases the chance to win a Cup. Now I tell them that they are not going to be squeezed into crap contracts, but lesser ones....in the 5-7 million mark. That also keeps them as Maple Leafs longer as well.....none become UFA's at age 29...but rather when they are in their 30's.

So now the Leafs window to win before the big 3 get big deals, is open longer due to them getting bridge deals.

What was the record AAV coming off an ELC before McDavid? Best I can think of is Ekblad or Tarasenko at 7.5M

McDavid is the ceiling and he just raised the bar for sure. The problem is the Oilers offered him that contract when they absolutely did not need to as he was still a whole year away from his first RFA summer.

If you think that contract negotiations didn't just go sharply upwards for Matthews / Nylander / Marner / Eichel / Laine / Draisatl etc because of McDavid you are crazy.

Everyone will position themselves around that new 12.5M deal. Matthews won't get that, but could he ask for 10M-11M? I don't see why not now...

Anyway, owners as a whole will not like having to pay out $100M contracts to players they do not need to (read: RFAs)

 

[Thorton02]

To do this just to eff up another team's roster is career suicide. Can you imagine pulling this stunt and then show up at the next GMs week long conference? You'd end up sitting at a table in a corner all by yourself.