With Petry Locked Up, Who Will Habs Ship Out

[BaseballCoach]

i remember marc telling the media "i need room for my 2 young defenseman"

so im pretty sure he's gonna look to move emelin and that aweful contract

and if he needs to move gilbert also to make room for a more than capable pateryn

then so be it

get to work marc.

Emelin's contract is not awful, and Bergevin has specifically gushed over our new second-pair of Petry-Emelin. Emelin got a 4 year deal and notwithstanding the paranoia around here, performed to his contract. Had a good playoff too. Gilbert will be moved or simply waited out one year. We can carry 8 D if we had to, Pateryn and Tinordi together make less than a good number 6.

Candidates for saving real coin, besides Gilbert, are Parenteau, Prust and possibly Desharnais.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Emelin's contract is not awful, and Bergevin has specifically gushed over our new second-pair of Petry-Emelin. Emelin got a 4 year deal and notwithstanding the paranoia around here, performed to his contract. Had a good playoff too. Gilbert will be moved or simply waited out one year. We can carry 8 D if we had to, Pateryn and Tinordi together make less than a good number 6.

Candidates for saving real coin, besides Gilbert, are Parenteau, Prust and possibly Desharnais.

And this I also find annoying. Beaulieu is already better than Emelin is. If Bergevin thinks that Emelin is ahead of him then that bumps Beau to the third...

 

[Cole Caulifield]

Subban wasn't signing away his whole prime at a cheap discount. He might've taken a 5year deal at a huge cost savings, but then he'd be UFA in his prime. The one thing I think MB gets very little credit for is simply locking up PK Subban's rights for 10 years, 2 of bridge plus a league max hometown only 8 years. Right now that looks like it's worth the money to me.

Also, sure Chicago got a steal on Keith. Not so much with their younger superstar forwards, who are getting PK money and more next year.

You mean like Keith did ? Why wouldn't he ?

That's the counter argument people always bring up. Why wouldn't PK do this ? He hadn't established himself as a Norris winner yet, and had a chance to secure his future as well as the future of his family. Of course he would have signed a long term deal. Like all the others players who have signed long term deals when presented with them. It's simply a matter of numbers. We had an opportunity to sign Subban to a long term deal. Denying this is simply playing ostrich.

 

[Big Lurk]

Andrighetto, Hudon, Reway, Scherbak, Mccarron. Maybe we are not that far off from Tampa. Then again maybe we are .


But I really hope Bournival gets through his health issues and gets another shot with the team.

 

[OnTheRun]

You mean like Keith did ? Why wouldn't he ?

That's the counter argument people always bring up. Why wouldn't PK do this ? He hadn't established himself as a Norris winner yet, and had a chance to secure his future as well as the future of his family. Of course he would have signed a long term deal. Like all the others players who have signed long term deals when presented with them. It's simply a matter of numbers. We had an opportunity to sign Subban to a long term deal. Denying this is simply playing ostrich.

Well, if you use Keith's contract as starting point for your negotiation, You're looking at $7 to $7.5 millions AAV over 13 years for Subban in 2013, not adjusted for inflation.

With everything said and done, you're probably looking at ~$8M AAV as a final number. So we are not that far off with $9M AAV two years later.

 

[Kriss E]

Emelin's contract is not awful, and Bergevin has specifically gushed over our new second-pair of Petry-Emelin. Emelin got a 4 year deal and notwithstanding the paranoia around here, performed to his contract. Had a good playoff too. Gilbert will be moved or simply waited out one year. We can carry 8 D if we had to, Pateryn and Tinordi together make less than a good number 6.

Candidates for saving real coin, besides Gilbert, are Parenteau, Prust and possibly Desharnais.

The thing is that even if you get rid of those guys, it doesn't help all that much.
DD and PAP are part of the top 6-9. You remove and it creates holes. Whoever you bring in isn't going to be any cheaper than them. They're not making a lot of money for the position they hold on the team.
DD is playing a top 2 center. He shouldn't, but that's the role Therrien appointed him to. You won't find a replace for him at a cheaper price, unless it's from within with Galchenyuk. But if you do that, then you need to bring in two top 6 wingers with about 8M in space (assuming your got rid of DD+PAP). That's not a lot of wiggle room.
That's why moving Emelin or Gilbert would also be ideal.
But I could also see Bergevin do nothing.

 

[The Nightman]

You mean like Keith did ? Why wouldn't he ?

That's the counter argument people always bring up. Why wouldn't PK do this ? He hadn't established himself as a Norris winner yet, and had a chance to secure his future as well as the future of his family. Of course he would have signed a long term deal. Like all the others players who have signed long term deals when presented with them. It's simply a matter of numbers. We had an opportunity to sign Subban to a long term deal. Denying this is simply playing ostrich.

I agree we could have gotten Subban for less but Keith didn't just "sell away his prime", he's still making an average of 6.5 million until he's 35 and will have made 77 million in total by the time he's 40.

Emelin's contract is not awful, and Bergevin has specifically gushed over our new second-pair of Petry-Emelin. Emelin got a 4 year deal and notwithstanding the paranoia around here, performed to his contract. Had a good playoff too. Gilbert will be moved or simply waited out one year. We can carry 8 D if we had to, Pateryn and Tinordi together make less than a good number 6.

Candidates for saving real coin, besides Gilbert, are Parenteau, Prust and possibly Desharnais.

Emelin's cap hit I can get over but the NTC given to him is a head scratcher.

 

[Cole Caulifield]

If Bergy signed Subban for 13 years his cap hit would've been much higher than 5.5 million. I'm just saying the two deals don't compare, this doesn't mean I'm happy with the way things turned out.

Would it have been ? How do you know ? I think that's very difficult to tell... have you considered the fact that under the old CBA front loading rules were way less strict ? You could have come up with a 5.5M average cap hit deal that is probably equivalent in today's dollars to what Subban signed for last summer considered the lost income from the bridge + lesser front loading.

Regardless of the actual amount, it would have been lower than 9M cap hit that's for sure. We had an opportunity. There's no denying it. What would have been the amount ? I don't know because the possibility was not explored for whatever reason.

 

[Cole Caulifield]

Well, if you use Keith's contract as starting point for your negotiation, You're looking at $7 to $7.5 millions AAV over 13 years for Subban in 2013, not adjusted for inflation.

With everything said and done, you're probably looking at ~$8M AAV as a final number. So we are not that far off with $9M AAV two years later.

I think that's a ridiculous exaggeration. Just 1M less despite the fact Subban hadn't won a Norris, and only had a 38 pts career high ? Even with the possibility to front load the deal more than what is possible now ? Without the bad blood of the bridge and lost income during those years ? Not even considering the added security of the 13 year deal?

I don't think you have given serious thought to this.

 

[DAChampion]

Gilbert is better than Pateryn now.

But he is also more expensive by 2 million dollars, he can get us a draft pick, and there is value to developing Pateryn.

 

[OnTheRun]

I think that's a ridiculous exaggeration. Just 1M less despite the fact Subban hadn't won a Norris, and only had a 38 pts career high ? Even with the possibility to front load the deal more than what is possible now ? Without the bad blood of the bridge and lost income during those years ? Not even considering the added security of the 13 year deal?

I don't think you have given serious thought to this.

Huh? You're the one not thinking straight here.

2013 is the lockout year. That's the point in time where you can frontload like crazy to make the deal enticing.

$5.5 in 2009 =/= $5.5 in 2013, the numbers I gave are salary cap adjusted
And when Keith signed he had no Norris and his career's best was 44 pts.

 

[Cole Caulifield]

Huh? You're the one not thinking straight here.

2013 is the lockout year. That's the point in time where you can frontload like crazy to make the deal enticing.

$5.5 in 2009 =/= $5.5 in 2013, the numbers I gave are salary cap adjusted
And when Keith signed he had no Norris and his career's best was 44 pts.

You do realize that if you give 8M average cap hit to Subban in the summer of 2012 even not frontloaded, it would mean more money than what he got in the summer of 2014 ? What is the incentive on a team standpoint then ? Please be reasonable.

 

[McGuires Corndog]

Well, if you use Keith's contract as starting point for your negotiation, You're looking at $7 to $7.5 millions AAV over 13 years for Subban in 2013, not adjusted for inflation.

With everything said and done, you're probably looking at ~$8M AAV as a final number. So we are not that far off with $9M AAV two years later.

No way.

Karlsson and Pietrangelo had just signed long term deals worth 6.5M a year. The table was set for Bergevin to extend Subban for a very similar amount. If you added on extra term? Maybe it takes it to 7M per? Subban wasn't as established in 2013 as Karlsson or Pietrangelo though.

We could have probably locked him to a career spanning contract for right in the 6-7M range. Look who's laughing now.

 

[The Nightman]

Would it have been ? How do you know ? I think that's very difficult to tell... have you considered the fact that under the old CBA front loading rules were way less strict ? You could have come up with a 5.5M average cap hit deal that is probably equivalent in today's dollars to what Subban signed for last summer considered the lost income from the bridge + lesser front loading.

Regardless of the actual amount, it would have been lower than 9M cap hit that's for sure. We had an opportunity. There's no denying it. What would have been the amount ? I don't know because the possibility was not explored for whatever reason.

I don't see Subban at 23, wanting to sign 13 years when he didn't even show how good he was yet. He's a very confident guy and I have no doubt he thought he could be this good since the beginning, so why do that to himself? We've seen two young but established superstars in Crosby and Ovechkin sign 12+ years before but that's what they were, established and already superstars unlike Subban was at 23.

Doesn't mean we couldn't have signed him for 5-6 years at a much better cap hit but 13+ years wasn't going to happen.

 

[Big Lurk]

No way.

Karlsson and Pietrangelo had just signed long term deals worth 6.5M a year. The table was set for Bergevin to extend Subban for a very similar amount. If you added on extra term? Maybe it takes it to 7M per? Subban wasn't as established in 2013 as Karlsson or Pietrangelo though.

Yep. It was all was on Bergevin. I hope he has learned from it!

 

[OnTheRun]

You do realize that if you give 8M average cap hit to Subban in the summer of 2012 even not frontloaded, it would mean more money than what he got in the summer of 2014 ? What is the incentive on a team standpoint then ? Please be reasonable.

Well you're the one who used Keith's contract as a starting point and that's the numbers you get.

$7M in 2013 is direct equivalent of $5.5 in 2009, now you need to adjust for inflation, add the "Montreal bonus" and compensate on the AAV because you can't frontload anymore.

So really 7.5 to 8 for 13 years is a realistic number.

 

[DAChampion]

Bergevin learn from his mistake?

Maybe, but he will not have another top ten NHL player coming out of ELC.

Though Gallagher, who is not as good, got a sixyear deal.

 

[Cole Caulifield]

I don't see Subban at 23, wanting to sign 13 years when he didn't even show how good he was yet. He's a very confident guy and I have no doubt he thought he could be this good since the beginning, so why do that to himself? We've seen two young but established superstars in Crosby and Ovechkin sign 12+ years before but that's what they were, established and already superstars unlike Subban was at 23.

Doesn't mean we couldn't have signed him for 5-6 years at a much better cap hit but 13+ years wasn't going to happen.

Why did Keith sign a 13 year deal ? He hadn't shown how good he was yet.

Why did Rick Dipietro, a #1 overall pick, sign a 15 year deal ? He hadn't proven how good he was yet. Does anyone have a brighter future than a #1 overall pick ?

That's the entire point of signing those deals. You never know what can happen. I'm sure Dipietro didn't think he would be plagued with injuries his entire career and never realize his potential. That could have happened for Keith too, or Subban.

Players sign those deals because of security, and also it's not a bad decision numbers wise. 1 dollar today is worth more than 1 dollar tomorrow. With front loading, they make just about the same in the end.

Subban, I assume, is like any other player and would have been interested by this. But then again maybe not, maybe Subban is a special person who wouldn't have cared about the same things other people care about. I doubt it, but maybe. People aren't always rational.

 

[Cole Caulifield]

Well you're the one who used Keith's contract as a starting point and that's the numbers you get.

$7M in 2013 is direct equivalent of $5.5 in 2009, now you need to adjust for inflation, add the "Montreal bonus" and compensate on the AAV because you can't frontload anymore.

So really 7.5 to 8 for 13 years is a realistic number.

It wouldn't have been in 2013, it would have been in 2012. So right off the bat you're wrong.

Plus, that's the entire point... in 2012 you COULD frontload. That would LOWER the average cap hit, not increase it. Plus, Subban had a lower career high than Keith. I only used Keith because of the length of his deal, not because it was an exact 1 for 1 comparable.

 

[OnTheRun]

It wouldn't have been in 2013, it would have been in 2012. So right off the bat you're wrong.

Plus, that's the entire point... in 2012 you COULD frontload. That would LOWER the average cap hit, not increase it. Plus, Subban had a lower career high than Keith. I only used Keith because of the length of his deal, not because it was an exact 1 for 1 comparable.

Subban signed his bridge deal in 2013, Let's not rewrite history here.

What's next? Saying Gauthier should have extended him for 16 years back in 2010?

 

[Cole Caulifield]

Subban signed his bridge deal in 2013, Let's not rewrite history here.

What's next? Saying Gauthier should have extended him for 16 years back in 2010?

Sigh..

Subban was up for renewal in the summer of 2012. We could have signed him normally then, under the previous CBA, not even an extension or anything. Just a normal signature of a player up for renewal.

Then the lockout happened, and then the holdout happened, and Subban eventually signed during the season in January 2013.

Like I said before, you haven't given much thought to this. It's ok, contract negotiations don't interest everyone. Lets both move on ? This discussion is growing stale.

 

[Maffew]

I'm doubting anyone will get shipped out just yet. If we're not under any cap trouble, then they'll likely keep what they have. Bergevin's motto: you can never have too many defencemen.

 

[The Nightman]

Why did Keith sign a 13 year deal ? He hadn't shown how good he was yet.

Why did Rick Dipietro, a #1 overall pick, sign a 15 year deal ? He hadn't proven how good he was yet. Does anyone have a brighter future than a #1 overall pick ?

That's the entire point of signing those deals. You never know what can happen. I'm sure Dipietro didn't think he would be plagued with injuries his entire career and never realize his potential. That could have happened for Keith too, or Subban.

Players sign those deals because of security, and also it's not a bad decision numbers wise. 1 dollar today is worth more than 1 dollar tomorrow. With front loading, they make just about the same in the end.

Subban, I assume, is like any other player and would have been interested by this. But then again maybe not, maybe Subban is a special person who wouldn't have cared about the same things other people care about. I doubt it, but maybe. People aren't always rational.

Keith was 27 not 23, also congrats on finding the one exception in Rick DiPietro. It's so irrational signing a 5-6 year deal then getting a huge pay day once their contract is up in UFA years. Will you be my agent?

 

[OnTheRun]

Sigh..

Subban was up for renewal in the summer of 2012. We could have signed him normally then, under the previous CBA, not even an extension or anything. Just a normal signature of a player up for renewal.

Then the lockout happened, and then the holdout happened, and Subban eventually signed during the season in January 2013.

Like I said before, you haven't given much thought to this. It's ok, contract negotiations don't interest everyone. Lets both move on ? This discussion is growing stale.

The CBA was expired in the summer of 2012 you can't make a new deal without a CBA...That's whats you are missing here.

JGRB give a much much better example with Karlsson's 7 years deal, the Keith's example just sucks.

 

[Cole Caulifield]

Keith was 27 not 23, also congrats on finding the one exception in Rick DiPietro. It's so irrational signing a 5-6 year deal then getting a huge pay day once they're contract is up in UFA years. Will you be my agent?

Ok you win, there is zero chance in hell that subban would have wanted to sign a long term deal. There is no precedent, and I'm crazy. You won the internet argument. Congratulations.