Subban files for arbitration

[Machine of Loving Grace]

The two sides will have to go by the value of "today" for Subban, hard for comparisons with contracts signed even only as far back as a year or two ago, I'm sure it will be done before arbitration, if not I wouldn't bank on Subban being a Hab for very long.....

It feels like Subban is gonna fight Bergevin for every dollar he feels he deserves but he isn't going to leave the Habs.

[DON]

Havent heard Bergevin, Meehan nor Subban say one word publically on subject?

So couldnt even take a wild guess whats up. Are they even negotiating at present?

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

It feels like Subban is gonna fight Bergevin for every dollar he feels he deserves but he isn't going to leave the Habs.

That sounds like a good assessment. You only have to remember that shot of him leaping ecstatically into Bergevin's arms after Game 7 against Those ers Boston to recognize that this guy is able to distinguish between driving a hard bargain in a contract negotiation and loving an organization. PK seems to have a lot of clarity about who and what he is and to be very flinty-eyed about his special talent and what it means. He has also had people, all his life, deny that he is indeed special, and he - rightly - knows they are full of crap. So when a GM tried to lowball him on a contract he is not going to let it pass.

The following link contains what is probably the best piece ever written on this extraordinary hockey player: http://www.thestar.com/news/ken_dryden_canada_day/2014/06/30/pk_subban_nothing_was_going_to_deter_me.htmlhttp://www.thestar.com/news/ken_dryden_canada_day/2014/06/30/pk_subban_nothing_was_going_to_deter_me.html

[Guest Stogey24]

Wow, that article shows some captain material

[Jeff Price (no relation)]

That sounds like a good assessment. You only have to remember that shot of him leaping ecstatically into Bergevin's arms after Game 7 against Those ######ers Boston to recognize that this guy is able to distinguish between driving a hard bargain in a contract negotiation and loving an organization. PK seems to have a lot of clarity about who and what he is and to be very flinty-eyed about his special talent and what it means. He has also had people, all his life, deny that he is indeed special, and he - rightly - knows they are full of crap. So when a GM tried to lowball him on a contract he is not going to let it pass.

I partially agree.

However, if he's really driven to win, he also has to realize that winning and getting every dollar you deserve are mutually exclusive in leagues with salary caps.

In the future you're going to see situations like in the NBA, where players are picking and choose which teams are competitive by collaborating to get together with other stars and each take a pay cut in order to create a contender.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

I partially agree.

However, if he's really driven to win, he also has to realize that winning and getting every dollar you deserve are mutually exclusive in leagues with salary caps.

In the future you're going to see situations like in the NBA, where players are picking and choose which teams are competitive by collaborating to get together with other stars and each take a pay cut in order to create a contender.

Well, that's what Patches did (take a discount, I mean, not co-ordinate with other stars).

I think PK Subban is one of the least likely players around to take such a discount, at least at this point in his career; and the reason for that can be discerned from this article. He seems to have zero bitterness or rancour at all - in fact, he comes off as remarkably self-aware and surprisingly insightful and even wise. Young people could learn a lot from reading what he says. But it's pretty clear that he also knows that he has had his "specialness" denied over and over throughout his hockey career, even though he is obviously an exceptional talent and knows it. Taking a pay cut will be too uncomfortably close to accepting or endorsing this denial of what he really is, i.e., a superstar, one of the absolute best in the entire world at what he does, for him to be able to accept. And I think that's completely understandable. Despite being jaw-droppingly talented, he's had to fight his way to the recognition that he deserves, which is just the opposite of what "good Canadian boys" like Carey Price or Drew Doughty or Sidney Crosby experienced. He's not going to endorse a contract that denies him that recognition.

[Machine of Loving Grace]

The thing for me is that I've heard that Subban's requested number last RFA go around was between $5M and $5.5M for five years. That would have been the discount. Bergevin knew cap was going down and wanted the bridge. However he spend those savings on Bouillon, Murray and Briere. So in hindsight it did us no real advantage. So with Subban not wanting to take a discount now? I have no qualms with it.

Last year, Subban was making $2.875M on the cap and got paid $3.75M. Asking him to take a pay cut after making that? Ridiculous.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

The thing for me is that I've heard that Subban's requested number last RFA go around was between $5M and $5.5M for five years. That would have been the discount. Bergevin knew cap was going down and wanted the bridge. However he spend those savings on Bouillon, Murray and Briere. So in hindsight it did us no real advantage. So with Subban not wanting to take a discount now? I have no qualms with it.

Last year, Subban was making $2.875M on the cap and got paid $3.75M. Asking him to take a pay cut after making that? Ridiculous.

Yes, well said. PK has already taken the hit, has already been on the receiving end of hard-ball negotiating. Beyond all that other stuff, why the hell should he keep rolling over? The team itself set the terms - hardball, it's-only-business negotiations - so he would be an idiot not to respond in kind.

What's great about PK is that I believe that, no matter how tough the negotiations, once it's all over he will go out there and given 100% every night for the team that signs him.

[Jeff Price (no relation)]

Yes, well said. PK has already taken the hit, has already been on the receiving end of hard-ball negotiating. Beyond all that other stuff, why the hell should he keep rolling over? The team itself set the terms - hardball, it's-only-business negotiations - so he would be an idiot not to respond in kind.

What's great about PK is that I believe that, no matter how tough the negotiations, once it's all over he will go out there and given 100% every night for the team that signs him.

That's fine if we get him for a reasonable price, like 64 million for 8 years.

If he demands 80+ million over that time, well, at that point, we're probably better off without him in a couple years, no matter how hard he works or great he is. It's a team game...and one great player surrounded by 19 buffoons you can't afford to improve is never going to win.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

That's fine if we get him for a reasonable price, like 64 million for 8 years.

If he demands 80+ million over that time, well, at that point, we're probably better off without him in a couple years, no matter how hard he works or great he is. It's a team game...and one great player surrounded by 19 buffoons you can't afford to improve is never going to win.

Personally, I doubt PK is asking for $10 mil. That would be way out of whack with NHL norms at this stage. I do think, though, that a team can carry one $10 mil player and win. I don't know if that can work with two, as per Chicago; the Hawks may have just signalled the end of their dynasty.

[Jeff Price (no relation)]

Personally, I doubt PK is asking for $10 mil. That would be way out of whack with NHL norms at this stage. I do think, though, that a team can carry one $10 mil player and win. I don't know if that can work with two, as per Chicago; the Hawks may have just signalled the end of their dynasty.

Absolutely, the Hawks are now a non-factor.

And yes, a team can carry one 10 million player, but that player also has to carry the team. It has to be a person the calibur of Sidney Crosby (at his best, not the mess he was this year), Wayne Gretzky, or Bobby Orr ... who's mere presence in the lineup completely changes the dynamic of the game.

Subban is not yet that type of player (and we can't gamble that he will become one.) Neither are Kane and Toews. In fact, with Crosby looking ineffectual this playoff run, there's nobody currently in the league who has that kind of dominance on the ice.

[hab29RETIRED]

So by that logic, you think that Chicago is better off without Kane and Toews??

Cap is going up. We need to pay our stars whatever they are worth and stop handing out stupid money to washed up has beens (Briere) and 4th liners (Prust), before you start moving your superstars.

That's fine if we get him for a reasonable price, like 64 million for 8 years.

If he demands 80+ million over that time, well, at that point, we're probably better off without him in a couple years, no matter how hard he works or great he is. It's a team game...and one great player surrounded by 19 buffoons you can't afford to improve is never going to win.

[hab29RETIRED]

Personally, I doubt PK is asking for $10 mil. That would be way out of whack with NHL norms at this stage. I do think, though, that a team can carry one $10 mil player and win. I don't know if that can work with two, as per Chicago; the Hawks may have just signalled the end of their dynasty.

If he wasn't, his agent will be asking for it after what Toews and Kane got. Keep in mind that $10+ is really what Weber, Suter are getting, when you factor in that they may not play to the end of their contracts. Malkin signed for $9m. Crosby is making almost that on a front loaded deal.

What it means is you can't pay a fourth liner like Prust close to $3M, a close to washed out Moen $1.75M, or a guy like Gorges close to $4M. MB had a chance to lock up Subban on the cheap and its come back to bite us big time.

[Jeff Price (no relation)]

Let's do some math on the effect Toews and Kane will have on the blackhawks roster:

Every team in the NHL has approximately $69 million to spend on 23 roster players. That's exactly $3 million per player. (That means an average player in the NHL makes $3 million, and the 12th best player on your roster should be making about $3 million. Anybody on your roster making under $3 million is actually freeing up cap money for other players to be above $3 million.)

Chicago just gave $21 million of their salary allotment to 2 players. That means that they have just under $2.2 million per body to pay their remaining 21 players.

Crawford makes 6 million. Sharp makes 5.9 million. Seabrook makes 5.8 million, Keith makes 5.5 million, and Hossa makes 5.3 million. That's another 28.5 million for five more players, so we're at $49.5 million used, and still 16 spots left on the roster.

Those 16 people share a pool of less than 20 million dollars. The league minimum salary is $550,000, so none of your players will make less than that. Remember, an average joe in the NHL makes 3 million. So of your 23 person roster, you've gotta have 16 of them averaging 1.2 million each.

See the ongoing problem here?

This is why players like Dion Phaneuf, who is, despite all the fun we poke at him, a better-than-average NHL defenseman, take so much flack from hockey fans -- he's making 8 million this year. He's not better than the players they could sign for less money. The quality of your stars doesn't win you the Stanley Cup. It's not your first line that decides who wins, it's the second, third and fourth lines. We know the stars are good...that's who the other team will send their best defenders against, etc. Three twenty goal scorers will generally cost you less than a single thirty goal scorer...and provide far more to the team.

I'm not saying stars don't have their place, but at a certain point, you pay them too much, and you're actually a better team without them, because of the other players keeping them prevents you from having.

I believe Subban is worth 8 million. I don't believe he's worth more.

So by that logic, you think that Chicago is better off without Kane and Toews??

Cap is going up. We need to pay our stars whatever they are worth and stop handing out stupid money to washed up has beens (Briere) and 4th liners (Prust), before you start moving your superstars.

Actually, in two or three years, yes, I do think they'd be better off without them. They will have no support for them, and be struggling to make the playoffs. This is not because Kane and Toews are no good. They're quite good. But they are not good enough to carry a lousy team by themselves.

As for Prust, he's still better than the average NHL player, and he's only making 2.5 million - significantly under the league average contract. Any time you can get a player you WANT to put on the ice that costs less than the average, you just scored big as a GM. Prust's contract means he actually frees up more money for the cap. Instead of 69 million for 23 players, after adding prust at 2.5 million, we have 66.5 million for 22 players. We get an extra $500,000 to convince a better than average NHL player to join us at 3.5 million instead of 3 million. It's not like any jackass we call up from Hamilton can do Prust's job for us. He's more than competent, so to get him at less than the league average is a steal.

[dlbalr]

Let's do some math on the effect Toews and Kane will have on the blackhawks roster:

Every team in the NHL has approximately $69 million to spend on 23 roster players. That's exactly $3 million per player. (That means an average player in the NHL makes $3 million, and the 12th best player on your roster should be making about $3 million. Anybody on your roster making under $3 million is actually freeing up cap money for other players to be above $3 million.)

Chicago just gave $21 million of their salary allotment to 2 players. That means that they have just under $2.2 million per body to pay their remaining 21 players.

Crawford makes 6 million. Sharp makes 5.9 million. Seabrook makes 5.8 million, Keith makes 5.5 million, and Hossa makes 5.3 million. That's another 28.5 million for five more players, so we're at $49.5 million used, and still 16 spots left on the roster.

Don't forget that these deals don't kick in this coming season but rather 2015-16. With the new TV deal fully coming into play, expect another $4-6 million jump in the cap. That eases the burden a tad (your point is still a good one though, their supporting cast is going to take a hit before too long).

[Machine of Loving Grace]

The Blackhawks added $8M with the extensions. The problem isn't the added $8M but the fact that Corey Crawford makes $6M and Bryan Bickell makes $4M.

[hab29RETIRED]

Let's do some math on the effect Toews and Kane will have on the blackhawks roster:

Every team in the NHL has approximately $69 million to spend on 23 roster players. That's exactly $3 million per player. (That means an average player in the NHL makes $3 million, and the 12th best player on your roster should be making about $3 million. Anybody on your roster making under $3 million is actually freeing up cap money for other players to be above $3 million.)

Chicago just gave $21 million of their salary allotment to 2 players. That means that they have just under $2.2 million per body to pay their remaining 21 players.

Crawford makes 6 million. Sharp makes 5.9 million. Seabrook makes 5.8 million, Keith makes 5.5 million, and Hossa makes 5.3 million. That's another 28.5 million for five more players, so we're at $49.5 million used, and still 16 spots left on the roster.

Those 16 people share a pool of less than 20 million dollars. The league minimum salary is $550,000, so none of your players will make less than that. Remember, an average joe in the NHL makes 3 million. So of your 23 person roster, you've gotta have 16 of them averaging 1.2 million each.

See the ongoing problem here?

This is why players like Dion Phaneuf, who is, despite all the fun we poke at him, a better-than-average NHL defenseman, take so much flack from hockey fans -- he's making 8 million this year. He's not better than the players they could sign for less money. The quality of your stars doesn't win you the Stanley Cup. It's not your first line that decides who wins, it's the second, third and fourth lines. We know the stars are good...that's who the other team will send their best defenders against, etc. Three twenty goal scorers will generally cost you less than a single thirty goal scorer...and provide far more to the team.

I'm not saying stars don't have their place, but at a certain point, you pay them too much, and you're actually a better team without them, because of the other players keeping them prevents you from having.

I believe Subban is worth 8 million. I don't believe he's worth more.

Actually, in two or three years, yes, I do think they'd be better off without them. They will have no support for them, and be struggling to make the playoffs. This is not because Kane and Toews are no good. They're quite good. But they are not good enough to carry a lousy team by themselves.

As for Prust, he's still better than the average NHL player, and he's only making 2.5 million - significantly under the league average contract. Any time you can get a player you WANT to put on the ice that costs less than the average, you just scored big as a GM. Prust's contract means he actually frees up more money for the cap. Instead of 69 million for 23 players, after adding prust at 2.5 million, we have 66.5 million for 22 players. We get an extra $500,000 to convince a better than average NHL player to join us at 3.5 million instead of 3 million. It's not like any jackass we call up from Hamilton can do Prust's job for us. He's more than competent, so to get him at less than the league average is a steal.

Hawks don't have to worry about the Kane/Towes deal in the coming year. Those deals don't have to go into affect until the year after and by then the cap will probably be around $74M with the canadian tv deal coming into play. They aren't going to get burnt by the Toews/Kane deals. It's the idiotic deals paying 3rd/4th liners for $4M that will bite them.

I'd much rather pay Subban $9.5M (rather than your $8M limit) and move Prust and his $3M and replace him with someone for $1.5M. A guy in Prust's role can be had for $1.5M, a Moen type for under $1M. Who are you going to get to replace Subban??

MB played a stupid game of poker a two years ago. when he could have signed Subban long-term for under $6M. The big savings he got were wasted on a washed up Briere. You pay your stars and avoid stupid mistakes like Briere.

Hopefully, MB will leran his leasson and lock up a guy like Eller cheap now for around $3.5M for 6 or 7 years, then waste money on Briere, Prust, Moen.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

People forget that the cap almost always rises. In a few years $10 mil will seem closer to what $7 mil seems like now.

[Jeff Price (no relation)]

Hawks don't have to worry about the Kane/Towes deal in the coming year. Those deals don't have to go into affect until the year after and by then the cap will probably be around $74M with the canadian tv deal coming into play. They aren't going to get burnt by the Toews/Kane deals. It's the idiotic deals paying 3rd/4th liners for $4M that will bite them.

I'd much rather pay Subban $9.5M (rather than your $8M limit) and move Prust and his $3M and replace him with someone for $1.5M. A guy in Prust's role can be had for $1.5M, a Moen type for under $1M. Who are you going to get to replace Subban??

MB played a stupid game of poker a two years ago. when he could have signed Subban long-term for under $6M. The big savings he got were wasted on a washed up Briere. You pay your stars and avoid stupid mistakes like Briere.

Hopefully, MB will leran his leasson and lock up a guy like Eller cheap now for around $3.5M for 6 or 7 years, then waste money on Briere, Prust, Moen.

You can't replace guys like Moen or Prust for 1.5 million. The reliability, the trust that you can put them out there for 10 minutes a night and they won't lose you the game (and they might even win it for you), that doesn't come with 1.5 million dollar players. Hell, Eller doesn't even have that now (both Moen and Prust were betterplayers than Eller last season...they did what we paid them to do, perfectly. Eller didn't perform at all.) We're going to notice the deficiency this year putting Malhotra on our fourth line. Sadly, his injury has made him a liability. I hope he's not too bad. If you skimp so much on your fourth line that you are risking a goal against every time they take the ice, with no chance of a goal in return, you're not going anywhere.

People forget that the cap almost always rises. In a few years $10 mil will seem closer to what $7 mil seems like now.

That is not guaranteed. Also, the cap rising cause your support players to cost more too. not to mention that the league minimum goes up even if the cap doesn't.

[Lovett's Magnatones]

You can't replace guys like Moen or Prust for 1.5 million. The reliability, the trust that you can put them out there for 10 minutes a night and they won't lose you the game (and they might even win it for you), that doesn't come with 1.5 million dollar players. Hell, Eller doesn't even have that now (both Moen and Prust were betterplayers than Eller last season...they did what we paid them to do, perfectly. Eller didn't perform at all.) We're going to notice the deficiency this year putting Malhotra on our fourth line. Sadly, his injury has made him a liability. I hope he's not too bad. If you skimp so much on your fourth line that you are risking a goal against every time they take the ice, with no chance of a goal in return, you're not going anywhere.

That is not guaranteed. Also, the cap rising cause your support players to cost more too. not to mention that the league minimum goes up even if the cap doesn't.

Here's another take:

Let's do this by production.

A team needs three goals to win an NHL game. That is 286 goals per season, which ranks 3-5 in team totals. Let's adjust some numbers.

The first year will be the worst, let's set the cap at 74 mil. Chicago loses Sharp and Bickell, and their goal total us adjusted to 270, putting them 7th-10th in the league, still contending.

21 million is 28% of the cap. For the contracts to be worth it, Toews and Kane must be a factor in 28% of the goals. Which is about 70-75 goals. 65 of which, at the minimum they will score.

How are these bad deals?

What's the alternative? A trade of Kane to Dallas for a first, Vernon Fiddler and Kevin Connauton? Chicago still has good players like Teuvo Terravainen in the minors. For all the crap he gets, Corey Crawford is still better than 20 starters in the league. They can get great returns for Sharp, Hjalmarssom, Leddy or Bickell.

I think a team that needed to jettison their stars is Pittsburgh. You can't have three guys above 7 million like Letang, Malkin and Crosby.

One bounce and the Hawks are the Stanley Cup Champions.

If you don't want big contracts, you have to have a pipeline of cheap talent on ELCs. Or you're just average. Like the 80's and 90's Bruins who pennypinched every star player.

[illWill]

"It’s not just about winning, it’s about being the best player on the ice and leading my team. Those are the moments I thrive in the most. That’s why I play this way."

"Bobby Orr could flip the switch on, and it was game over. He could skate, shoot, pass, hit, defend. He was a great teammate. He also made a lot of mistakes. My dad read his book and said Orr talked about how for every great play he made, 10 didn’t work. But he had the ability to turn the page, elevate his game and not let any of that stuff affect him."

"At the end of the tournament, for them to come up to me and say “You’re a great teammate,” that’s even better than winning a gold medal."

This is exactly how I feel about P.K and he reassured me.

[Guest Stogey24]

Here's another take:

Let's do this by production.

A team needs three goals to win an NHL game. That is 286 goals per season, which ranks 3-5 in team totals. Let's adjust some numbers.

The first year will be the worst, let's set the cap at 74 mil. Chicago loses Sharp and Bickell, and their goal total us adjusted to 270, putting them 7th-10th in the league, still contending.

21 million is 28% of the cap. For the contracts to be worth it, Toews and Kane must be a factor in 28% of the goals. Which is about 70-75 goals. 65 of which, at the minimum they will score.

How are these bad deals?

What's the alternative? A trade of Kane to Dallas for a first, Vernon Fiddler and Kevin Connauton? Chicago still has good players like Teuvo Terravainen in the minors. For all the crap he gets, Corey Crawford is still better than 20 starters in the league. They can get great returns for Sharp, Hjalmarssom, Leddy or Bickell.

I think a team that needed to jettison their stars is Pittsburgh. You can't have three guys above 7 million like Letang, Malkin and Crosby.

One bounce and the Hawks are the Stanley Cup Champions.

If you don't want big contracts, you have to have a pipeline of cheap talent on ELCs. Or you're just average. Like the 80's and 90's Bruins who pennypinched every star player.

I could see Malkin being moved, probably not this year, but I think it might happen.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

It IS an interesting question: how much is too much for PK Subban? Would you, for instance, be willing to make him THE highest-paid player in hockey? Is there a limit?

I think Subban is a franchise player in the sense of being a guy who can anchor an elite team for 15 years. But it's an open question whether he will even become the best defenceman in the game (Doughty is better, at least judging by c.v.), let alone the best player. He is, however, one of maybe a dozen difference-making, hyper-elite players in hockey. And he is also THE most explosive and exciting player in all of hockey. Or maybe he shares that honour with Ovechkin.

But I also think the question is moot, because I doubt PK would be asking for a contract that is wildly off the chart like that. Anything over $9 mil would, I believe, be unlikely to emanate from his camp. If I'm right, Subban wants a contract that accords him the respect he deserves as a superstar. But he knows he's not the best, yet. For instance, he says in that interview that he could have been the best player in the Olympic tournament if he'd been given the ice-time (!!!). But he also knows he was a scrub and that he was NOT the best player in the tournament, and accepts that he still has to prove to people that he can be that guy. If that's your mindset, for sure you are going to come in asking for Doughty-like numbers (or more than that, on the grounds of inflation), but you're not gonna come in and demand the league maximum.

Lastly, I'll say this: We have waited 20 years for a player like him, a position player with the talent and desire to TRULY do justice to the legacy of great Montreal Canadiens superstars. He is the best position player to wear our jersey since the dynasty era, and just happens to have all the panache and excitement associated with the best traditions of the CH. If the Habs end up losing PK Subban, it will be a betrayal of the fans on the scale of trading Patrick Roy, and I will seriously sit down and re-consider my fandom. No fan-base should have to tolerate that kind of betrayal twice in a lifetime.

[Lovett's Magnatones]

Subban is the first player since Roy who has the chance to have a Hall of Fame calibet career.

[KoRP]

I don't think any of us expect anything other than Subban to be signed long term, and you're right he is a thoroughbred capable of being what we need, a true star. You can bet MB wants to sign him, and he says he wants to stay, so it looks like it will get done. However there is a pay scale each team envisions to be fiscally responsible, and breaking policy doesn't sound like an MB move....

Is there any scenario where MB will just say that's enough, and trade him? Say after arbitration if it happens? What would happen if the return was just too good to pass up?

I certainly hope not, but stranger things have happened....