Jump to content

Price's contract talks


dlbalr

Price's contract  

32 members have voted

  1. 1. Which term is better, considering a longer term = longer cap hit?

    • 1 year
      2
    • 2 years
      12
    • 3 years
      8
    • 4 years
      5
    • 5 or more years
      5


Recommended Posts

As the question states, knowing that a longer term will lead to a higher cap hit (as you buy out arbitration and potentially UFA years), what's the best option for the Habs in terms of signing Price's new deal?

I'm torn between 2 or 3 years; neither side wants 1, and anything over 4 could yield an ugly cap hit heading towards the $4 M mark. Your thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 126
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I personally have faith in Price, so I'd prefer a 5 year deal at like a sliding scale of 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4. It's unreasonable for Price and his agent I'm sure. It'd end up being a $3m/yr cap hit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally have faith in Price, so I'd prefer a 5 year deal at like a sliding scale of 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4. It's unreasonable for Price and his agent I'm sure. It'd end up being a $3m/yr cap hit.

If that could be done for a $3 M hit, I'd be happy with a deal at that term. I suspect you're right though, I don't see Price going for anything short of ~$4 M on a 5 year pact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thoughts are blinded because I have faith in him as a person and a goaltender, I've seen a player try to do whatever the media, and fans want from playing with fire, to being meek, playing with passion. To be honest, I'd likely bite on a 5 year deal at $4m avg.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm inclined to say two years. Not that I don't have some faith in the lad, but we have a short-term need for cap savings, and the fact remains that he's still a work in progress. There remains a real possibility that Price will either bomb out or just plateau at merely competent. (Other possibilities, too: the Marty Turco phenomenon of good regular season goalie comes to mind, a legitimate concern given Price's less-than-awesome playoff track record). The Habs have generally asked their young players to earn their long-term deals, and while I realize that many people curse them for this, the main criticism centres on their failure to lock guys up long term at cut-rate prices (Streit being the star and maybe the only example). Since Price clearly will NOT lock in at cut rates, the criticism wouldn't apply in his case. Therefore, let him continue to develop (or fail to) and then re-assess, just as we did with Higgins, Plekanec, Markov and a few others: fairest all around, avoids us getting stuck with another dog contract, and gives us a tiny bit of cap breathing room short term.

Edited by The Chicoutimi Cucumber
Link to comment
Share on other sites

why is he holding out? If he's looking for 3 years at 3 million, and he was worth it, I'm pretty sure another team would put an offer sheet in for 2.9. He's obviously not worth it right now. 2 years... 2.5 million. Reassess

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finally had a chance to read the Price contract article from the main page. Great article, Brian. Terrific insight and breakdown on the contractual implications that arise across the multiple scenarios.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

why is he holding out? If he's looking for 3 years at 3 million, and he was worth it, I'm pretty sure another team would put an offer sheet in for 2.9. He's obviously not worth it right now. 2 years... 2.5 million. Reassess

As I noted in the article on the main page, he's not holding out - the holdup is on the Habs' end. Also, someone could offer Price an offer sheet at $4 M, he still has to sign the sheet and the indications are he's not interested in doing so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me just add my voice to the chorus of praise for that article. It's yet another exhibit in the kind of thoughtful analysis that the 'professional' media hacks are chronically incapable of providing. (They are more interested in scrambling like hungry terriers after Mike Cammallerri quotes at golf tournaments than in actually THINKING about why Price's contract is taking so long, or INVESTIGATING whether the Molsons are starting to systematically muscle in on hockey decisions - potentially one of the most important habs-related developments of the decade). Articles like this, by stark contrast, actually address important issues and add much-needed reasoning and analysis to fan discourse. Nicely done.

Edited by The Chicoutimi Cucumber
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm inclined to say two years. Not that I don't have some faith in the lad, but we have a short-term need for cap savings, and the fact remains that he's still a work in progress. There remains a real possibility that Price will either bomb out or just plateau at merely competent. (Other possibilities, too: the Marty Turco phenomenon of good regular season goalie comes to mind, a legitimate concern given Price's less-than-awesome playoff track record). The Habs have generally asked their young players to earn their long-term deals, and while I realize that many people curse them for this, the main criticism centres on their failure to lock guys up long term at cut-rate prices (Streit being the star and maybe the only example). Since Price clearly will NOT lock in at cut rates, the criticism wouldn't apply in his case. Therefore, let him continue to develop (or fail to) and then re-assess, just as we did with Higgins, Plekanec, Markov and a few others: fairest all around, avoids us getting stuck with another dog contract, and gives us a tiny bit of cap breathing room short term.

Playoff goalie? That is media created hyperbole. It is of zero concern to me whether he can handle the playoffs. Osgood, Leighton, Nabokov, Niemi etc are they playoff goalies?

The line between AHL goaltender and NHL goaltender is so fine now that Price can be competent and win multiple Stanley Cups. Leighton is an AHL goaltender and bounced from

team to team because he always ended up on crap teams. How can the same goalie go from a 4+ GAA and an .848 SV% to a 2.48 GAA and a .918 SV% and a Stanley Cup Finals run in the same season? Clemmensen goes from career AHL stiff to posting Vezina numbers and back to career stiff in one year. Tim Thomas etc etc.

Price in a worst case scenario will be a top 15 goaltender. His size, quickness and footwork blow the majority of NHLers off the map. If Price was traded to the Devils, Flyers, Flames etc the fanbase would scream that the Habs made the wrong choice because he would put up HUGE numbers. If he was traded to the Thrashers the fans would have been relieved that they chose the right guy because his numbers would suck even if he was outstanding every night. Same goaltender, entirely different perception based on numbers not actual performance.

Great goaltenders don't win on their own. With the evolution of equipment and the generation of Roy clones that have been unleashed on the league since the mid 90s the line between great and average is almost indecipherable.

Price will do one of two things with the Habs.

1. He will be average and his stats will fluctuate with the efficiency of their defensive commitment, essentially mimicking the fortunes of the team.

or

2. He will be great and drag an average team to good and a good team to great.

The actual talent risk involved is limited. The biggest risk is the mentally challenged fanbase misappropriating blame towards Price and forcing him out of town to worship the next average goaltender who will fluctuate at the same rate and then eviscerate him when things go badly.

Give him a 2 year deal at no more than $2.5M per season and get on with it. If he raises his game like scenario two you go big on a 5 year deal and buy out 3 UFA years. If he turns out to be average like scenario 1 you continue to 1 year him until his RFA seasons are complete and if he leaves you replace him with unnamed average goaltender number 1.

Edited by Wamsley01
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Earlier I was thinking Price would get about half of Halak's money. Now when I see him want about the same Im not sure Im so happy about that deal anymore. I thought there was no way in hell a young prospect goalie that was a backup last season would get over 2M/year. If Price gets 3M/year or more Ill change to the ones who wanted Halak to stay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always said it from the beginning that Price will be a future star goalie but not for our club maybe in nashville where the country music is swarming with Gart Brooks. Price should have been traded and Martin Biron would have been a great replacement at age 32. Gagne would have also been a great pick up for montreal. I'm fed up with our GM for nissed opportunities. Please Mr. Jeffrey Molson come to the rescue!! :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Earlier I was thinking Price would get about half of Halak's money. Now when I see him want about the same Im not sure Im so happy about that deal anymore. I thought there was no way in hell a young prospect goalie that was a backup last season would get over 2M/year. If Price gets 3M/year or more Ill change to the ones who wanted Halak to stay.

Of course, that would mean trading Price instead of Halak. The real point is that there is no way we could keep both and stay under the cap because both were due for raises. (Also, since the end of the season it's become clear that keeping both was widely viewed as untenable - by the goalies, by the other players, by management - regardless of cap considerations). I have no problem with someone who says that we should have kept Halak instead of Price, but let's not delude ourselves into thinking we could have kept both under any circumstances. I do agree that the closer Price's contract inches towards that of Halak, the dodgier that trade appears. Like it or not, Halak has PROVEN that he steal playoff games and dominate a series. This is a major argument in his favour.

As for Wamsley's post above...I agree with most of it, but I massively disagree that Price's playoff performance is irrelevant. First of all, I do not agree that his 'questionable' playoff track record is a media myth. He was good against Boston in 2008, and absolutely wretched against the Flyers that year. He was mediocre - certainly not an asset - against Boston in 2009. And he was a merely-OK playoff backup last season. That record does not suggest 'money goalie.' Now, Price is still a work in progress and it would be ridiculous to project him to be a playoff bust on the basis of that limited a sample. All I was saying is that he has left the door open for doubts on this score.

Now, do you NEED a money goalie to win in the playoffs? Not necessarily. But Leighton and Nabokov are examples of cases where having a money goalie might have made the difference between winning and losing playoff rounds and indeed the Stanley Cup. The Wings won DESPITE Osgood in 2007 because they were so massively superior to the opposition (he played better in 2008), which will NEVER be the case with Montreal for the forseeable future. That leaves Niemi as the outlier case. In short, it is certainly better to have a money goalie than not and always better to have a goalie who performs in the playoffs than Marty Turco or Jim Carey. If Carey Price evolves into a Turco, then we should have kept Halak, who has at least given solid grounds for optimism that he can steal games and dominate series when it counts at the NHL level.

Edited by The Chicoutimi Cucumber
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always said it from the beginning that Price will be a future star goalie but not for our club maybe in nashville where the country music is swarming with Gart Brooks. Price should have been traded and Martin Biron would have been a great replacement at age 32. Gagne would have also been a great pick up for montreal. I'm fed up with our GM for nissed opportunities. Please Mr. Jeffrey Molson come to the rescue!! :angry:

If the Canadiens dealt Price and Halak had Biron as a backup, the minute Halak slumped or struggled he would get thrown under the bus like ALL before him.

This debate is ongoing not because of the players, but because of the fans. Remember, we are the fanbase that booed Patrick Roy out of town and tried to replace him with Andre Racicot.

Goaltending's importance is way overblown. Give me the Wings and Osgood/Howard over any team with Luongo/Ward/Miller and an average cast of characters ANYDAY!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, that would mean trading Price instead of Halak. The real point is that there is no way we could keep both and stay under the cap because both were due for raises. (Also, since the end of the season it's become clear that keeping both was widely viewed as untenable - by the goalies, by the other players, by management - regardless of cap considerations). I have no problem with someone who says that we should have kept Halak instead of Price, but let's not delude ourselves into thinking we could have kept both under any circumstances. I do agree that the closer Price's contract inches towards that of Halak, the dodgier that trade appears. Like it or not, Halak has PROVEN that he steal playoff games and dominate a series. This is a major argument in his favour.

Steve Penney, Jose Theodore, Jon Casey, Don Beaupre, Richard Brodeur, Ron Hextall, John Vanbiesbrouck, Olaf Kolzig, Dwayne Roloson and Martin Biron have all PROVEN that they can steal playoff series over the last 30 years.

One spring of brilliance does not assure a second.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We want miracles...but want to pay peanuts. For all those out there hoping and praying on a $2m or less contract, and if Price gives in and does it..I hope I will not be hearing complaints if he does not play like a $5m goalie. You get what you pay for...everyone is hoping to take advantage of young players, I for one hate that. Making young players have the stress to carry franchises, compete and earn their so called spot, and oh yeah, we're giving you near the league minimum, hows that sound?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve Penney, Jose Theodore, Jon Casey, Don Beaupre, Richard Brodeur, Ron Hextall, John Vanbiesbrouck, Olaf Kolzig, Dwayne Roloson and Martin Biron have all PROVEN that they can steal playoff series over the last 30 years.

One spring of brilliance does not assure a second.

100%. But at least Halak has done it. Price hasn't come close - yet. Anyway, I'm NOT bashing Price, just supporting my original assertion that there are reasons for not locking into him long term just yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like it or not, Halak has PROVEN that he steal playoff games and dominate a series. This is a major argument in his favour.

The habs won both series' in 7 games, I would not call the goaltending of Halak dominating, especially when you add in the team defense concept the habs played giving up tons of low % shots in favour of stopping the high risk plays, not to mention Halak was pulled in both the Pitts and Washington series. I have many doubts that Halak has proven anything. His play against the Flyers was a huge mark against him, he has proven he cannot play large stretches of games without needing a rest, is that what a proven goalie shows? The jury is out on how Halak will play with less equipment this year, the book is already out to shoot high on him, add to the fact his pads shrinking by an inch, we'll see if he can still make those highlight down low pad saves.

This is getting off target of the topic, but I had to respond to your remark. It seems all fans here are trying to do is belittle and downplay Price so we can sucker this player into a cheaper contract. They don't realize that doing this hurts the players confidence, and goalies are strange animals...if you keep asking for a $1.5-$2m goalie...well you may just get a $2m goalie and then you'll be hooting and complaining he's not a world beater.

100%. But at least Halak has done it. Price hasn't come close - yet. Anyway, I'm NOT bashing Price, just supporting my original assertion that there are reasons for not locking into him long term just yet.

Didn't Price steal the series against Boston with a shut out in game 7?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The habs won both series' in 7 games, I would not call the goaltending of Halak dominating, especially when you add in the team defense concept the habs played giving up tons of low % shots in favour of stopping the high risk plays, not to mention Halak was pulled in both the Pitts and Washington series. I have many doubts that Halak has proven anything. His play against the Flyers was a huge mark against him, he has proven he cannot play large stretches of games without needing a rest, is that what a proven goalie shows? The jury is out on how Halak will play with less equipment this year, the book is already out to shoot high on him, add to the fact his pads shrinking by an inch, we'll see if he can still make those highlight down low pad saves.

This is getting off target of the topic, but I had to respond to your remark. It seems all fans here are trying to do is belittle and downplay Price so we can sucker this player into a cheaper contract. They don't realize that doing this hurts the players confidence, and goalies are strange animals...if you keep asking for a $1.5-$2m goalie...well you may just get a $2m goalie and then you'll be hooting and complaining he's not a world beater.

Didn't Price steal the series against Boston with a shut out in game 7?

On Halak: I've expressed similar doubts in the past. He's never been a #1 goalie at the pro level - a shocking fact that his advocates seem to overlook - he is still unproven over the longer-term, and the 'pad size' question is a very legitimate source of anxiety. At the same time, credit where due. Halak has consistently surpassed expectations over his young career (of course, this is partly because expectations were low, but nonetheless, you can certainly argue that he's a guy with a pattern of rising to the occasion). To my mind, Price has never come close at the NHL level to pulling off a performance equivalent to Halak's Game 6 performance against Washington, nor to getting in the other team's head the way Halak did for much of the Washington series and, to a lesser degree, in the Pittsburgh series. (Yes, Price shut out Boston, but that was hardly series-stealing - we had a huge psychological advantage over the Bruins that series - nor was it a performance of historic calibre). Again, I was among those who stressed the degree to which the Habs' system was a factor in those two huge playoff series. But there seems to me to be no point in denying the scale of Halak's contributions to those victories. See this for further confirmation: http://habsloyalist.blogspot.com/2010/07/h...-was-halak.html

On Price: I am in no way trying to belittle him. I feel I'm looking at him objectively. He's a very promising young goalie who is still suffering growing pains and who has yet to put together a compelling season + playoff. It remains entirely within the realm of possibility that he will, in the end, emerge as a merely adequate NHL starter, or as a very good/great regular season guy who can't raise his game in the playoffs, or as a bona-fide elite goaltender. Given this fundamental uncertainty, combined with the fact that he will not sign long-term for discounted rates, we should be looking at a shorter-term deal (2 years) at moderate value (under $3 mil). That's not 'suckering' him. That's treating him fairly based on where he is in his development.

I'm not saying we should have kept Halak over Price, but the ability to rise to the occasion and dominate at key moments is something you can't quantify and should not be discounted when we consider the case for Halak, given that Price hasn't shown it yet at this level. Having said that, it was a rational decision to keep Price given his profile and (hopefully!) more affordable salary. Like I say, if he ends up costing nearly as much as Halak, then one major part of the 'keep Price' argument dissolves...but not the entire argument.

Edited by The Chicoutimi Cucumber
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm inclined to say two years. Not that I don't have some faith in the lad, but we have a short-term need for cap savings, and the fact remains that he's still a work in progress. There remains a real possibility that Price will either bomb out or just plateau at merely competent. (Other possibilities, too: the Marty Turco phenomenon of good regular season goalie comes to mind, a legitimate concern given Price's less-than-awesome playoff track record). The Habs have generally asked their young players to earn their long-term deals, and while I realize that many people curse them for this, the main criticism centres on their failure to lock guys up long term at cut-rate prices (Streit being the star and maybe the only example). Since Price clearly will NOT lock in at cut rates, the criticism wouldn't apply in his case. Therefore, let him continue to develop (or fail to) and then re-assess, just as we did with Higgins, Plekanec, Markov and a few others: fairest all around, avoids us getting stuck with another dog contract, and gives us a tiny bit of cap breathing room short term.

What a tough question. Theodore caved after he went from boy wonder defender to boy with huge expextations based upon huge contract deadbeat.

How do you keep someone fresh. My future captain, Higgins..... wouldn't have been great longterm and I generally like the batting average of our team.

Glad I'm not the GM, but pay hin and lock it up longterm without strangling ourselves if he goes south.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not saying we should have kept Halak over Price, but the ability to rise to the occasion and dominate at key moments is something you can't quantify and should not be discounted when we consider the case for Halak, given that Price hasn't shown it yet at this level. Having said that, it was a rational decision to keep Price given his profile and (hopefully!) more affordable salary. Like I say, if he ends up costing nearly as much as Halak, then one major part of the 'keep Price' argument dissolves...but not the entire argument.

I always thought the keeping Price over Halak debate was that you couldn't afford both not that Price was going to be pennies on the dollar compared to Halak. Price was an all-star two years ago, most seem to forget. Last season they lost their best player to injury in first game of the season, and Price played the bulk of his games while the team was trying to gel amongst the largest shakeup in hockey team history, where as Halaks numbers in my opinion padded by being the back up and playing the weaker teams. Even when Price had starts later in the season he was thrown to the Caps, Sharks, etc the better teams. This day in age we always want the player to show loyalty when clubs do not, I would love to see a long term deal to prevent any headache that could happen in a couple years, if he plays great, the money will be costy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Price was an all-star two years ago, most seem to forget. Last season they lost their best player to injury in first game of the season, and Price played the bulk of his games while the team was trying to gel amongst the largest shakeup in hockey team history, where as Halaks numbers in my opinion padded by being the back up and playing the weaker teams. Even when Price had starts later in the season he was thrown to the Caps, Sharks, etc the better teams. This day in age we always want the player to show loyalty when clubs do not, I would love to see a long term deal to prevent any headache that could happen in a couple years, if he plays great, the money will be costy.

There should not be a debate on whether or not we traded the right goalie. Carey Price is a blue chip goaltending prospect that does not come around too often. He is ONLY 22 (23 in August) and he has 3 good seasons in as a pro. People are ignorant to the fact that he is so young and goalies do not come in to their prime until their mid-twenties. I'm sick of hearing Price sucks or that he can't handle the big game. You can't expect a kid to come in the league at 20 years old, in the mecca of the hockey world and win the hardest trophy to win in sports with an above average team (Cam Ward at 21 got hot in the playoffs and led to a miracle). Ask the Maple Leafs if they regret trading their blue-chip prospect Rask.

I agree with Bar's opinion in that Price/Halak's numbers last year were not totally reflective of their play. I watched probably 70 regular season habs games last year and we were fortunate to have 2 quality goaltenders. Today, they are both fully capable NHL starting goalies IMO. It just seemed that Halak would win 5-4 one game, then win 3-1 the next. While Price would lose 2-1 every game it seemed, not getting any goal support. I can remember multiple games against Buffalo where he and Miller went save for save. There was only a few games where I felt that Price had an off game, but the damn media/hatefull habs fans would blow it out of proportion every time he would lose, no matter if he made 40+ saves. I don't care who is in nets as long as they get the win, and I think that Price will give us that chance moving forward. There is a reason why management has traded number 1 Huet before the playoffs and also Halak the "savior". It's because they know how good he actually is and will be. The players during the playoffs in the spring were commenting on Price saying how they can't score on him in practice and how he is so focused eventhough he was a backup. And not to mention when he was seen yelling at SK for his work ethic really goes to show you that he is coming into his own. So what I think makes sense for our team in terms of a deal for him would be something like 3 years at $3m per. Having a number 1 goalie at $3m is a great deal in the NHL. I think 3 years will be a long enough sample to determine what his value will be down the road and also finally put to rest the "controversy".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always thought the keeping Price over Halak debate was that you couldn't afford both not that Price was going to be pennies on the dollar compared to Halak. Price was an all-star two years ago, most seem to forget. Last season they lost their best player to injury in first game of the season, and Price played the bulk of his games while the team was trying to gel amongst the largest shakeup in hockey team history, where as Halaks numbers in my opinion padded by being the back up and playing the weaker teams. Even when Price had starts later in the season he was thrown to the Caps, Sharks, etc the better teams. This day in age we always want the player to show loyalty when clubs do not, I would love to see a long term deal to prevent any headache that could happen in a couple years, if he plays great, the money will be costy.

In hte cap world, it appears that long term contracts for goalies are going the way of the dodo bird. I tend to agree with Wamsley on the playoff goalie theory. When was the last time a goalie stole a cup? I guess you could argue that Ward won the conn smythe and therefore he was the reason Carolina won. The only guys in the last 20 years that I can think of are Brodeur and Roy. Brodeur had powerhouse names like Stevens, Rafalski, Elias at his prime, Gomez, Gionta, Madden (one of the best shut down centres in recent NHL) , Joe Nieuwendyk, Scott Niedermayer... Holy crap! The goalie that won the conne smythe that year was Giguere. He did not win the cup for his team. I would argue that Brodeur did not win the cup for his team either. Look at the team! I would argue that the only goalie to actually win it for his team in my lifetime was Patrick Roy in 1993, and maybe Brodeur in 94/95. The rest of the great goalie playoff performances resulted in not winning the cup. I'm not saying that you shouldn't pay big money for goalies, but Montreal fans are too used to having a great goalie bail them out, and then we are the first to blame a loss on the goalie and boo them out of town.

I would rather pay price reasonable money for two or three years and reavaluate. As I said. If he is worth big money long term...where are the offer sheets? there are none.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...