Price's contract talks

[hab29RETIRED]

It takes 2 sides to agree to that though. Evidently, 1 side wants the short-term and the other a long-term deal. In the end there will be a compromise, but it probably won't be until right before training camp, especially if it's Price who wants the long-term contract (as I've heard it is).

The report on TSN with an interview from Price's agent said the opposite - Habs looking for a long-term deal, Price short-term.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

The report on TSN with an interview from Price's agent said the opposite - Habs looking for a long-term deal, Price short-term.

Hmmm. That doesn't sound good. Of course he could be reasoning that if he locks in now, he'll be underpaid over the long term. But if true, this may also mean that he has every intention of becoming a UFA as soon as possible and therefore leaving town.

Time will tell, but you'd like to think that the Habs made the decision to move Halak from some kind of informed position vis-a-vis Price's longer-term intentions. I doubt it though.

[saskhab]

Hmmm. That doesn't sound good. Of course he could be reasoning that if he locks in now, he'll be underpaid over the long term. But if true, this may also mean that he has every intention of becoming a UFA as soon as possible and therefore leaving town.

Time will tell, but you'd like to think that the Habs made the decision to move Halak from some kind of informed position vis-a-vis Price's longer-term intentions. I doubt it though.

A 4 year deal would be what Price would seek if he had intentions of leaving as soon as possible, not a 1 or 2 year deal. Although, I suppose it's possible that a 1 or 2 year deal gets Price to arbitration years with the Habs having the option of walking away from the deal. But that's probably not what Price and his agent are dreaming about.... UFA after an arbitration walkaway is really a form of hockey purgatory. I suspect it's more money than term at this point.

[Wamsley01]

Hmmm. That doesn't sound good. Of course he could be reasoning that if he locks in now, he'll be underpaid over the long term. But if true, this may also mean that he has every intention of becoming a UFA as soon as possible and therefore leaving town.

Time will tell, but you'd like to think that the Habs made the decision to move Halak from some kind of informed position vis-a-vis Price's longer-term intentions. I doubt it though.

That is a panic driven mindset. The Habs have Price for 4 more years and a ton of things can happen during that time frame.

Why would you lock yourself into a long term deal coming off your worst season as a professional? Fans need to stop thinking in terms of

what they want and think in terms of what they would do in Price's shoes.

If you had the worst year of your career and you knew you could perform better would you want to lock your future earnings in step with

what you knew your potential was or what you had already underachieved?

The Habs put themselves in this position by dealing Halak first. Price's confidence was shaken and self admittedly thought he was on his way

out of town. All of a sudden they returned his confidence by handing him the keys to the franchise, don't expect him to sign anything they put

in front of him.

Considering that teams have been lowballing goalies all off season what are the odds of an RFA offer coming in that the Habs can't match?

If Price is playing hardball like people fear then any offer he takes will have to be for big $$, which nobody is throwing around.

If camp starts and Price hasn't signed, then it will be clear that something is amiss, but until then I am not worried.

[brobin]

I agree. I sure wish they had held off on dealing Halak until they got Price signed. At this point, Price (his agent really) can hold out for more.

I will be very worried if this stretches into camp. He needs to get his head on the game, not the contract. History isn't kind to players signed late. They typically struggle early, which will not be good for Price. He needs a strong start to get his own confidence back, as well as that of his team and the fans. A bad start and we might see a repeat of last year, with dumb fans booing and Price searching for answers.

a

That is a panic driven mindset. The Habs have Price for 4 more years and a ton of things can happen during that time frame.

Why would you lock yourself into a long term deal coming off your worst season as a professional? Fans need to stop thinking in terms of

what they want and think in terms of what they would do in Price's shoes.

If you had the worst year of your career and you knew you could perform better would you want to lock your future earnings in step with

what you knew your potential was or what you had already underachieved?

The Habs put themselves in this position by dealing Halak first. Price's confidence was shaken and self admittedly thought he was on his way

out of town. All of a sudden they returned his confidence by handing him the keys to the franchise, don't expect him to sign anything they put

in front of him.

Considering that teams have been lowballing goalies all off season what are the odds of an RFA offer coming in that the Habs can't match?

If Price is playing hardball like people fear then any offer he takes will have to be for big $, which nobody is throwing around.

If camp starts and Price hasn't signed, then it will be clear that something is amiss, but until then I am not worried.

[sakiqc]

I'm starting to feel a 5 year deal is coming as well, but with higher numbers though, around the $4m/yr range

3, 3, 4, 4, 5

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.

[sakiqc]

Price with full hands on #1 job plus no worries contracts wise, a better support system.. those are key ingredients for establishing himself in his role. I hope we finally end the endless rotating goalie pony trick we've had for the past 15 years.

[saskhab]

No way Price gets $3m for next year.

It's going to be a one year deal. Gauthier is playing hardball, simple as that.

[Toronthab]

No way Price gets $3m for next year.

It's going to be a one year deal. Gauthier is playing hardball, simple as that.

It's all he's entitled to. His wins in Hamilton don't count next year. He's matured? Fine. Prove it. I suspect he's a good goalie and may rise to the top. But he hasn't and isn't as far as we can tell. I support the management moves indidentally, but I'm glad we're not Theoduding ourselves.

[bar]

Contracts are a gamble, with a lower yeared contract the habs are hedging that Price does not succeed, because if he does then they will pay more in the future. It's the risk/reward scenerio. One year deal is a low risk, low reward scenerio.

I disagree about Price not being worth $3m. He is easily worth $3m a year. From tax situation to having to bear the brunt of the media and fans overhyped expectations, $3m seems to be a good target for him.

People point at getting big contracts after banner years as bad management, Souray, Savard, Komi, etc. If you look on the other hand, deciding a player deserves a lowball contract based on one bad years, a year I may add was not typical of a franchise, new coach, 17 player changes, best D man going down in the first game, etc. Price was an all-star at age 21 we forget.

I really dispise the way young players are treated in the NHL, expected to carry the load, be faces of franchises, and sign for peanuts to satisfy some twisted sense of loyalty to a team, that treats you this way after one bad season. If Plek was signed to a long term contract after last season we'd be saving ourselves like what $1.5-$2m a year.

[saskhab]

Price is not worth $3m for a non-arbitration year when you look at today's goaltending market. If Halak gets $3.75m for 2 arbitration years and 2 UFA years, and RFA's are at a 40% discount rate over UFA's, that means Price must be in the mid-$2m range at best. That would mean he's actually valued at over $4m on the open market if he signed at $2.5m, for example. That would've pegged him in the Halak range (as Halak also signed for a bit of a discount on his UFA years).

It's not about reduced expectations, it's about his value, plain and simple.

[bar]

Not calling you a liar, just asking where you found this 40% discount rate? I personally would rather have a long term contract, and roll the dice that way vs. having him perform how I am sure he can, and have us have to pay down the road. You can overpay to save money down the road, it's fine if you don't see him at that value now. This league is heading down the road of high risk contracts. I'd rather take a chance now vs. later.

[saskhab]

Not calling you a liar, just asking where you found this 40% discount rate? I personally would rather have a long term contract, and roll the dice that way vs. having him perform how I am sure he can, and have us have to pay down the road. You can overpay to save money down the road, it's fine if you don't see him at that value now. This league is heading down the road of high risk contracts. I'd rather take a chance now vs. later.

http://www.behindthenethockey.com/2010/1/6...d-rfas-cost-per

Basically, it's how much the limited market of being a RFA drives the price down versus having 30 teams competing for your services with no penalties attached (picks, etc.). It's been calculated at 40%.

Also, it should be noted that "hometown discounts" do exist for pending UFAs.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Contracts are a gamble, with a lower yeared contract the habs are hedging that Price does not succeed, because if he does then they will pay more in the future. It's the risk/reward scenerio. One year deal is a low risk, low reward scenerio.

I disagree about Price not being worth $3m. He is easily worth $3m a year. From tax situation to having to bear the brunt of the media and fans overhyped expectations, $3m seems to be a good target for him.

People point at getting big contracts after banner years as bad management, Souray, Savard, Komi, etc. If you look on the other hand, deciding a player deserves a lowball contract based on one bad years, a year I may add was not typical of a franchise, new coach, 17 player changes, best D man going down in the first game, etc. Price was an all-star at age 21 we forget.

I really dispise the way young players are treated in the NHL, expected to carry the load, be faces of franchises, and sign for peanuts to satisfy some twisted sense of loyalty to a team, that treats you this way after one bad season. If Plek was signed to a long term contract after last season we'd be saving ourselves like what $1.5-$2m a year.

I'm closer to Torontohab than bar on this. Based on play, Price has not earned a long-term deal, nor has he earned a huge paycheck. (I'm not very good at calculating market value, but somewhere in the 3 mil range seems fair. Based on performance there is no WAY he should get Halak money). I can see that argument that we need to lock up young guys while they're still cheap - but there again, I don't think too many guys who have not produced at an elite level, but who believe that they will eventually do so, really are going 'lock up' at cheap rates. The guys who do are guys like Streit who were never expected, or expecting, to become stars. Teams usually lock up players like Mike Richards and Jeff Carter AFTER they have given convincing proof that they will be impact players in the NHL. And of course you have to distinguish bona-fide star potential from freak seasons like Souray's (not to mention that Souray was a narrow PP specialist, which makes calculating his value even thornier).

So the principle seems pretty clear to me: if you have demonstrable proof that player X will be a star for years to come, you lock him up at a fair rate. Price has offered little in the way of such proof at the NHL level. Therefore he should be locked up only at a major discount relative to his potential. Otherwise it should be a short-term deal based on his actual performance up to now.

[sakiqc]

Last summer we could have signed Plekanec long term for much cheaper than his 5M/year. We all know what kind of goalie Price is going to be. No matter if Price end up becoming a top 5 or top 10 goalie, he is here for a long time. I hope they sign him the longest term possible.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Last summer we could have signed Plekanec long term for much cheaper than his 5M/year. We all know what kind of goalie Price is going to be. No matter if Price end up becoming a top 5 or top 10 goalie, he is here for a long time. I hope they sign him the longest term possible.

That's the trouble right there. Do we? No, we don't. He could turn out to be:

1. Exactly the guy he is now. Hot and cold, mid-range NHL goalie.

2. A guy who ultimately crumbles under the Montreal spotlight and is obliterated: c.f. Thibault and Theodore.

3. Marty Turco: An excellent regular-season goalie who fails to step it up in the playoffs.

4. A middling starter who is capable of spectacular performances at key times. (Least likely option in my opinion; this is more likely to be true of Halak than Price IMHO).

5. A dominant all-around NHL goalie.

I think (3) and (5) are the most likely scenarios for Price. But all five are solidly within the realm of plausibility.

Pleks got the contract he deserved. Yes, we could have signed him at 4 mil after a 39-point season, but it's a strange philosophy that assumes ALL your young players are by definition going to become stars and should therefore be locked up long-term no matter how they actually produce. You can't just assume the best case scenario and plan accordingly.

[saskhab]

Marty Turco, playoff bust? Could've fooled me:

Turco's career stats (regular season): 509 GP, 2.31 GAA, .911 SV%, 40 SO

Turco's career stats (playoffs): 47 GP, 2.17 GAA, .914 SV%, 4 SO

Turco had 2 bad playoffs, in 2004 and 2006. He had 3 good to spectacular ones (2003, 2007, 2008). Meanwhile, he's had 4 good NHL seasons, 2 poor ones, 1 great NHL season and 2 very good ones as a backup.

[bar]

I understand everyones opinion that at this point Price may not have earned a long term or more than $3m a year. I'm suggesting that this is a risk I'd willingly take. The other alternative is...well, we just traded that other alternative. So they HAD to be willing to risk it with Price. You do not trade a (some say) potential number #1 goalie and then have no faith in Price. They are banking on a great season from Price, and then a wink and nudge "you'll sign for cheap right Pricey, show some loyalty". A one year does nothing to create stability.

I just do not understand the thinking of trading Halak if you did not plan on trying to sign Price long term, just doesn't make sense.

Marty Turco, playoff bust? Could've fooled me:

Turco's career stats (regular season): 509 GP, 2.31 GAA, .911 SV%, 40 SO

Turco's career stats (playoffs): 47 GP, 2.17 GAA, .914 SV%, 4 SO

Turco had 2 bad playoffs, in 2004 and 2006. He had 3 good to spectacular ones (2003, 2007, 2008). Meanwhile, he's had 4 good NHL seasons, 2 poor ones, 1 great NHL season and 2 very good ones as a backup.

One thing that wasn't shown was his W-L record, but that's more a team stat. Goalies get too much credit for wins, and too much blame for losses.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Marty Turco, playoff bust? Could've fooled me:

Turco's career stats (regular season): 509 GP, 2.31 GAA, .911 SV%, 40 SO

Turco's career stats (playoffs): 47 GP, 2.17 GAA, .914 SV%, 4 SO

Turco had 2 bad playoffs, in 2004 and 2006. He had 3 good to spectacular ones (2003, 2007, 2008). Meanwhile, he's had 4 good NHL seasons, 2 poor ones, 1 great NHL season and 2 very good ones as a backup.

Whatever, the wider point stands. Not every goalie translates NHL season success into particularly impressive playoff performance and Price may be one of those guys.

[saskhab]

I understand everyones opinion that at this point Price may not have earned a long term or more than $3m a year. I'm suggesting that this is a risk I'd willingly take. The other alternative is...well, we just traded that other alternative. So they HAD to be willing to risk it with Price. You do not trade a (some say) potential number #1 goalie and then have no faith in Price. They are banking on a great season from Price, and then a wink and nudge "you'll sign for cheap right Pricey, show some loyalty". A one year does nothing to create stability.

Just to be clear, I am okay with one of those long term deals, I just don't think his next season should be paid at $3m even in that scenario.

$2.25m, $2.75m, $3.5m, $3.75m, $4m or something in that kind of progressive arc would be my 5 year deal. Not sure if that's something he would go for. From the sounds of his agent, he is looking for a short term deal, or at least that is what both sides are focusing on right now since they can't agree on a long term structure.

[bar]

Ahhh sorry Sask...I didn't pick up on that. I agree that maybe the cap hit will show him making more than $3m but he wouldn't actually get that.

[JoeLassister]

Can't wait for Bobby Ryan to sign so the others will all set their price over his value.

Edit : Could be started now, Sam Gagner signed 2 years 4,55M$.

Edited August 30, 2010 by JoeLassister

[saskhab]

Can't wait for Bobby Ryan to sign so the others will all set their price over his value.

Edit : Could be started now, Sam Gagner signed 2 years 4,55M$.

Actually probably started with Hornqvist in Nashville. He got a shade over $3m per year for 3 years. Also, Bryan Little got just under $2.4m for 3 years, Steve Downie $1.85m for 2, Nick Grossman $1.65m for 2. All were guys coming off their entry level deals with no arbitration rights like Price. We can now assume the market has been set for these players, although there were comparables earlier in the summer like Perron to go off of.

[JoeLassister]

Actually probably started with Hornqvist in Nashville. He got a shade over $3m per year for 3 years. Also, Bryan Little got just under $2.4m for 3 years, Steve Downie $1.85m for 2, Nick Grossman $1.65m for 2. All were guys coming off their entry level deals with no arbitration rights like Price. We can now assume the market has been set for these players, although there were comparables earlier in the summer like Perron to go off of.

I still think that all the guys named above are not in the same category as Price. I think Price is with Ryan, Gagner and maybe Mueller. IMO, Grossman, Downie and even Little don't have the same impact on their respective team. And 3M$ for Hornqvis is, IMHO, way overpaid for a guy with only 1 good NHL season (yes it was a 30 goals one, but still a really bold signing).

[BlueKross]

I still think that all the guys named above are not in the same category as Price. I think Price is with Ryan, Gagner and maybe Mueller. IMO, Grossman, Downie and even Little don't have the same impact on their respective team. And 3M$ for Hornqvis is, IMHO, way overpaid for a guy with only 1 good NHL season (yes it was a 30 goals one, but still a really bold signing).

I don't think there is any choice but to sign Price. What's the problem the price or the term? Start the barbie if something doesn't happen soon.