You're Marc Bergevin - What deal do you offer Subban?

[Commandant]

On Subban’s Bridge contract… vs Price and Pacioretty.

When Price was given his second contract in the summer of 2010, he was coming off a poor season where he had lost his starting job to Jaro Halak in the playoffs. He had much to prove.

When Pacioretty was given his second contract he had just had his first productive half season in the NHL after being in the AHL at the start of the year. He had 14 goals and 24 points in 37 games. Was injured with a broken neck and severe concussion. And he had a total of 123 NHL games 20 goals 29 assists and 49 points to his name.

Last season PK was given the most ice time of any defenceman on our team. He played over 24 minutes per game and was matched against every team’s top line. He led the team in scoring by a defenceman. He played top penalty kill and powerplay minutes. He was +9 on a 28th place squad, and was clearly our best defenceman on the year.

Seems pretty clear to me that his career and situation isn’t the same as those two and I understand why he wants more than a bridge contract.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Good point, Commandant.

I really am all over the place on this one. Will being prematurely rewarded stunt PK's development? Will doing so create a dangerous RFA precedent for the organization? Will it give MB a rep as a pushover, making future negotiations harder? Conversely, do we risk losing PK as a UFA if we make a stand insisting on a 'bridge' deal? Isn't PK's performance worth something in the domain of $5 mil (adjusting for Quebec taxes) and don't we want to treat guys fairly? Wouldn't it be nice to have PK locked up, even if it's a slight 'overpay' based on current results? Heck, don't we want to see PK on the ice this year? - and how does losing a whole year, potentially, affect his development??

Beats the heck out of me. Times like this, I'm glad I'm not making the call.

[REV-G]

Good point, Commandant.

I really am all over the place on this one. Will being prematurely rewarded stunt PK's development? Will doing so create a dangerous RFA precedent for the organization? Will it give MB a rep as a pushover, making future negotiations harder? Conversely, do we risk losing PK as a UFA if we make a stand insisting on a 'bridge' deal? Isn't PK's performance worth something in the domain of $5 mil (adjusting for Quebec taxes) and don't we want to treat guys fairly? Wouldn't it be nice to have PK locked up, even if it's a slight 'overpay' based on current results? Heck, don't we want to see PK on the ice this year? - and how does losing a whole year, potentially, affect his development??

Beats the heck out of me. Times like this, I'm glad I'm not making the call.

I don't know how great the impact will be on our cap for next year with it being reduced so much, but what Commandment pointed out about comparrisons between PK, Price and Patches is very fair. It concerns me when I hear PK's agent say at this point in the season that they are not close. PK needs to be on the ice learning the new system and being a part of the team. Like the CBA, they must find a way to get this done and get PK back on the ice with his team. WIth all the talent we have coming up PK, for me, is a very key component on the back end and should be for years to come. I believe we are at a major transition time, this year and next, and the core of our team going forward needs to have PK locked up for many years. Is there a chance, a risk, that if we overpay a bit or give him a longer contracdt than we have some of the other guys, that PK will fall back and struggle? I don't so for one minute. WIth him, what you see is what you get. I think this will be his level of play for years to come, with a higher level of maturity and control. For me it will only get better. Get hims signed now!!

[brobin]

I don't think we risk losing PK if he ends up with a bridge deal. PK has faced worse in his career and always stayed loyal. I undersand why he wans the money now, but I suspect you are going to see fewer of these deals so early in careers as GMs get burned by some current deals.

If you think about it, if PK is so confident in his abilities, then why not sign the bridge deal. If he is as good as projected, he will still get the long term deal and even more money in a few years.

From the habs perspective, we have 4 years to lock him up before free agency. Lets assume he turns into a top 5 guy over the next two or three years. We can then sign him for a long term deal well into free agency, rather then only a couple of years.

Again, I go back to leverage. We are in a building year, so we can afford to wait him out. If Bergeron is a tough negotiator, he will hold tight until PK decides he wants to play. At that point, give him a decent amount per year in the bridge deal based on his role, not his potential.

[patience is a virtue]

I am all in favour of locking up PK long-term (ideally 5 years) for $5M per. I think this misses the point however. The new CBA has changed the situation. MB wants cap space for Gally to play this season. And the fact that Del Zotto just signed 2 years for $2.5M per has given him a ton of leverage.

Meehan must be livid and is digging in.

Edit: I just read on page 5 that Meehan is Del Zotto's agent too. Hmmmm? I wonder how he is arguing against his own precedent? Any ideas on this?

[dlbalr]

More Subban talk from Sportsnet (about halfway through the below clip, also talk on the CHL Prospects game and Gomez/Redden), Doug MacLean feels Subban is asking for too much. He also suggests that the Habs' offer is around (or below) $3 M per season, that's the first I've heard of even a suggestion of a below $3 M offer..

http://pmd.fan590.com/audio_on_demand-3/Doug-MacLean-with-Greg-Brady-and-Jim-Lang-bl-20130116-Interview.mp3

[brobin]

Meehan is a ruthless negotiator going against a rookie GM. I am not sure how much of this is PK being influenced by Meehan thinking he can score here. Bergeron needs to hold fast. People need to remember that the better deal we get,, the better for the team.

I don't see what the big rush is in a rebuilding year. It will get done at some point. I am more concerned with how Markov looks this year.

[JMMR]

Even if you think the Habs D is okay right now and could survive without PK.

That all changes a week or 3 into the season when 1 or more of the defenseman is hurt.

[tebo64]

I do not expect Bergevin to give on this contract. If he does then he will put himself in a position of weakness with other agents.

[JoeLassister]

Meehan is a ruthless negotiator going against a rookie GM. I am not sure how much of this is PK being influenced by Meehan thinking he can score here. Bergeron needs to hold fast. People need to remember that the better deal we get,, the better for the team. I don't see what the big rush is in a rebuilding year. It will get done at some point. I am more concerned with how Markov looks this year.

It's Marc Bergevin though...

[brobin]

It's Marc Bergevin though...

Lol... Good catch...

[Commandant]

I don't think we risk losing PK if he ends up with a bridge deal. PK has faced worse in his career and always stayed loyal. I undersand why he wans the money now, but I suspect you are going to see fewer of these deals so early in careers as GMs get burned by some current deals. If you think about it, if PK is so confident in his abilities, then why not sign the bridge deal. If he is as good as projected, he will still get the long term deal and even more money in a few years. From the habs perspective, we have 4 years to lock him up before free agency. Lets assume he turns into a top 5 guy over the next two or three years. We can then sign him for a long term deal well into free agency, rather then only a couple of years. Again, I go back to leverage. We are in a building year, so we can afford to wait him out. If Bergeron is a tough negotiator, he will hold tight until PK decides he wants to play. At that point, give him a decent amount per year in the bridge deal based on his role, not his potential.

Why does a player want long term security?

Because you are only one play away from the end of your career.... see Marc Savard and Chris Pronger who collect their cash despite being finished.

I am all in favour of locking up PK long-term (ideally 5 years) for $5M per. I think this misses the point however. The new CBA has changed the situation. MB wants cap space for Gally to play this season. And the fact that Del Zotto just signed 2 years for $2.5M per has given him a ton of leverage.

Meehan must be livid and is digging in.

Edit: I just read on page 5 that Meehan is Del Zotto's agent too. Hmmmm? I wonder how he is arguing against his own precedent? Any ideas on this?

5 million to PK and 3.25 million for Gally and we are still well under the cap.

[dreegking]

I could live with 5.5 per, for 4 years. I'd prefer an escalating contract of 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 million.

[Machine of Loving Grace]

I do not expect Bergevin to give on this contract. If he does then he will put himself in a position of weakness with other agents.

Lombardi gave into Doughty. I doubt that hurt his standing with agents.

[brobin]

PK and Meehan to meet tomorrow to discuss next steps. Important meeting as that will be where PK decides if he is willing to negotiate a bridge contract, or if he will sit out until he gets offered a long term deal.

[DON]

Why does a player want long term security?

Because you are only one play away from the end of your career.... see Marc Savard and Chris Pronger who collect their cash despite being finished.

5 million to PK and 3.25 million for Gally and we are still well under the cap.

i am fine with a nice big offer for Subban, similar to many other top young stars.

But for some reason it seems Bergevin is hesitant to pay going rate it seems?

Does Bergevin simply think Subban may be is not the character he wants to have as a leader long term and possibly has super trade offers in back pocket as plan 'B'?

Do you still think Subban would not be enough to say get Yakupov from the Oil (or Subban + something)? Or some other young top forward prospect, maybe Granlund or Huberdeau to pair with Galchenyuk?

Not that i want to trade Subban at all, just still see more a weakness in top six than on the back end?

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

My impression is that everyone in hockey recognizes that PK Subban is an excellent young player. But there does not seem to be universal agreement that he is in the very highest echelon of young defencemen...there's a school that is, I think, unconvinced that he is (say) the second coming of Chelios. They see him as a work in progress and a player who could potentially fall short of our lofty expectations.

To my mind, PK is, right now, a #2 defender on a good team. That is not worth $6 mil. IF MB digs in his heels, I can live with that.

[Machine of Loving Grace]

Do you still think Subban would not be enough to say get Yakupov from the Oil (or Subban + something)? Or some other young top forward prospect, maybe Granlund or Huberdeau to pair with Galchenyuk?

Not that i want to trade Subban at all, just still see more a weakness in top six than on the back end?

Aside from Beaulieu, we don't have anyone who can perform like Subban, Markov or Kaberle offensively and the latter two likely won't be Canadiens for that much longer. Beaulieu should be eventually replacing Markov, not Subban.

If we trade Subban it better be for a blueliner back and it better be a guy who would want to be in Montreal. Like maybe if Pittsburgh already knew that Letang wanted to leave.

[JoeLassister]

Aside from Beaulieu, we don't have anyone who can perform like Subban, Markov or Kaberle offensively and the latter two likely won't be Canadiens for that much longer. Beaulieu should be eventually replacing Markov, not Subban.

If we trade Subban it better be for a blueliner back and it better be a guy who would want to be in Montreal. Like maybe if Pittsburgh already knew that Letang wanted to leave.

Exactly. We would trade Subban and then draft a Subban kind of player all over again... Makes no sense, IMHO.

[JoeLassister]

As soon as Gomez is bought out, if I am Bergevin :

3M - 3M - 4M - 6M - 7M - 7M - 5M - 5M

40/8 = 5 on the cap. Easily tradable during season 7 and 8 of his contract, when he'll be in his early 30's.

Subban's not happy ? add 0,5M for every year, make it 5,5M, I don't care at all.

[dlbalr]

I could live with 5.5 per, for 4 years. I'd prefer an escalating contract of 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 million.

As soon as Gomez is bought out, if I am Bergevin :

3M - 3M - 4M - 6M - 7M - 7M - 5M - 5M

Remember, the highest dollar value in any year cannot be greater than 2x the cheapest year. So a deal with $3M as a salary in one of the years means that the max he could earn in any season on that deal is $6M.

[JoeLassister]

Remember, the highest dollar value in any year cannot be greater than 2x the cheapest year. So a deal with $3M as a salary in one of the years means that the max he could earn in any season on that deal is $6M.

fawk. Doesn't change much though.

4M - 4M - 4M - 6M - 6M - 6M - 5M - 5M

or 3,5M - 3,5M - 5M - 5M - 6,5M - 6,5M - 5M - 5M

or anything that fits the bill.

[Machine of Loving Grace]

The contract he gave Price was $5.5M, $5.75M, $6.75M and then $7M for the last three seasons. I could see him doing similar with Subban but it seems to me that Bergevin refuses to sign him long term.

[brobin]

Why does a player want long term security?

Because you are only one play away from the end of your career.... see Marc Savard and Chris Pronger who collect their cash despite being finished.

.

It's called disability insurance. Many players carry permanent disability insurance that covers them beyond any insurance for their existing contract.

[Commandant]

It's called disability insurance. Many players carry permanent disability insurance that covers them beyond any insurance for their existing contract.

1) Its expensive to buy (and added expense for the player that reduces the value of his short term contract).

2) The payout is less than being under contract.

3) What if he gets a nagging injury... not one that makes him medically unable to play, but one that means his level of play is much lower. Insurance won't pay out, and his next contract will reflect his reduced effectiveness.

there are a ton of reasons why a player would ask for job security.