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

[hab29RETIRED]

Kaberle was not a UFA we signed. We were actually dumber picking up other people's garbage.

Because Kaberle was a free agent brought in by the last, and desperate, GM. Comparables are nice negotiating tools, but leverage is what counts. PK has little leverage this season. If he was the final piece on a cup contender, then he would have lots of leverage.At this point, PK has to decide if he wants to sit to see if his leverage improves. For example, Markov sucks, Kaberle is worse. The team is in a playoff position, etc. something to make Bergevin need PK back in the lineup. On the other hand, if the D look pretty good without him, he loses even more leverage.

[hab29RETIRED]

I agree. I can see PK costing over $7m in 3 to 4 years.

Wow, so many people apparently don't care to see Subban signed unless it's for dimes? Fact is, you have to pay good money to keep your talent. If you just throw up you hands, say 'screw it, he wants too much money', and trade him for something less valuable, you're team will always be stuck in mediocrity. PK is obviously an outstanding talent. You can't keep players like him around without dipping into the bank.

[hab29RETIRED]

No way you get him for that term for under $5m. I think average hit of $5.5m is about as lowest he would sign for.

This is the key. Fan base thinks we suck, hence it's ok to play hard ball with PK since "we aren't going anywhere anyway" and "it will only help our overall draft position."

Problem is, we don't suck as bad as our record showed last season. We will win our share of games and be in the thick of things come end March - mid april. Theoretical leverage in the fans and press' eyes just went out the window. Pressure's on now; what do you do?

My opinion? 8yrs @ a shade under $5mil per year.

[hab29RETIRED]

Sure he has leverage. The habs have only two top 4 dman on their roster and he and Meehan know that.

I don't think you understand what I am saying. In the short term, Subban sitting out has no leverage if the team is getting along fine without him. If Markov goes down, then he will have leverage. I am not talking about trading him, I am talking about leverage while he sits.

[Habinator33]

Personally I think there is too much hype surrounding Subban and it makes him out to be a better player then he actually is. I still view him as a good player I just think there are too many people that make it sound like he just won the Norris. Thats why I rather go with a bridge contract on him just like with Pacioretty and Price to further watch his development especially under new coaches. If he develops into the player I hope he does then eventually he'll be paid for it and if he doesn't develop into the player we don't have to worry about having yet another player thats not earning his contract.

I understand the risks with giving him a long term contract or a short term contract right now. I am more comfortable with the risks associated with a short term.

[Habinator33]

Alex Edler just signed a 6 year 30 million deal. Could've been UFA at seasons end. Any impact on Subban?

[brobin]

Kaberle was not a UFA we signed. We were actually dumber picking up other people's garbage.

Sorry, didn't mean to imply it was us that have him the contract. It was a Ufa deal when he got his money. Subban is an RFA.

[brobin]

If Lombardi stuck to his guns last year and didn't resign Dowdy, would the kings have won the cup last year?

In these situations things can get ugly quickly- that's how the Flames ended up moving Gilmour for Leeman.

Lol... Right...

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

I keep coming back to the question of dollars, about which, according to one rumour, the Habs and Meehan agree. If they do, that's a real stumper...and can only mean that Bergevin is concerned that Subban will regress and therefore doesn't want a longer-term contract. In other words, he's not yet convinced that PK truly is a high-quality player. (Like I say, he is a #2 legitimate defenceman on a good team. People who try to pretend otherwise must not have been watching the same player I have).

All I can say is, if we are in a position to lock up Subban long term for under $5 mil, then Bergevin would be clinically insane NOT to do it.

If both sides agree on something over $5 million, then I find that an overpayment based on PK's actual performance and I don't understand why Bergevin would agree to it, even contingent upon the deal being a 'bridging' contract only.

I'm all for MB *if* he is making a stand on paying for performance only, rather than potential. But these other scenarios are head-scratchers.

I guess time will tell.

[brobin]

Kulikov. Two years, $5M. He is a closer compatible to PK... Same age, first rounder, plays over 20 minutes a game...

I give PK more, but not double... I still think 7 to 7.5 over two is a fair deal. 8 would be fine.

[Machine of Loving Grace]

I don't think you understand what I am saying. In the short term, Subban sitting out has no leverage if the team is getting along fine without him. If Markov goes down, then he will have leverage. I am not talking about trading him, I am talking about leverage while he sits.

The problem with that is that it's bad for Montreal and Dallas to be going into the first game of 48 without star players. Why risk it? If Montreal is shooting for the playoffs (which they are), one loss to Toronto because they didn't have strong enough D depth and had to play Diaz or Weber instead of P.K. Subban is now the difference between making the playoffs and not. That's a major GM error.

Bergevin better be praying for a win.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Alex Edler just signed a 6 year 30 million deal. Could've been UFA at seasons end. Any impact on Subban?

Only in that Edler has a better NHL resumé than Subban and therefore should make more money than him. Hell, I wouldn't mind it if Bergervin made that the hill he'll die on, to coin a phrase.

Machine, the deal with Subban has potential long-term implications for the franchise. I don't want MB to feel forced into fundamentally overpaying because he HAS to make the playoffs with a mediocre team. Look at Gillis in Vancouver, letting Ehrhoff walk rather than pay him a deal that made no sense; ditto New Jersey when their salary structure was still under control, with Gomer and Gio. Well run teams don't keel over every time a player makes a demand. Bergevin will never have more leverage than he has right now. He should use it. (I'm just worried he's using it for the wrong reasons, e.g., being 'unconvinced' that PK really is a strong player).

[hab29RETIRED]

Alex Edler just signed a 6 year 30 million deal. Could've been UFA at seasons end. Any impact on Subban?

Edler is in a different situation. He is playing for a contender (despite my reservations of the canucks having what it takes to win any big games), and took a hometown discount to be part of a potential winning team and fit in the cap.

On the other hand, the habs under Gainey have walked away from guys that bled for them (koivu), and been willing to pay the big bucks to their own guys. The only home grown talent the Gainey regime signed to big deals prior to them hitting their free agent summer that I can recall was brisebois. Markov was signed after the year ended. On the other hand he traded for the second worst contract in hockey (Gomez), picked up the inflated contract of Schneider after foolishly losing depth like Beauchemin and hainsey for nothing, who would have made the draft picks lost on Schneider unnecessary.

PG wasn't willing to take the chance on Gorges or pleks as RFA's but was willing to pick up lousy long-term contracts (bourque) or inflated washouts (Kaberle).

It was nice to see Price and Maxpac locked up before they hit their UFA years. I really think the habs long term can save between $1.5m to $2m/year if they lock Subban up long term now.

Lets not forget how that hill to die on turned out;)

Only in that Edler has a better NHL resumé than Subban and therefore should make more money than him. Hell, I wouldn't mind it if Bergervin made that the hill he'll die on, to coin a phrase.

[hab29RETIRED]

No way would I pay subban $5m on a short term deal. You don't pay that much to an RFA, unless you are buying some UFA years.

I think given the possibility of the players being hit with high escrow next year and possibly this year you structure a long-term average of $5.5m, but have less dollars this year and next.

I keep coming back to the question of dollars, about which, according to one rumour, the Habs and Meehan agree. If they do, that's a real stumper...and can only mean that Bergevin is concerned that Subban will regress and therefore doesn't want a longer-term contract. In other words, he's not yet convinced that PK truly is a high-quality player. (Like I say, he is a #2 legitimate defenceman on a good team. People who try to pretend otherwise must not have been watching the same player I have).

All I can say is, if we are in a position to lock up Subban long term for under $5 mil, then Bergevin would be clinically insane NOT to do it.

If both sides agree on something over $5 million, then I find that an overpayment based on PK's actual performance and I don't understand why Bergevin would agree to it, even contingent upon the deal being a 'bridging' contract only.

I'm all for MB *if* he is making a stand on paying for performance only, rather than potential. But these other scenarios are head-scratchers.

I guess time will tell.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

No way would I pay subban $5m on a short term deal. You don't pay that much to an RFA, unless you are buying some UFA years.

I think given the possibility of the players being hit with high escrow next year and possibly this year you structure a long-term average of $5.5m, but have less dollars this year and next.

That's why I find the rumour that the two sides are agreed on money so perplexing. It doesn't add up. As for Edler and the Canucks, Habs29, you'll find that that organization has done quite nicely in getting many players to play at a discount. That's a model to follow, but - arguably - you don't get there by throwing big money long-term at RFAs based on potential rather than performance.

[brobin]

It was nice to see Price and Maxpac locked up before they hit their UFA years. I really think the habs long term can save between $1.5m to $2m/year if they lock Subban up long term now.Lets not forget how that hill to die on turned out;)

I don't understand your rush. PK has 4 years of RFA. A bridge contract followed by locking him up prior to his UFA year is what people are suggesting.

[hab29RETIRED]

You get their by winning and throwing money initially to guys like Luongo. Back when they gave Kesler $5m, some in the media thought it was too high given his shott track record.

Habs need guys who want to win and are commited to Montreal. Which is why I think a young nucleus of Price, maxpac and subban locked up long-term will be good to attract more talent and may help in guys willing yo take less if the pieces are there to build a winner.

That's why I find the rumour that the two sides are agreed on money so perplexing. It doesn't add up. As for Edler and the Canucks, Habs29, you'll find that that organization has done quite nicely in getting many players to play at a discount. That's a model to follow, but - arguably - you don't get there by throwing big money long-term at RFAs based on potential rather than performance.

You get their by winning and throwing money initially to guys like Luongo. Back when they gave Kesler $5m, some in the media thought it was too high given his shott track record.

Habs need guys who want to win and are commited to Montreal. Which is why I think a young nucleus of Price, maxpac and subban locked up long-term will be good to attract more talent and may help in guys willing yo take less if the pieces are there to build a winner.

That's why I find the rumour that the two sides are agreed on money so perplexing. It doesn't add up. As for Edler and the Canucks, Habs29, you'll find that that organization has done quite nicely in getting many players to play at a discount. That's a model to follow, but - arguably - you don't get there by throwing big money long-term at RFAs based on potential rather than performance.

[hab29RETIRED]

I'd much rather sign a 23 or 24 year old to an 8 year deal then a 27 or 28 year old. I'dmuch rather have a guy locked up during his prime years (before he turns 31), then be forced to offer the long term years for the period that he is going to start his decline.

I was a big supporter of signing Gorges long term when he was an RFA. The habs could have signed Gorges for $1m to 1.5m/yr less if they signed him to a long term desk 5 months before they did. Even his agent said the habs could have saved a lot of money by signing him 5 months earlier.

Similarly when everyone was ragging on pleks and saying we should trade him after his miserable year, I had said I wanted him signed long term. Then when he got off to a hot start, I was saying to sign him long term, while most we're saying lets wait to see how he performs through the rest of the year. It cost a hell of a lot more to lock him up afterwards.

Teams that have players take home time discounts show faith in the guys they believe will become their core (based on their evaluation), players in turn return that faith with loyalty.

I don't understand your rush. PK has 4 years of RFA. A bridge contract followed by locking him up prior to his UFA year is what people are suggesting.

[TurdBurglar]

Kulikov. Two years, $5M. He is a closer compatible to PK... Same age, first rounder, plays over 20 minutes a game... I give PK more, but not double... I still think 7 to 7.5 over two is a fair deal. 8 would be fine.

What your saying is PK is equal to or better than Weber, Suter or Doughty. You are being a little delusional. If it's a bridge deal it's $6m, if it's long term it's $5m or under for sure.

I still think he's going to sign in the range of $5m-$5.5m, which would be fair. If he's holding out for more he's not what we're looking for. Very few team have success with greedy players (Washington(Ovechkin), New Jersey(Kovalchuk), Ottawa(Heatly), just to name a few. Yes Kovalchuk did make it to the finals once, we also made it to the conference finals with Gomez, didn't make his contract worth it. Look at teams built for success like Pittsburg. First re-sign both Malkin and Crosby settled for 7ish a piece, when they could of easily got 10 each, but to help the team be successful they settled for less for the good of the team. So I say again, if Subban is looking for more than $6m, trade him for picks and/or a replacement, he is not worth taking extra cap space to hinder team success. This is probably whats going on with MB right now.

[Machine of Loving Grace]

What your saying is PK is equal to or better than Weber, Suter or Doughty. You are being a little delusional. If it's a bridge deal it's $6m, if it's long term it's $5m or under for sure.

I still think he's going to sign in the range of $5m-$5.5m, which would be fair. If he's holding out for more he's not what we're looking for. Very few team have success with greedy players (Washington(Ovechkin), New Jersey(Kovalchuk), Ottawa(Heatly), just to name a few. Yes Kovalchuk did make it to the finals once, we also made it to the conference finals with Gomez, didn't make his contract worth it. Look at teams built for success like Pittsburg. First re-sign both Malkin and Crosby settled for 7ish a piece, when they could of easily got 10 each, but to help the team be successful they settled for less for the good of the team. So I say again, if Subban is looking for more than $6m, trade him for picks and/or a replacement, he is not worth taking extra cap space to hinder team success. This is probably whats going on with MB right now.

"Very few teams have success with greedy players"

You mean like Ken Dryden in the 70s sitting out for an entire year?

[bbp]

"Very few teams have success with greedy players"

You mean like Ken Dryden in the 70s sitting out for an entire year?

I dont think that can be qualified as greedy. It was for education wasn't it? For a career after hockey? I mean sure it wasnt team oriented but it was not a money grab by any stretch of the word.

[Machine of Loving Grace]

I dont think that can be qualified as greedy. It was for education wasn't it? For a career after hockey? I mean sure it wasnt team oriented but it was not a money grab by any stretch of the word.

Sam Pollock had never been rejected on a contract offer before. Dryden said he was being low-balled by Pollock after winning the Conn Smythe so he sat the entire season and went back to McGill.

I can promise you that if message boards existed back then, everyone would have been screaming to trade that selfish money grubbing bum to California because he's not a team player, nobody calls him a leader and he's too young to expect that sort of money. Also Bunny Laraque can get the job done and the team isn't in any hurry to bring him back.

[bbp]

Sam Pollock had never been rejected on a contract offer before. Dryden said he was being underpaid for winning the Conn Smythe so he sat the entire season and went back to McGill.

I can promise you that if message boards existed back then, everyone would have been screaming to trade that selfish money grubbing bum to California because he's not a team player, nobody calls him a leader and he's too young to expect that sort of money. Also Bunny Laraque can get the job done and the team isn't in any hurry to bring him back.

was unaware of that bit

[Zowpeb]

What your saying is PK is equal to or better than Weber, Suter or Doughty. You are being a little delusional. If it's a bridge deal it's $6m, if it's long term it's $5m or under for sure.

I still think he's going to sign in the range of $5m-$5.5m, which would be fair. If he's holding out for more he's not what we're looking for. Very few team have success with greedy players (Washington(Ovechkin), New Jersey(Kovalchuk), Ottawa(Heatly), just to name a few. Yes Kovalchuk did make it to the finals once, we also made it to the conference finals with Gomez, didn't make his contract worth it. Look at teams built for success like Pittsburg. First re-sign both Malkin and Crosby settled for 7ish a piece, when they could of easily got 10 each, but to help the team be successful they settled for less for the good of the team. So I say again, if Subban is looking for more than $6m, trade him for picks and/or a replacement, he is not worth taking extra cap space to hinder team success. This is probably whats going on with MB right now.

Pretty sure he was saying $8M over a 2 year period which is hardly delusional...I assume you were thinking he meant $7m to $8m per year...which would indeed be crazy.

[brobin]

What your saying is PK is equal to or better than Weber, Suter or Doughty. You are being a little delusional. If it's a bridge deal it's $6m, if it's long term it's $5m or under for sure.

I still think he's going to sign in the range of $5m-$5.5m, which would be fair. If he's holding out for more he's not what we're looking for. Very few team have success with greedy players (Washington(Ovechkin), New Jersey(Kovalchuk), Ottawa(Heatly), just to name a few. Yes Kovalchuk did make it to the finals once, we also made it to the conference finals with Gomez, didn't make his contract worth it. Look at teams built for success like Pittsburg. First re-sign both Malkin and Crosby settled for 7ish a piece, when they could of easily got 10 each, but to help the team be successful they settled for less for the good of the team. So I say again, if Subban is looking for more than $6m, trade him for picks and/or a replacement, he is not worth taking extra cap space to hinder team success. This is probably whats going on with MB right now.

It was 5 over two years. So I am saying more then 2.5 per year.