Jump to content

Galchenyuk's new contract.


Dalhabs
 Share

Recommended Posts

Haha, I', not biting on which is best, long term, or bridge, I like bridge, but just my opinion, and that is based on what the stars for the Habs have received from this management team.

If it's good enough for Price and Subban, it's good enough for Galchenyuk.

Having said that, I think Galchenyuk is a sure bet, so I'm happy either way...

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bridge deal or long term? How much $?

I feel it has to be a bridge at around 4.5M/year if he finishes this season at this pace with 50-60 points.

Not sure if Forsburg is an RFA this year - is he in year 2 or 3 of his contract? If he is in year 3, than Galchenyuk will probably be under whatever Forsburg gets.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if Forsburg is an RFA this year - is he in year 2 or 3 of his contract? If he is in year 3, than Galchenyuk will probably be under whatever Forsburg gets.

One more season for Forsberg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Galchenyuk would prefer a bridge deal. Question is, do we try and save money by locking him up now, or pay much more later, like we did with Subban.

I say MB tells him and the agent this is how we do things here. Like Korp says Price and Subban signed the bridge deal......ink up kid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Locking him in lower in a long term (like Pacs) could be beneficial. Aviods the Subban hitting it out of the park during his bridge deal. t However Subban worked out great for team and player. They said prove how good you are BEFORE we open the vault. He did and the habs benefit. So either way seems to have its advantages. Finally the habs have these GREAT tough calls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Galchenyuk doesn't want a long term deal, he doesn't have the stats to get the dollars.So the best for him is probably 2 years, prove how good he is and then BAM out of the park.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stogey24

Didn't Gallagher just avoid a bridge deal and sign a long term one? Perhaps MB will use that philosophy with Chucky

What you see is what you get with Gallgher. He's a 40pt guy, I'd say pretty much his ceiling and he'll be consistent with that number. Pretty easy contract to give.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If MB were smart, and I'm pretty sure he is, he'd better sign AG to a long-termed, medium money contract now. Something like the Gallagher contract but more money. There's no telling how high the ceiling is for AG, but if MB waits until after the supposed bridge deal, he'll end up paying through the teeth. And, along with Subbans deal, paying two players close to 20 mil/yr will really handcuff the club going forward

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If MB were smart, and I'm pretty sure he is, he'd better sign AG to a long-termed, medium money contract now. Something like the Gallagher contract but more money. There's no telling how high the ceiling is for AG, but if MB waits until after the supposed bridge deal, he'll end up paying through the teeth. And, along with Subbans deal, paying two players close to 20 mil/yr will really handcuff the club going forward

My opinion as well. Kicking the tire to see if a 5,5M$/season for 6 to 8 seasons would be enough for Galchenyuk to bite.

I'm like 80% sure he'll command a Subban-like salary in the future so better try to pull a Pacioretty here instead of paying big.

With Subban, it was 99% sure. I was very vocal about it and wanted to make everything possible to avoid the bridge.

That being said, you'll find PLENTY of guys here in favor of a bridge deal, no matter what, no matter who.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If MB were smart, and I'm pretty sure he is, he'd better sign AG to a long-termed, medium money contract now. Something like the Gallagher contract but more money. There's no telling how high the ceiling is for AG, but if MB waits until after the supposed bridge deal, he'll end up paying through the teeth. And, along with Subbans deal, paying two players close to 20 mil/yr will really handcuff the club going forward

FOR that very reason his agent will likely ask for short term and then as HR said "bam, out of the park" huge deal in to years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

100% agree.

I wanted Subban locked up for 12 years befor le the lockout.

Given galchenyuks current stats $5.5m/8 yrs might get it done.

My opinion as well. Kicking the tire to see if a 5,5M$/season for 6 to 8 seasons would be enough for Galchenyuk to bite.

I'm like 80% sure he'll command a Subban-like salary in the future so better try to pull a Pacioretty here instead of paying big.

With Subban, it was 99% sure. I was very vocal about it and wanted to make everything possible to avoid the bridge.

That being said, you'll find PLENTY of guys here in favor of a bridge deal, no matter what, no matter who.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

100% agree.

I wanted Subban locked up for 12 years befor le the lockout.

Given galchenyuks current stats $5.5m/8 yrs might get it done.

Given his top-3 pedigree and that there are plenty of $6M+ comparables (on six year deals let alone eight when those last two would be the most expensive not to mention that the cap is higher now than when most of those comparables were signed), there is no way $5.5 M gets it done. If it's 8 years, it's likely somewhere around $6.5 M.

Let's say he's offered a $5.5 M AAV over eight years or a bridge of $3.5 M for two years and opts for the latter. All he has to get after that to match your proposed $5.5 over eight years is $37 M over the next six years, or a $6.17 M cap hit which, if he progressed as expected in those two bridge years, would probably be pretty easy. For him to commit long-term, there needs to be greater incentive as odds are, he'd beat that $44 M (5.5 x 8) figure pretty easily with shorter-term pacts. This would likely favour the team too much for Galchenyuk to consider, the potential value loss is almost exclusively on his side of the table.

Let's say he's offered a $6.5 M AAV over eight years or a bridge of $3.5 M for two years and opts for the latter. To match my proposed $6.5 M over eight years, he'd need to get $45 M over the next six years, or a $7.5 M cap hit. If he progresses well as expected, he might get that or it may come in lower if he doesn't reach the full level of expectations. Now, there's somewhat of a value trade-off for Galchenyuk in that if he does become a high end star, he's leaving money on the table but if he's a 60 point player, he's not going to get that $7.5 M in his next deal so he's making money by taking the eight years now. Going long-term becomes more a legit consideration at this level whereas at a $5.5 M AAV long-term, he's all but certain to be leaving a fair amount on the table.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given his top-3 pedigree and that there are plenty of $6M+ comparables (on six year deals let alone eight when those last two would be the most expensive not to mention that the cap is higher now than when most of those comparables were signed), there is no way $5.5 M gets it done. If it's 8 years, it's likely somewhere around $6.5 M.

Let's say he's offered a $5.5 M AAV over eight years or a bridge of $3.5 M for two years and opts for the latter. All he has to get after that to match your proposed $5.5 over eight years is $37 M over the next six years, or a $6.17 M cap hit which, if he progressed as expected in those two bridge years, would probably be pretty easy. For him to commit long-term, there needs to be greater incentive as odds are, he'd beat that $44 M (5.5 x 8) figure pretty easily with shorter-term pacts. This would likely favour the team too much for Galchenyuk to consider, the potential value loss is almost exclusively on his side of the table.

Let's say he's offered a $6.5 M AAV over eight years or a bridge of $3.5 M for two years and opts for the latter. To match my proposed $6.5 M over eight years, he'd need to get $45 M over the next six years, or a $7.5 M cap hit. If he progresses well as expected, he might get that or it may come in lower if he doesn't reach the full level of expectations. Now, there's somewhat of a value trade-off for Galchenyuk in that if he does become a high end star, he's leaving money on the table but if he's a 60 point player, he's not going to get that $7.5 M in his next deal so he's making money by taking the eight years now. Going long-term becomes more a legit consideration at this level whereas at a $5.5 M AAV long-term, he's all but certain to be leaving a fair amount on the table.

True. 6,5M$ is most probable than 5,5M$. Kids in EDM signed for 6M$ a few years back when the cap was lower.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it is a really tough call because the assumption is that the cap will increase,but due to oil and the C$ it may not, it could actually go down. What then? If Alex sign 6 or 8 years now he avoids that problem.It is something that a smart GM like MB is definitely going to take into account. He is an RFA with ok #'s but not great. He has lots of potential but how much are we paying for that these days.He does not have the leverage that PK had and in spite of what my friend Habs 29 thinks, that was a wash in the end. So I say again this is a tough call on both sides. I really do not know which way it goes. Probably 2 year bridge and hope for the best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think he's got the numbers to get $3.5m/yr over two years, unless he has a much stronger finish. Both duschane and johansson had much better nbers than what Galchenyuk is on pace for. He also hasn't out up the same numbers as Hall, RNH or Eberle when they got their $6m deals.

I think Maxpac signed long-term because he had a career threatening injury and that probably influenced his willingness to sign long-term. We may have the same incentive to opt for security for Galchenyuk.

Given his top-3 pedigree and that there are plenty of $6M+ comparables (on six year deals let alone eight when those last two would be the most expensive not to mention that the cap is higher now than when most of those comparables were signed), there is no way $5.5 M gets it done. If it's 8 years, it's likely somewhere around $6.5 M.

Let's say he's offered a $5.5 M AAV over eight years or a bridge of $3.5 M for two years and opts for the latter. All he has to get after that to match your proposed $5.5 over eight years is $37 M over the next six years, or a $6.17 M cap hit which, if he progressed as expected in those two bridge years, would probably be pretty easy. For him to commit long-term, there needs to be greater incentive as odds are, he'd beat that $44 M (5.5 x 8) figure pretty easily with shorter-term pacts. This would likely favour the team too much for Galchenyuk to consider, the potential value loss is almost exclusively on his side of the table.

Let's say he's offered a $6.5 M AAV over eight years or a bridge of $3.5 M for two years and opts for the latter. To match my proposed $6.5 M over eight years, he'd need to get $45 M over the next six years, or a $7.5 M cap hit. If he progresses well as expected, he might get that or it may come in lower if he doesn't reach the full level of expectations. Now, there's somewhat of a value trade-off for Galchenyuk in that if he does become a high end star, he's leaving money on the table but if he's a 60 point player, he's not going to get that $7.5 M in his next deal so he's making money by taking the eight years now. Going long-term becomes more a legit consideration at this level whereas at a $5.5 M AAV long-term, he's all but certain to be leaving a fair amount on the table.

True. 6,5M$ is most probable than 5,5M$. Kids in EDM signed for 6M$ a few years back when the cap was lower.

They also had much better numbers than Galchenyuk. There's also the wildcard risk of a lower salary cap with the current state of the CDN$. I work in oil and gas and our biggest fear right now is a return to $30/bbl, which is going to drive the cdn$ lower and that in turn will adversely effect te cap.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually I don't think Galchenyuk has the same leverage that Subban has, because, unlike Sunban he hasn't produced at a level that you can gaurantee he will be a 85+ point player. That's why I think he may be willing to sign longer term for security - especially since he did have a potentially career ending injury.

it is a really tough call because the assumption is that the cap will increase,but due to oil and the C$ it may not, it could actually go down. What then? If Alex sign 6 or 8 years now he avoids that problem.It is something that a smart GM like MB is definitely going to take into account. He is an RFA with ok #'s but not great. He has lots of potential but how much are we paying for that these days.He does not have the leverage that PK had and in spite of what my friend Habs 29 thinks, that was a wash in the end. So I say again this is a tough call on both sides. I really do not know which way it goes. Probably 2 year bridge and hope for the best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have faith Bergy will do fine in whatever he gets done, I simply am no capologist and don't know which is best for Habs?

As a #3 pick doing very well, he aint going anywhere anytime soon.

But still get a chuckle out of some who are certain he f'ed up with Subban. Why is a mill or two one way or other of any importance? Subban is not doing too badly and dont hear anyone complaining that he is overpaid or term is too long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think he's got the numbers to get $3.5m/yr over two years, unless he has a much stronger finish. Both duschane and johansson had much better nbers than what Galchenyuk is on pace for. He also hasn't out up the same numbers as Hall, RNH or Eberle when they got their $6m deals.

Funny you mention Duchene as he is the exact comparable I used for the $3.5 M figure. He was a 3rd overall pick and signed a two year, $7 M contract after posting 28 points in 58 games (0.48 PPG). Now, Galchenyuk's PPG pace is higher this year (he already has 31 points) but Duchene had the better first two seasons of the two to offset that. They are very strong comparables, especially when you consider the increase in the cap since then. If Galchenyuk finishes in the 45-50 point range, he'll have the numbers for $3.5 M on a bridge deal.

The Edmonton trio all signed extensions coming off their second seasons which puts them in a bit of a different boat. But, let's look at Nugent-Hopkins since he was the latest of the trio to sign. He inked his $6 M per year deal coming off a 2012-13 season in which he actually produced less than Galchenyuk. The cap at that time was $64.3 M; it's projected to be about 10-12% higher than that for when Galchenyuk's extension kicks in. (You note the decline in the Cdn $ but the rest of the TV money is coming into play to offset that; next year's cap won't be lower than what it is now.) Add 10-12% to your $5.5 M proposal (since you want to slot Galchenyuk behind the Edmonton trio in terms of money) to account for the difference in cap between then and now. That makes that $5.5 M somewhere between $6.05 M and $6.215 M.

$5.5 M is too low for him to take for eight years. I could see him taking that for six (since only two UFA years would be bought out then and he'd hit the open market at 27) but those back two seasons are going to be enough to drag that cap hit into the $6 M+ range if he's going to sign a max-term deal.

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...