habs rule Posted June 7, 2015 Share Posted June 7, 2015 if he is worth 33 mill .......... kieth, doughty, hedman, subban, weber, petrangelo and the likes are worth 150 mill. nah won't fit under the cap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICEWATER77 Posted June 7, 2015 Share Posted June 7, 2015 Damn straight, KoRP! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted June 7, 2015 Share Posted June 7, 2015 Salary for players is all a gamble every time a contract is signed, and the values change as well as the commodities importance from year to year, this year it's D men, next year it's RW's, the next year it's muscle, the next year it's skill, it all depends on team needs and holes in lineups, and availability to fill that hole. For every argument saying Petry for instance isn't worth his new deal, there is an example such as Dion Pilon in Toronto that indicates Petry is worth every cent... Opinions are like A$$holes, everyone has one, and Bergevin signed the best UFA possible for the Montreal Canadiens roster deficiencies, end of story. yep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habs30/31 Posted June 7, 2015 Share Posted June 7, 2015 yep As I its said its a good sign by MB. Petry was our best dman in the play offs. In the second round he was by far the best. How do you let that go, and then cry nobody was available come july? Our D looks better this summer than it did last. Money wise........... other than Price, Pacs and Gally every Canadien is over paid as far as I'm concerned. Buts that's just how it is. A gamble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IN THE HEARTS OF MEN Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 -price, patch and gally?? what about markov, petry, gilbert, beaulieau, pateryn, tinordi, mitchell, flynn, weise, smith pelly, delarose, plex, AG27 and DD are all not over paid. some under paid and some at fair value -leaving just Pk subban, emelin, eller, tokarski, PAP and prust all over paid -thats my 2 cents and thats without singling out regular season or playoff performance to help justify your answer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Subban and Eller are overpaid? And Tokarski has a significant salary? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Tokarski making a $562,000 cap hit on a $575,000 salary being overpaid might be the funniest thing I've read on this forum in a long time. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Subban is overpaid. He has the fifth highest cap hit in the league. Great as he is, I'm not sure he's the league's 5th most valuable player; he's not even the most valuable player on the Habs., for Pete's sake. And I say this as a HUGE PK Subban fan. This is not meant as a criticism of the contract, because MB had no choice. I remain a little bit irked, though, that Subban went all-out for maximum value irrespective of the damage it would do to the team's salary structure. Like it would have killed him to take $8 mil or something. That he did go all out might be just business - but given the emphasis he put upon 'respect' when talking about the contract, I suspect that he was looking for payback for the fact that the Bergevin regime itself did not show 100% confidence in him at the start, and seemed to share in some of the concerns about his 'character.' Having failed to offer him informal avenues of 'respect' proportionate to his talent, the team was consequently forced to put its money where its mouth hadn't been. I can't blame Subban for that, because there is no way a player that gifted should have had to put up with all the slurs and slander he endured early in his career. At least, that's one theory. (Note that I'm not trying to revive the debate over whether MB shouldn't have forced the bridge deal). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 You have to look at when a contract is signed. Imagine Price was a UFA this summer. You think he's gonna sign for a $6.5M cap hit? Every contract signed before CBA chances that limited contract length need to be examined with context to new deals. Want the context on Subban? His cap hit is $2.5M less than Kane and Toews, who also signed deals post new CBA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbhatt Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Subban is overpaid. He has the fifth highest cap hit in the league. Great as he is, I'm not sure he's the league's 5th most valuable player; he's not even the most valuable player on the Habs., for Pete's sake. And I say this as a HUGE PK Subban fan. This is not meant as a criticism of the contract, because MB had no choice. I remain a little bit irked, though, that Subban went all-out for maximum value irrespective of the damage it would do to the team's salary structure. Like it would have killed him to take $8 mil or something. That he did go all out might be just business - but given the emphasis he put upon 'respect' when talking about the contract, I suspect that he was looking for payback for the fact that the Bergevin regime itself did not show 100% confidence in him at the start, and seemed to share in some of the concerns about his 'character.' Having failed to offer him informal avenues of 'respect' proportionate to his talent, the team was consequently forced to put its money where its mouth hadn't been. I can't blame Subban for that, because there is no way a player that gifted should have had to put up with all the slurs and slander he endured early in his career. At least, that's one theory. (Note that I'm not trying to revive the debate over whether MB shouldn't have forced the bridge deal). Well said...you hit the nail on the head. Maybe throw in the ridiculous tax discrepancy as icing on that cake as well: getting 9 in Montreal is like getting 7 in many U.S. cities when it comes to actual take-home pay, and there's no way a player can just ignore a 2 million dollar swing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IN THE HEARTS OF MEN Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Tokarski making a $562,000 cap hit on a $575,000 salary being overpaid might be the funniest thing I've read on this forum in a long time. so you got my drift.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stogey24 Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Subban is overpaid. He has the fifth highest cap hit in the league. Great as he is, I'm not sure he's the league's 5th most valuable player; he's not even the most valuable player on the Habs., for Pete's sake. And I say this as a HUGE PK Subban fan. This is not meant as a criticism of the contract, because MB had no choice. I remain a little bit irked, though, that Subban went all-out for maximum value irrespective of the damage it would do to the team's salary structure. Like it would have killed him to take $8 mil or something. That he did go all out might be just business - but given the emphasis he put upon 'respect' when talking about the contract, I suspect that he was looking for payback for the fact that the Bergevin regime itself did not show 100% confidence in him at the start, and seemed to share in some of the concerns about his 'character.' Having failed to offer him informal avenues of 'respect' proportionate to his talent, the team was consequently forced to put its money where its mouth hadn't been. I can't blame Subban for that, because there is no way a player that gifted should have had to put up with all the slurs and slander he endured early in his career. At least, that's one theory. (Note that I'm not trying to revive the debate over whether MB shouldn't have forced the bridge deal). As easy as it is to say now, when you see game changing talent like Subban, you don't bridge the contract. He was putting up consistent enough numbers to lock him up off his ELC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 As easy as it is to say now, when you see game changing talent like Subban, you don't bridge the contract. He was putting up consistent enough numbers to lock him up off his ELC. I think Bergevin felt very strongly that he had to establish the principle of the bridge deal as a way of informing future negotiations - i.e., he had to send the message that he was not going to be a pushover in negotiations. But I also suspect Bergevin, Mr. Old School, foolishly shared in the erroneous, league-wide concern that PK was not a good team player and that he had an attitude/maturity problem, and didn't want to get locked into a long-term deal with a guy who might prove to be a punk or a locker-room problem. I'm pretty sure he now regrets making this mistake about PK. This sort of thing is one of the risks you run when you bring in a new management regime; they don't really know the players yet, but have to make major decisions about them without full information. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 As easy as it is to say now, when you see game changing talent like Subban, you don't bridge the contract. He was putting up consistent enough numbers to lock him up off his ELC. dlbalr has already laid out why bridge was not in err, as well Subban is locked up till his game may start to fade when is 32-33, vs signing him for 5-6 years after ELC and need to resign when is 29-30. So was a smart way to go if looking long term... period. Galchenyuk being bridged will likely follow same route. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 dlbalr has already laid out why bridge was not in err, as well Subban is locked up till his game may start to fade when is 32-33, vs signing him for 5-6 years after ELC and need to resign when is 29-30. So was a smart way to go if looking long term... period. Galchenyuk being bridged will likely follow same route. You are exactly correct sir. The bridge deal did not hurt us except emotionally. It was the prudent way to go. In the end both are winners, Subban answered the challenge and MB got the years he wanted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 MB had a choice. He could have avoided not wasting money on a bum like Briere and signed SUbban for 8 years at a max of $6.5M, instead of the bridge deal. Once he missed that boat, he needed to get him signed before Kane and Toews signed their deals. MB tried to play hardball with a Norris winning RFA and got screwed by his own cheapness. Subban is overpaid. He has the fifth highest cap hit in the league. Great as he is, I'm not sure he's the league's 5th most valuable player; he's not even the most valuable player on the Habs., for Pete's sake. And I say this as a HUGE PK Subban fan. This is not meant as a criticism of the contract, because MB had no choice. I remain a little bit irked, though, that Subban went all-out for maximum value irrespective of the damage it would do to the team's salary structure. Like it would have killed him to take $8 mil or something. That he did go all out might be just business - but given the emphasis he put upon 'respect' when talking about the contract, I suspect that he was looking for payback for the fact that the Bergevin regime itself did not show 100% confidence in him at the start, and seemed to share in some of the concerns about his 'character.' Having failed to offer him informal avenues of 'respect' proportionate to his talent, the team was consequently forced to put its money where its mouth hadn't been. I can't blame Subban for that, because there is no way a player that gifted should have had to put up with all the slurs and slander he endured early in his career. At least, that's one theory. (Note that I'm not trying to revive the debate over whether MB shouldn't have forced the bridge deal). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 dlbalr has already laid out why bridge was not in err, as well Subban is locked up till his game may start to fade when is 32-33, vs signing him for 5-6 years after ELC and need to resign when is 29-30. So was a smart way to go if looking long term... period. Galchenyuk being bridged will likely follow same route. I still don't agree with why the bridge deal was not in err and don't buy the savings wash out. I don't see how not signing a brdige deal with Karlsson hurt Ottawa, or how not signing Tavares to a bridge deal was a mistake for the Islanders??? Unless Dbalr can convince me that the Karlsson and Tavares contracts were mistakes, I don't buy the bridge contract with Subban was not a mistake.ALl the bridge deal did was allow us to waste money on an old washed out bum like Briere, who was replaced by a younder useless bum like PAP. How many stud defenceman fade at 32??? Most star dman don't fade until they hit the other side of 35, so Subban still has another homerun contract he will sign after this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 I still don't agree with why the bridge deal was not in err and don't buy the savings wash out. I don't see how not signing a brdige deal with Karlsson hurt Ottawa, or how not signing Tavares to a bridge deal was a mistake for the Islanders??? Unless Dbalr can convince me that the Karlsson and Tavares contracts were mistakes, I don't buy the bridge contract with Subban was not a mistake. Until we see what they get in their next contract, the numbers can't really be run. (That's why I had to wait for Subban's big deal to be signed to do the math.) Karlsson becomes a UFA at 29, Tavares 27. Both are going to get huge deals. Until we see how pricey those contracts are and in particular, if those players are actually kept, it can't be said with any certainty one way or the other if it was a mistake or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 I still don't agree with why the bridge deal was not in err and don't buy the savings wash out. I don't see how not signing a brdige deal with Karlsson hurt Ottawa, or how not signing Tavares to a bridge deal was a mistake for the Islanders??? Karlsson will probably make $11M-$12M per season when his deal is up in 19-20 as a 29 year old on an eight year anchor. Tavares is a different situation. Like Crosby, he openly admits to taking less money to help the Islanders. He does a superstar discount. If you think Pacioretty is getting anything less than $9M per season on his next contract you're silly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illWill Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 MB had a choice. He could have avoided not wasting money on a bum like Briere and signed SUbban for 8 years at a max of $6.5M, instead of the bridge deal. Once he missed that boat, he needed to get him signed before Kane and Toews signed their deals. MB tried to play hardball with a Norris winning RFA and got screwed by his own cheapness. Are those numbers confirmed by reports or just pulled out of thin air? I know that I wasn't involved in the negotiating process so I can't comment on what salary and term were discussed, or what each side wanted. Also, MB didn't try to negotiate with a Norris winning RFA, that happened prior to him winning the award. At the time P.K had only put up 38 and 36 points in a season, wasn't liked or respected around the league, needed work on his defensive game and really hadn't proven that much to receive such a contract. It's easy in hindsight to see he was a superstar in the making, but personally I'd rather a GM not gamble on potential by handing out massive long term contracts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Always been with H29 on this one. Still don't see how the bridge deal helped us 3 years ago when we were totally not contenders. The difference between paying Subban about 6 M$ on the cap hit instead of 9M$ is important RIGHT NOW, while we also have Price, Plek, Patch, Petry, Markov on board. It prevents us from upgrading DD or Eller for a player that would make an extra 3M$. The importance is shown on the % taken by Subban's contract every year, not the total amount of Millions spent between the beginning of the bridge and the final year of his next contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 For some reason, I can't quote right now so @ MoLG So ? This is 4 years from now. In 2018-2019, if they are not a cap team, Ottawa should think about moving Karlsson before this deal ends for blue for bluechip prospects/high picks/quality player of some sorts, not re-signing him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 We likely should have signed Subban to a long term deal and abused the NHL's CBA, not to mention Bergevin should have been less worried about free cap space which he ended up wasting on Briere. But we didn't and Subban is still a Hab so I really... don't... care too much? I'll pay top dollar for a franchise player 10/10 over middling players. Subban's contract isn't going to stop us from building a Cup contender. If Subban makes $9M on the cap and performs at an $8M players ability, he's still performing at a level only two, maybe three other players could play up to (Price, Pacioretty). It's a $1M overpayment. Better that than Parenteau at $4.5M playing like a $2.5M player or Eller making $3.5M to be no better than a $1.7M player or Emelin making $4.1M to perform like a $2.5M player. That adds up much faster than getting $7M-$9M of top defenceman play. Pay the stars like stars and the roleplayers like roleplayers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habs30/31 Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 We likely should have signed Subban to a long term deal and abused the NHL's CBA, not to mention Bergevin should have been less worried about free cap space which he ended up wasting on Briere. But we didn't and Subban is still a Hab so I really... don't... care too much? I'll pay top dollar for a franchise player 10/10 over middling players. Subban's contract isn't going to stop us from building a Cup contender. If Subban makes $9M on the cap and performs at an $8M players ability, he's still performing at a level only two, maybe three other players could play up to (Price, Pacioretty). It's a $1M overpayment. Better that than Parenteau at $4.5M playing like a $2.5M player or Eller making $3.5M to be no better than a $1.7M player or Emelin making $4.1M to perform like a $2.5M player. That adds up much faster than getting $7M-$9M of top defenceman play. Pay the stars like stars and the roleplayers like roleplayers. you forgot 8.5 million for plaks and dd............who make up one centerman between them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICEWATER77 Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 You hear of players in the NFL re-structuring their contracts quite often..generally it's a QB relocating some of his millions so his GM can bring in help. Is this allowed in the NHL? I've never heard of it if it has happened Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.