News: Barry Trotz working to extend Juuse Saros and sees no reason why he won't get it done

[Double Dion]

1C is far more critical, as well as Josi level 1D



Saros will never go for that, he’ll want term and he’ll get it from someone

This is his UFA deal and he’s never been paid before. He’s not going for the biggest cap hit I believe but he’s going for max term

No it's not. The last time the Flames made the finals their 1C was Conroy. Their 1D was Regehr. Their goalie had a 1.70 GAA and a .933 save percentage. Nothing takes an average team and elevates it like a goalie.

 

[KrisLetAngry]

Humans are greedy and Saros is human, he should want to get as much as possible. As for the NMC the last 2 big names to sign are Sorokin and Hellebuyck and they both got a NMC for at least 3 years

Yea NMC first 3 years then a NTC let's say 24 teams the next 1 or 2 years then a 12 to 16 team NTC in the end. Something like that.

 

[herzausstein]

It’s not just about the return. They keep showing they lack vision

Now they are build to draft in the middle of the 1st round. Not good enough to compete, not bad enough to land franchise prospects. Just happy with taking part

That’s the forever Minnesota model



I’m not saying RoR is a legit 1C but that’s the closest they got and I was complimentary

I’d be frustrated as heck as a fan knowing season after season they aren’t build to compete and the future doesn’t look that much different

We are terrible at drafting centers (or atleast historically). I mean our best center that we've ever drafted was the very first pick as a franchise David Legwand taken 2nd overall in 1998. Due to legit 1Cs rarely being available, it may take a miracle for us to get one.

 

[go4hockey]

A four or five year deal makes sense.

Not for the player.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

OK, but why would Saros consider that deal at all?

Because he wants to be in Nashville. So he'll compromise on term, not push for big money, and he saw the way the franchise handled Rinne at the end of his career, he'll understand that they'll take care of him. It's a bit different than in some other places. But I do see the team being willing to go to 6 years. It wouldn't shock me if Saros took just 5, but I think they can settle on 6.

If he wanted 7 or 8 years, or if he wanted the NMC clause, then he has every right to ask for those, but then that would be just like asking Trotz to trade him, and Trotz would accommodate him and trade him. Saros doesn't want to be traded somewhere else, he wants to be in Nashville. So they'll be able to compromise.

 

[HBK27]

Because he wants to be in Nashville. So he'll compromise on term, not push for big money, and he saw the way the franchise handled Rinne at the end of his career, he'll understand that they'll take care of him. It's a bit different than in some other places. But I do see the team being willing to go to 6 years. It wouldn't shock me if Saros took just 5, but I think they can settle on 6.

If he wanted 7 or 8 years, or if he wanted the NMC clause, then he has every right to ask for those, but then that would be just like asking Trotz to trade him, and Trotz would accommodate him and trade him. Saros doesn't want to be traded somewhere else, he wants to be in Nashville. So they'll be able to compromise.

Nashville is great and I could certainly understand his desire to stay there and give a bit of a hometown discount.

That's a big ask though to leave a lot of money / term on the table though and assume the team will just "take care of him" after his playing career, when likely new management and potentially even new owners will be in charge. Not to mention the league monitors how much former players make in their roles with former teams to ensure it's within the range of normal salary for those types of positions, so there's a limit as to how much he can realistically make up.

A year ago, Sorokin signed an 8 year, $66M contract with significant trade protection (4 year NMC, followed by 4 year 16 team no-trade list). He struggled this season and was benched for all but 1 game in the playoffs - which he got pulled from. Maybe he'll bounce back given his track record, but goalies are ridiculously volatile.

Hellebuyck signed a 7 year, $59M deal last summer and had a great regular season but struggled once again in the playoffs.

Those are the comps Saros is looking at...maybe he gives a bit on AAV and comes down to 6 years - but that puts him at 35 years old for his next contract, so maybe he's looking at one-year deals from then out at a likely lower AAV than he can secure right now.

As much as I'm sure he wants to stay there, I absolutely don't see him taking 3-4 years and 5-6 would surprise me as well. He could give up some on the AAV especially being in a no income tax state, but I think he still goes 7-8 years as a likely top 5 goalie in the league. Have to feel that this all gets sorted out before the draft, right?

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Nashville is great and I could certainly understand his desire to stay there and give a bit of a hometown discount.

That's a big ask though to leave a lot of money / term on the table though and assume the team will just "take care of him" after his playing career, when likely new management and potentially even new owners will be in charge. Not to mention the league monitors how much former players make in their roles with former teams to ensure it's within the range of normal salary for those types of positions, so there's a limit as to how much he can realistically make up.

A year ago, Sorokin signed an 8 year, $66M contract with significant trade protection (4 year NMC, followed by 4 year 16 team no-trade list). He struggled this season and was benched for all but 1 game in the playoffs - which he got pulled from. Maybe he'll bounce back given his track record, but goalies are ridiculously volatile.

Hellebuyck signed a 7 year, $59M deal last summer and had a great regular season but struggled once again in the playoffs.

Those are the comps Saros is looking at...maybe he gives a bit on AAV and comes down to 6 years - but that puts him at 35 years old for his next contract, so maybe he's looking at one-year deals from then out at a likely lower AAV than he can secure right now.

As much as I'm sure he wants to stay there, I absolutely don't see him taking 3-4 years and 5-6 would surprise me as well. He could give up some on the AAV especially being in a no income tax state, but I think he still goes 7-8 years as a likely top 5 goalie in the league. Have to feel that this all gets sorted out before the draft, right?

I'm not really referring to post-playing days in terms of "taking care of". Just more the tag-on short-term deals if he's still able to play at an NHL level after a 5- or 6-year deal expires. He still has to live up to his side of the bargain and be a capable player. Nothing for the league to look at.

I also don't think it's really an "ask" per se on Saros... it's more of a "tell". Longer term and an NMC clause that could become a problem in an Expansion Draft scenario can't be on the table. Period. Saros is within his rights to seek those, nobody is asking him to give them up. Just he won't get those in Nashville.

He has had a good 4 or 5 year run as a starter, but I don't see any Vezinas or playoff wins on his resume, he can't compare himself to the absolute top paid goalies yet. Or he can, but again, nobody should agree with that or offer him compensation accordingly. Having such a poor season this year really does put a damper on what he should be able to get.

I don't think there's any chance it "gets sorted out before the draft". He's eligible to extend after July 1st, which is after the draft, and Trotz will be very busy both at the draft and when the Free Agent frenzy opens up. Saros won't be the highest priority at that time. Or alternatively, it's ALREADY sorted out. But they still won't announce it until a bit later. It wouldn't surprise me if they already have established enough common ground in talks that the announcement is basically a formality at this point.

 

[HBK27]

I'm not really referring to post-playing days in terms of "taking care of". Just more the tag-on short-term deals if he's still able to play at an NHL level after a 5- or 6-year deal expires. He still has to live up to his side of the bargain and be a capable player. Nothing for the league to look at.

I also don't think it's really an "ask" per se on Saros... it's more of a "tell". Longer term and an NMC clause that could become a problem in an Expansion Draft scenario can't be on the table. Period. Saros is within his rights to seek those, nobody is asking him to give them up. Just he won't get those in Nashville.

He has had a good 4 or 5 year run as a starter, but I don't see any Vezinas or playoff wins on his resume, he can't compare himself to the absolute top paid goalies yet. Or he can, but again, nobody should agree with that or offer him compensation accordingly. Having such a poor season this year really does put a damper on what he should be able to get.

I don't think there's any chance it "gets sorted out before the draft". He's eligible to extend after July 1st, which is after the draft, and Trotz will be very busy both at the draft and when the Free Agent frenzy opens up. Saros won't be the highest priority at that time. Or alternatively, it's ALREADY sorted out. But they still won't announce it until a bit later. It wouldn't surprise me if they already have established enough common ground in talks that the announcement is basically a formality at this point.

Ultimately up to Saros, but given his position of strength I would be extremely surprised if he didn't get some form of NMC protection in his deal knowing that multiple expansion drafts are on the way. Otherwise, asking him to leave money, term and control of where he plays off the table is a mighty big ask.

Maybe you're right that he shouldn't compare himself to the top goalies in the league given the factors you've outlined. Good point about this probably going past July 1st. With no big name goalies hitting UFA, it probably shouldn't affect value too much, especially since Saros currently doesn't have any trade protection.

I do think that both camps have to have had ongoing discussions and a good sense of where this is going already, as if it doesn't look like a deal can be agreed upon then Trotz has to consider dealing him at the draft. Hope it all works out for you guys - ideally, he does give you guys that hometown deal and you can deal with what to do with Askarov/Saros in a few seasons once forced by their collective play or the expansion draft.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Ultimately up to Saros, but given his position of strength I would be extremely surprised if he didn't get some form of NMC protection in his deal knowing that multiple expansion drafts are on the way. Otherwise, asking him to leave money, term and control of where he plays off the table is a mighty big ask.

Maybe you're right that he shouldn't compare himself to the top goalies in the league given the factors you've outlined. Good point about this probably going past July 1st. With no big name goalies hitting UFA, it probably shouldn't affect value too much, especially since Saros currently doesn't have any trade protection.

I do think that both camps have to have had ongoing discussions and a good sense of where this is going already, as if it doesn't look like a deal can be agreed upon then Trotz has to consider dealing him at the draft. Hope it all works out for you guys - ideally, he does give you guys that hometown deal and you can deal with what to do with Askarov/Saros in a few seasons once forced by their collective play or the expansion draft.

The only thing I disagree with here is Saros having a "position of strength". He really doesn't have any leverage at all. The Preds aren't a contending team. I'm not big on Askarov's immediate readiness, but the Preds could easily roll out some stopgap goaltending, and given the mediocre level Saros played at last season, it seems like the team can at least do okay while they continue their retooling even with very average replacement level goaltending.

Meanwhile, there are teams who would trade something for Saros, even as a rental. So I think Trotz holds all the cards here. If there was going to be any truly hard bargaining anyway. Which again, I don't think is going to be the case. I'd rather have Saros on a somewhat team-friendly deal (like the 6x$6.67M) than not have him at all. But I'd rather not have him at all than have any higher term or an NMC clause involved. There are 4 active goalies atm with a Cap hit higher than $6.67M. A few more will join the club over the years of a Saros extension. But he'll stay comfortably in the top 10 goalie Cap hits for several more years with that extension. So it's not completely "unfair" or anything, given his relatively sparse resume. I'd be very comfortable making that sort of "max offer" a take-it-or-leave-it scenario, if it came down to that.