Player Discussion Cole Caufield: The little man with the big future.

[ReHabs]

I have feeling this going to be bad contract

Much better to bet on future performance and get 80-90% of that than to pay for past performance and get far less.

 

[Naslundforever]

 

[jrom]

With all the recent noise on Habs blogs and trash rumors sites about difficult negotiations with Brisson, can’t help to think that Habs org is leaking some of that to media.
Caufield’s contract structure is key for rebuild (in addition to drafting and developing properly).

 

[Nico Cauzuki]

With all the recent noise on Habs blogs and trash rumors sites about difficult negotiations with Brisson, can’t help to think that Habs org is leaking some of that to media.
Caufield’s contract structure is key for rebuild (in addition to drafting and developing properly).

this happens every year with every star player im not worried one bit about Caufields new contract he will be a Hab for a long time

 

[Captain97]

this happens every year with every star player im not worried one bit about Caufields new contract he will be a Hab for a long time

Wasn't he literally doing social media stuff with Suzuki a couple weeks ago? He seems to love it here, it's just figuring out the details it would seem.

I agree, every star goes through negotiations that aren't always instant

 

[Nico Cauzuki]

Wasn't he literally doing social media stuff with Suzuki a couple weeks ago? He seems to love it here, it's just figuring out the details it would seem.

I agree, every star goes through negotiations that aren't always instant

ive had a drink and a small conversation with Caufield mid season before hes surgery ( caught him at Palma ) apparently he goes there often and he told me how he likes the passion here and loves the attention and that Montreal has a great staff in place and a good future obviously hes not gonna go around saying he hates it here to fans but yea im sure he likes Montreal and will extend

 

[JeffreyLFC]

I think signing him to a 8 years contract would be a terrible mistake UNLESS we drive a very good bargain.

The more I analyze our roster and the less it makes sense to tie Caufield for 8 years.
The best case scenario IMO, would be a 3 or 4 years deal.

Why?
1. His experience, while he has shown he can hold his own and potentially become one of the finest goal scorer in the NHL, his injury and lack of NHL experience is still a decent risk to commit for a player on a 8 years deal.

2. Roster build, this is something that is becoming a key in becoming a perennial contender is to have cap flexibility and the ability to have a good balance between 2nd contract, ELC and UFA. At this moment, many of the cap is allocated to average talent like Gallagher and Anderson but in 4 years their salary will be off the book and it would give us the chance to decide if it's wiser to commit to Caufield for another longterm deal or to move away. In 4 years, we would have a very good idea on where the team is heading and how Caufield has progressed. If we decide to move on from him, we should be able to find a taker on the trading market and have even more room to other players.

3. The Dach experiment, although Dach was less proven than Caufield at the NHL level. I think this deal was a great one by Hughes, it's a great opportunity for Dach to show he has what it takes to be a top player.

In general, I would love Caufield to stay with the habs for all his career and it might well happen but the NHL is business and if anything we should learn from these playoff is that having great balance and cap well distributed is a key indicator to NHL playoff success.

Let me know what you think.

 

[ottawa]

Expecting 8x8, hoping for 6x6

 

[Sorinth]

I think signing him to a 8 years contract would be a terrible mistake UNLESS we drive a very good bargain.

The more I analyze our roster and the less it makes sense to tie Caufield for 8 years.
The best case scenario IMO, would be a 3 or 4 years deal.

Why?
1. His experience, while he has shown he can hold his own and potentially become one of the finest goal scorer in the NHL, his injury and lack of NHL experience is still a decent risk to commit for a player on a 8 years deal.

2. Roster build, this is something that is becoming a key in becoming a perennial contender is to have cap flexibility and the ability to have a good balance between 2nd contract, ELC and UFA. At this moment, many of the cap is allocated to average talent like Gallagher and Anderson but in 4 years their salary will be off the book and it would give us the chance to decide if it's wiser to commit to Caufield for another longterm deal or to move away. In 4 years, we would have a very good idea on where the team is heading and how Caufield has progressed. If we decide to move on from him, we should be able to find a taker on the trading market and have even more room to other players.

3. The Dach experiment, although Dach was less proven than Caufield at the NHL level. I think this deal was a great one by Hughes, it's a great opportunity for Dach to show he has what it takes to be a top player.

In general, I would love Caufield to stay with the habs for all his career and it might well happen but the NHL is business and if anything we should learn from these playoff is that having great balance and cap well distributed is a key indicator to NHL playoff success.

Let me know what you think.

In 4 years time the cap will have risen significantly and it's likely that signing him long term at that point will be very very expensive. Not too mention a long term deal where most of the years are UFA years is going to be way more expensive then one where there's a significant chunk of RFA years. If you want cap flexibility, getting him signed to a long term deal now is the best course of action. Just look at the Subban contracts to see how it can hurt your cap flexibility when going with a bridge deal.

 

[JeffreyLFC]

In 4 years time the cap will have risen significantly and it's likely that signing him long term at that point will be very very expensive. Not too mention a long term deal where most of the years are UFA years is going to be way more expensive then one where there's a significant chunk of RFA years. If you want cap flexibility, getting him signed to a long term deal now is the best course of action. Just look at the Subban contracts to see how it can hurt your cap flexibility when going with a bridge deal.

That's what I thought too but I believe it's more a myth than actual evidence about the cap going significantly higher. It will eventually go up, but I highly doubt we will see 10% growth or so at some point. Not to mention that players are also asking for shorter deals. Case in point Jason Robertson with his 4 years deal.

I think lately we have seen many teams signing players for 8 years and getting bad value from them. With the case of Cole Caufield is more what is the actual ask. If he ask for let's assumer 8 years at 6.5M then it becomes a no brainer but if the ask is 8 years at 9.5, that is very poor value.

As for the Subban contract, it was a 2 years deal and not 4 years. The problem was to commit on a 8 years deal and not considering a trade before. As I have said, hockey is a business and if in 4 years from now, the Habs have stalled in their rebuild and they look miserable, it would be easier to move away and do a quick turnaround than if you only have 8 years deal with full NMC and huge cap hit on the roster.

 

[Sorinth]

That's what I thought too but I believe it's more a myth than actual evidence about the cap going significantly higher. It will eventually go up, but I highly doubt we will see 10% growth or so at some point. Not to mention that players are also asking for shorter deals. Case in point Jason Robertson with his 4 years deal.

I think lately we have seen many teams signing players for 8 years and getting bad value from them. With the case of Cole Caufield is more what is the actual ask. If he ask for let's assumer 8 years at 6.5M then it becomes a no brainer but if the ask is 8 years at 9.5, that is very poor value.

As for the Subban contract, it was a 2 years deal and not 4 years. The problem was to commit on a 8 years deal and not considering a trade before. As I have said, hockey is a business and if in 4 years from now, the Habs have stalled in their rebuild and they look miserable, it would be easier to move away and do a quick turnaround than if you only have 8 years deal with full NMC and huge cap hit on the roster.

You don't think the cap will have grown by 10% four years from now? That's a crazy take, next year alone it might go up 3-4m which is almost half of that 10%.

NHL salary cap could increase by at least $4 million in 2023-24 | NHL.com

Contingent upon escrow debt from players being repaid in full by end of season, Commissioner Bettman says

www.nhl.com

The point of the Subban comparison is to show that we lost cap flexibility by signing him to a bridge deal. We got 2 years of great cap efficiency and then had to pay around 50% more then we would have with a long term deal from the start. Even at 4 years, getting great cap efficiency from Caufields contract is pretty meaningless for the next 4 years compared to the 4 years after that since our window isn't likely to open in the short term.

Obviously there's a limit to how much we would give in an 8 year deal, and if Caufield is adament for a shorter deal then we don't have a choice but anyone can make up numbers to make a situation seem bad. The bottom line is we shouldn't care too much about cap efficiency for the next few years because we aren't contending, we should care about cap efficiency in the longer term which is why an 8 year deal makes way more sense for the team, overpay cap wise now so that when we are contenders we aren't paying a premium.

 

[Kaiden Ghoul]

Anything under 8 and im happy, since the cap will increase and Mcdavid Drai Matthews will make 13-15 millions, 8 millions for one 40-50 goals scorer +/- 80 points player would be sweet, if we can lock him for 8 years. But i think theres something that complicated the négociation... the contract lenght, will he take 8x8 if he think he can get 10 millions in 3 years ?

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

That's what I thought too but I believe it's more a myth than actual evidence about the cap going significantly higher. It will eventually go up, but I highly doubt we will see 10% growth or so at some point.

Aside for the pandemic years and the 12-13 stoppage and one year following the 2008 financial crisis, the league has always had increases, sometimes more than 10% in a single year. We're also about to see a quick rise to compensate for the pandemic as the players have finished paying their share.

Look at the NHL's estimates:

So yeah, we better sign him for 8 years. Years 4-5-6-7-8 will be rebates.

 

[Canadienna]

This is a big moment for Hughes. It's his first real test at a big deal from the GM side. It must be so odd having been in the other guys shoes.

The longer into the summer it goes on the less and less likely it's at all "team-friendly" imo. Not at all as easy as Suzuki's deal.

 

[jrom]

In 4 years time the cap will have risen significantly and it's likely that signing him long term at that point will be very very expensive. Not too mention a long term deal where most of the years are UFA years is going to be way more expensive then one where there's a significant chunk of RFA years. If you want cap flexibility, getting him signed to a long term deal now is the best course of action. Just look at the Subban contracts to see how it can hurt your cap flexibility when going with a bridge deal.

Well that’s the thing, his agent (Brisson) isn’t a moron and knows this very well.

If I am his agent and HuGo wants a long term deal for sure I’m asking for the rising cap to be taken into account.

Boldy is a reasonable comparison but I don’t think he should be paid something similar to Stuzle. Problem with Caufield is that you really need to roster build to support him (more physical linemates that can also cover on D).

Hopefully something reasonable and long term is signed but you can forget about a team friendly “discount”.

 

[MadMslm]

This is a big moment for Hughes. It's his first real test at a big deal from the GM side. It must be so odd having been in the other guys shoes.

The longer into the summer it goes on the less and less likely it's at all "team-friendly" imo. Not at all as easy as Suzuki's deal.

We’ll be interesting to see when it happens.

If it’s not in the next two weeks, Hughes might have to put it on hold.

Combine is at the beginning of June, then the whole scouting staff will meet up and start working toward their final list for the draft.

 

[Sorinth]

Well that’s the thing, his agent (Brisson) isn’t a moron and knows this very well.

If I am his agent and HuGo wants a long term deal for sure I’m asking for the rising cap to be taken into account.

Boldy is a reasonable comparison but I don’t think he should be paid something similar to Stuzle. Problem with Caufield is that you really need to roster build to support him (more physical linemates that can also cover on D).

Hopefully something reasonable and long term is signed but you can forget about a team friendly “discount”.

Obviously we would prefer the Boldy contract to the Stutzle one, but I'd prefer the Stutzle deal to a short term deal. And yes I'm sure the rising cap is factored in by both sides but money now is worth more then money later so there's still an incentive on his side to take a big long term deal over waiting for the cap to rise and cashing in later. In fact you can see that at play with Boldy's contract, his is fairly front loaded which no doubt played a part in getting a lower cap hit. We should probably take it a step further and make a signing bonus heavy contract to really help lower the caphit.

I very much disagree that you need to build a roster to support him, we've already seen him have success without big physical linemates for example. He's also not actually bad defensively and certainly not so bad that he needs someone to make up for him.

 

[junyab]

I'd prefer to sign a bridge now, then an 8yr after it. I feel right now he is a huge part of a smaller core group of forwards. In 4-5yrs he will be a smaller part of a much larger core group of forwards.

Now - Caufield, Suzuki, Dach

4-5 Years - Caufield, Suzuki, Dach, Slaf, Dubois?, 1st Pick 2023

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Lock him up for as long as you can. I don’t want to have to pony up a crazy raise in four or five years.

 

[JeffreyLFC]

You don't think the cap will have grown by 10% four years from now? That's a crazy take, next year alone it might go up 3-4m which is almost half of that 10%.

NHL salary cap could increase by at least $4 million in 2023-24 | NHL.com

Contingent upon escrow debt from players being repaid in full by end of season, Commissioner Bettman says

www.nhl.com

The point of the Subban comparison is to show that we lost cap flexibility by signing him to a bridge deal. We got 2 years of great cap efficiency and then had to pay around 50% more then we would have with a long term deal from the start. Even at 4 years, getting great cap efficiency from Caufields contract is pretty meaningless for the next 4 years compared to the 4 years after that since our window isn't likely to open in the short term.

Obviously there's a limit to how much we would give in an 8 year deal, and if Caufield is adament for a shorter deal then we don't have a choice but anyone can make up numbers to make a situation seem bad. The bottom line is we shouldn't care too much about cap efficiency for the next few years because we aren't contending, we should care about cap efficiency in the longer term which is why an 8 year deal makes way more sense for the team, overpay cap wise now so that when we are contenders we aren't paying a premium.

no, I don't believe we will see a significant increase (like 10% in a single season), 2 or 3% maximum and maybe even some flat cap at some point down the road. The NHL does not have the appeal of the other big league in North America and their TV deals will probably not increase that much overtime. The only good news for the NHL would be to get out of Arizona or other sub performing market but before we see that, no I do not expect significant increase in cap over the next 8 years.

Aside for the pandemic years and the 12-13 stoppage and one year following the 2008 financial crisis, the league has always had increases, sometimes more than 10% in a single year. We're also about to see a quick rise to compensate for the pandemic as the players have finished paying their share.

Look at the NHL's estimates:

So yeah, we better sign him for 8 years. Years 4-5-6-7-8 will be rebates.

Where is the 10% annual increase? I only saw it once, just after the lock out. Your estimate give a 5% increase at best and it is 4 years from now.

 

[Sorinth]

no, I don't believe we will see a significant increase (like 10% in a single season), 2 or 3% maximum and maybe even some flat cap at some point down the road. The NHL does not have the appeal of the other big league in North America and their TV deals will probably not increase that much overtime. The only good news for the NHL would be to get out of Arizona or other sub performing market but before we see that, no I do not expect significant increase in cap over the next 8 years.


Where is the 10% annual increase? I only saw it once, just after the lock out. Your estimate give a 5% increase at best and it is 4 years from now.

Even at 3% a year, after 4 years which was the Caufield bridge deal that would mean the cap being 12.5% higher.

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

no, I don't believe we will see a significant increase (like 10% in a single season), 2 or 3% maximum and maybe even some flat cap at some point down the road. The NHL does not have the appeal of the other big league in North America and their TV deals will probably not increase that much overtime. The only good news for the NHL would be to get out of Arizona or other sub performing market but before we see that, no I do not expect significant increase in cap over the next 8 years.


Where is the 10% annual increase? I only saw it once, just after the lock out. Your estimate give a 5% increase at best and it is 4 years from now.

It takes a special kind of person to double down on a bad take even after being offered proof to the contrary.

It's pointless to argue with someone like that, so I'll leave you to your delusions.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Trade him for Michkov 100%

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Trade him for Michkov 100%

Imagine them on the same team.

I have little doubt that CC is going to perpetually be in the top five for goal scorers. If we had another guy doing that… put them on separate lines - double them up when behind. We haven’t had an offense like that since the 70s.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Imagine them on the same team.

I have little doubt that CC is going to perpetually be in the top five for goal scorers. If we had another guy doing that… put them on separate lines - double them up when behind. We haven’t had an offense like that since the 70s.

goalscorers peak early

so unless you have a transcendental player à la michkov, better get rid of them in their early 20s for maximal value, unless the window fits

in Caufield's case, he'll still be good in our window, but if we can get Michkov, a much superior talent, we should pull the trigger