Speculation: Gaudreau seeking $8M annually on new deal with Flames -- Pt. 2

Status
Not open for further replies.

TS Quint

Stop writing “I mean” in your posts.
Sep 8, 2012
8,569
6,079
No, that's called tampering.
Because that doesn't happen in the NHL :laugh: Remember the reason for the pre July 1 negotiation period that started this year? It was because everyone was talking to players before July 1 anyway. How else were players getting signed 1 minute after free agency opened. Let's not be naive.
 

johna2626

Registered User
Aug 19, 2015
952
2
Atlanta
So is this a situation of the Flames being cheap, or not having enough cap space? Looks like they have close to 8 million in cap space.

Realilistically, if there's someone you sign 8x8, it's Johnny Gaudreau or Kucherov, not Stamkos. Only reason Stamkos gets the big payday is because he could leave
 

93LEAFS

Registered User
Nov 7, 2009
34,176
21,372
Toronto
It is when the average NHLer is over 6 feet and hovering around 200 pounds.

Gaudreau is a helluva player, but I would never give a small body like that a long-term contract.
You do realize their is no proof smaller players are more likely to get injured or have shorter careers right? For every Marc Savard there is a Ray Whitney. I remember more big guys having there careers end quick than small guys see Keith Primeau, Lindros brothers, Jason Allison, etc.
 

Ninety7

go oil go
Jun 19, 2010
8,194
5,842
Canada
So is this a situation of the Flames being cheap, or not having enough cap space? Looks like they have close to 8 million in cap space.

Realilistically, if there's someone you sign 8x8, it's Johnny Gaudreau or Kucherov, not Stamkos. Only reason Stamkos gets the big payday is because he could leave

I'd imagine they are trying to think of the future with contracts for Bennett and Tkachuk?
 

Walkingthroughforest

I got the worst ******* attorneys
Aug 19, 2007
7,678
1,953
Because that doesn't happen in the NHL :laugh: Remember the reason for the pre July 1 negotiation period that started this year? It was because everyone was talking to players before July 1 anyway. How else were players getting signed 1 minute after free agency opened. Let's not be naive.

If Treliving called up a GM and said he wanted to trade Gaudreau to their team for a package and the team refused because they were informed by the agent he wouldn't sign with them, that is something serious the league would look into. I would assume it could be as severe as the agent losing their ability to represent NHL players. And Lewis Gross is not a Don Meehan-esq agent, this a little, insignificant fish in the agent pool.
 

Mike Jones

Registered User
Apr 12, 2007
12,640
3,054
Calgary
If Treliving called up a GM and said he wanted to trade Gaudreau to their team for a package and the team refused because they were informed by the agent he wouldn't sign with them, that is something serious the league would look into. I would assume it could be as severe as the agent losing their ability to represent NHL players. And Lewis Gross is not a Don Meenan-esq agent, this a little, insignificant fish in the agent pool.

Why would it be wrong for an agent to tell a new team that their player won't sign with them? We may not like it but it doesn't seem wrong. The agent is going to have to deal with the new team anyway (A contract still needs to be signed in order for his or her player to report and play) - why not get everything on the table right off the bat?
 

Walkingthroughforest

I got the worst ******* attorneys
Aug 19, 2007
7,678
1,953
Why would it be wrong for an agent to tell a new team that their player won't sign with them? We may not like it but it doesn't seem wrong. The agent is going to have to deal with the new team anyway (A contract still needs to be signed in order for his or her player to report and play) - why not get everything on the table right off the bat?

I'm not discussing the agent telling his new team he doesn't want to sign with them, I'm discussing communication to other teams while the players rights are still held by his previous team.

The agent that represents a player cannot talk to any team that is not the rights owner unless certain circumstances are met or it is tampering. The Johnny Gaudreau situation is not one of those instances and if Gross went to any GM and discussed Johnny, it would 100% be tampering.
 

Ashasx

Registered User
Jun 30, 2010
4,558
137
I don't think it's happening, but Voracek would have to be the main piece. He's 27 and signed for eight years, so not old, and not just a win-now guy.

Wouldn't the Flames just pay Gaudreau Voracek money instead of trading for Voracek (a significantly worse player)?
 

Ashasx

Registered User
Jun 30, 2010
4,558
137
Of course not. By paying Gaudreau Voracek-money, they show weakness in their negotiation skills.

I'm just saying that the Flames would sooner sign Gaudreau to unreasonable money than trade him for Voracek at the same unreasonable money.
 

Mike Jones

Registered User
Apr 12, 2007
12,640
3,054
Calgary
I'm not discussing the agent telling his new team he doesn't want to sign with them, I'm discussing communication to other teams while the players rights are still held by his previous team.

The agent that represents a player cannot talk to any team that is not the rights owner unless certain circumstances are met or it is tampering. The Johnny Gaudreau situation is not one of those instances and if Gross went to any GM and discussed Johnny, it would 100% be tampering.

Fair enough.
 

WesMcCauley

Registered User
Apr 24, 2015
8,616
2,600
Dont see Flames trading him. They dont need defensemen, have a great young center. He is Calgary´s Kane. You dont trade him... Lock him up longterm and move on. They have very few bad contracts and some core players locked up longterm on fair or good deals for Calgary. Wideman`s contract is done after this season, thats 5+ mill more in cap space. Give Johnny 7,5ish*8, find him a babysitter and they are good to go.
 

Toggel

Registered User
Feb 26, 2015
496
11
I'm not discussing the agent telling his new team he doesn't want to sign with them, I'm discussing communication to other teams while the players rights are still held by his previous team.

The agent that represents a player cannot talk to any team that is not the rights owner unless certain circumstances are met or it is tampering. The Johnny Gaudreau situation is not one of those instances and if Gross went to any GM and discussed Johnny, it would 100% be tampering.

No team would trade for Gaudreau with out first getting permission to talk to the agent and see what contract demands are. Which could include "My client will not sign with your team"
 

L13

Registered User
Oct 1, 2015
1,226
94
I'd imagine they are trying to think of the future with contracts for Bennett and Tkachuk?

Should have thought of that future before giving Brouwer 4.5mil x 4.

Anyway. Friedman said on the radio that the contract should be done this week.
 

Flames Fanatic

Mediocre
Aug 14, 2008
13,436
2,953
Cochrane
No team would trade for Gaudreau with out first getting permission to talk to the agent and see what contract demands are. Which could include "My client will not sign with your team"

That is a conversation that starts AFTER trade talks start, once the other team's GM has permission to talk to Gaudreau's agent from Brad Treliving. Not before.
 

tempest2i

Jigsaw Falling Into Place
Oct 25, 2009
9,118
91
Cowtown
That is a conversation that starts AFTER trade talks start, once the other team's GM has permission to talk to Gaudreau's agent from Brad Treliving. Not before.

If a player is without a contract, why would a rival GM require permission to speak with that player?
 

Rebuilt

Registered User
Jun 8, 2014
8,736
15
Tampa
up aTreliving called GM and said he wanted to trade Gaudreau to their team for a package and the team refusIfed because they were informed by the agent he wouldn't sign with them, that is something serious the league would look into. I would assume it could be as severe as the agent losing their ability to represent NHL players. And Lewis Gross is not a Don Meehan-esq agent, this a little, insignificant fish in the agent pool.

Its my understanding that an an RFA can talk to whomever he wants. Its not tampering. Hes not under contract with the Flames. They just own his rights .

He can do whatever he wants and the Flames only recourse is to match the contract . They cant stop him doing anything else.
 

tmurfin

That’s the joke
May 8, 2010
11,258
1,312
Its my understanding that an an RFA can talk to whomever he wants. Its not tampering. Hes not under contract with the Flames. They just own his rights .

He can do whatever he wants and the Flames only recourse is to match the contract . They cant stop him doing anything else.

Not a 10.2(c) RFA. Gaudreau is not eligible for an offersheet (Doesn't have 3 years of experience), once the Flames qualified him, they got exclusive negotiation rights.
 

snipes

How cold? I’m ice cold.
Dec 28, 2015
55,860
64,448
Its my understanding that an an RFA can talk to whomever he wants. Its not tampering. Hes not under contract with the Flames. They just own his rights .

He can do whatever he wants and the Flames only recourse is to match the contract . They cant stop him doing anything else.

Nope.

Gaudreau is not eligible for an offer-sheet. He has close to no rights at all.
 

snipes

How cold? I’m ice cold.
Dec 28, 2015
55,860
64,448
Correct, his only option other than to sign, is to sit out.

Yup. Calgary has all of the leverage, as an Oiler fan I wish he was eligible for an offer-sheet but he isn't.

He literally has next to no rights. The Flames hold a significant bargaining advantage.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Ad

Ad