Proposal: Other offers for PK Subban

[Drydenwasthebest]

Highest paid, highest cap hit....whatever. It's clearly the cap hit that makes all the difference and exactly what I highlighted in my post but please, feel free to PURPOSEFULLY ignore it to try and argue with semantics.

You can think whatever you want but I'd keep Barrie + Rantanen rather than acquire PK at $9M. PK at $7M...that's a whole other story.

As for the other guys coming up on new deals, prepare to be surprised. Oh they'll make more than they do now but won't break the bank like you think they will. Benn has been in top 10 scoring the past 2-3 years, even won the scoring title and he didn't get more than 10M. Stamkos and Hedman just signed extensions for much less than what everyone thought.

Yes...and no. The things with the Stamkos and Hedman deals that people do not seem to understand is :

1--Tampa was allowed to give 8 years while everyone else could only offer 7 years.

2--The tax structure in Tampa is such that 8.5 million in Tampa is equivalent to over 10 million in Toronto (I am using US dollars for both). I believe Tampa has the best tax structure in North America and it allows them to have an almost unfair competitive edge when it comes to signing players. The extra year Tampa was able to offer is also quite significant because nobody would offer Hedman OR Stamkos those salaries 7 years from now when both players will be in decline.

3--As far as Stamkos goes, he has already shown signs of slowing down. He can still score goals like a champ, but he has slowed down and has not put up close to a 90 point season over the last two years. 8.5 million for a 60-75 point player is not a steal of a deal.

4--Hedman is not as good as Subban. However, with the tax structure in Tampa, he is probably getting paid more than the 9 mil Subban is signed for.

So, things are not as simple as you might want to paint them as. Montreal sports teams always have to give out higher contracts because we have a brutal tax structure in Quebec. Having all of the information is important before giving lessons in semantics.

 

[Oleg Petrov]

Yes...and no. The things with the Stamkos and Hedman deals that people do not seem to understand is :

1--Tampa was allowed to give 8 years while everyone else could only offer 7 years.

2--The tax structure in Tampa is such that 8.5 million in Tampa is equivalent to over 10 million in Toronto (I am using US dollars for both). I believe Tampa has the best tax structure in North America and it allows them to have an almost unfair competitive edge when it comes to signing players. The extra year Tampa was able to offer is also quite significant because nobody would offer Hedman OR Stamkos those salaries 7 years from now when both players will be in decline.

3--As far as Stamkos goes, he has already shown signs of slowing down. He can still score goals like a champ, but he has slowed down and has not put up close to a 90 point season over the last two years. 8.5 million for a 60-75 point player is not a steal of a deal.

4--Hedman is not as good as Subban. However, with the tax structure in Tampa, he is probably getting paid more than the 9 mil Subban is signed for.

So, things are not as simple as you might want to paint them as. Montreal sports teams always have to give out higher contracts because we have a brutal tax structure in Quebec. Having all of the information is important before giving lessons in semantics.

Fair points. However, when trading Subban and establishing value ONLY cap hit matters (for the most part). The fact that MTL had those factors produce an unfavorable outcome not only cost them more against the cap, but also impacted the value in return.

 

[Drydenwasthebest]

I think the Hedman contract was pretty indicative of the Habs having paid too much to Subban.

Subban was 25 when he got $9 million Avg for 8 years (giving up 6 UFA years)
Hedman will be 26 turning 27 when he gets $7.9 Avg for 8 years (giving up 8 UFA years)

Do I think Subban is better? Yes, marginally but not by a million against the cap. Not to mention, Hedman was signed at a time when the cap is higher and is giving up two more UFA years.

You think very incorrectly because you, like many people, are not considering the tax differential between Tampa and Montreal.

Tax rates in Tampa are a combined 38.87%. In Montreal they are 52.98%. That means:

Hedman at 7.9 million actually takes home 4.8 million in Tampa.

Subban at 9 million actually takes home 4.2 million in Quebec.

So,in reality, and that is what counts to the players when negotiating their livelihood, Subban is making less money than Hedman. Subban is the better player, but gets paid less even though his cap hit is higher.

As I said, things are not as simple as people think.

 

[triggrman]

You think very incorrectly because you, like many people, are not considering the tax differential between Tampa and Montreal.

Tax rates in Tampa are a combined 38.87%. In Montreal they are 52.98%. That means:

Hedman at 7.9 million actually takes home 4.8 million in Tampa.

Subban at 9 million actually takes home 4.2 million in Quebec.

So,in reality, and that is what counts to the players when negotiating their livelihood, Subban is making less money than Hedman. Subban is the better player, but gets paid less even though his cap hit is higher.

As I said, things are not as simple as people think.

Only 41 of the games are played at home. He's taxed on where he makes the money not just his home team.

 

[Oleg Petrov]

You think very incorrectly because you, like many people, are not considering the tax differential between Tampa and Montreal.

Tax rates in Tampa are a combined 38.87%. In Montreal they are 52.98%. That means:

Hedman at 7.9 million actually takes home 4.8 million in Tampa.

Subban at 9 million actually takes home 4.2 million in Quebec.

So,in reality, and that is what counts to the players when negotiating their livelihood, Subban is making less money than Hedman. Subban is the better player, but gets paid less even though his cap hit is higher.

As I said, things are not as simple as people think.

Re my post above. It doesn't matter how MTL got to $9 million, the fact is $9 million impacts his value. Other, similar players count for less against the cap, it is what it is and it impacts his value.

 

[DasKaiser]

Pk subban + 2017 1st for letang

Pleassssse! Think that would be too steep for letang. He has injury and concussion issues.

 

[V13]

Either deal the Oilers would have been a better team today if they got PK.
I guess I'm surprised the Oil didn't over pay a little knowing PK was on the table?

Agree and i think the Habs would have been long term too because they could have filled more holes. The issue come from losing our #1 D short term. I'm in the "Wait and see" mood when it come to the Weber trade but...

Pacioretty - Galchenyuk - Radulov
Hall - Plekanec - Gallagher

You also slot Yakupov somewhere in the top 9

Then with the #4 since PLD was gone i would have picked Juolevi and still picked Sergachev with the #9 to offset the loss of Subban long term and to have more chance to develop a #1 D. That give a D prospect pool of :

- Sergachev
- Juolevi
- Nurse or Kelfbom
- Juulsen

That's pretty solid potential futur D core imho. However as i said short term the Habs would have had issues with losing PK but long term it would have looked nice

But that said what's done is done and Weber should still be a solid contributor to the Habs for the next 3-4 years at least.

 

[Drydenwasthebest]

Only 41 of the games are played at home. He's taxed on where he makes the money not just his home team.

The same is true of every player, and all Habs players get taxed for the majority of their games at one of the highest tax rates in the NHL. Only Toronto and Ottawa gets hit with a higher tax rate. I am using averages, but the reality is that Stamkos and Hedman take home more net cash playing for Tampa for less gross than Subban did playing for Montreal.

 

[Drydenwasthebest]

Re my post above. It doesn't matter how MTL got to $9 million, the fact is $9 million impacts his value. Other, similar players count for less against the cap, it is what it is and it impacts his value.

You are still wrong. It DOES matter how Subban got to 9 million because the tax difficulty the Habs, Sens, and Leafs operate under is significant when trying to sign players. It is WHY those teams give out higher gross paying contracts since the players would not sign with them otherwise. If Montreal would not have given Subban the 9 million, we would have lost him a lot earlier and gotten far less of a deal in trade value than we just did. Other, similar players count for less against the cap because they are getting more actual cash.

Ignoring context does not validate your argument, it just proves that you prefer to ignore context and reality to "prove" your point..thereby nullifying it completely.

 

[dookers9]

Edmonton
Fayne
Yak
Reinhart
Eberle

Montreal
Subban

No rnh, deai, hall, klef or nurse......NO

Given what we now know, that Hall was moved for the likes of Larsson, I'd have offered up Hall & Nurse for Subban. In another couple years with Nurse getting paid, still while the other contracts would have been in place, the money would have been a close match. And Oilers fans would be content with moving Nurse seeing as Subban would have been plenty more of an aquisition than Larsson.

 

[Bender]

You are still wrong. It DOES matter how Subban got to 9 million because the tax difficulty the Habs, Sens, and Leafs operate under is significant when trying to sign players. It is WHY those teams give out higher gross paying contracts since the players would not sign with them otherwise. If Montreal would not have given Subban the 9 million, we would have lost him a lot earlier and gotten far less of a deal in trade value than we just did. Other, similar players count for less against the cap because they are getting more actual cash.

Ignoring context does not validate your argument, it just proves that you prefer to ignore context and reality to "prove" your point..thereby nullifying it completely.

Sorry but YOU are wrong and the fact that you keep spinning this stuff is hilarious.

The reason why Subban was signed to that deal is completely irrelevant to an acquiring team.

Why would Colorado or Dallas or any other team give two craps WHY his cap hit is $9M per year??? All they know is that IF they make his acquisition, that's what it's going to be against the cap on their team.

It doesn't matter to that team if PK was taxed ZERO percent and he gets to keep it all or if he's taxed 100% and gets to keep none of it. The Canadiens, Senators and Leafs all have their challenges tax-wise and this isn't a secret. It's not being ignored to validate an argument, it's being ignored because it's not relevant to the discussion.

 

[Frank Drebin]

You are still wrong. It DOES matter how Subban got to 9 million because the tax difficulty the Habs, Sens, and Leafs operate under is significant when trying to sign players. It is WHY those teams give out higher gross paying contracts since the players would not sign with them otherwise. If Montreal would not have given Subban the 9 million, we would have lost him a lot earlier and gotten far less of a deal in trade value than we just did. Other, similar players count for less against the cap because they are getting more actual cash.

Ignoring context does not validate your argument, it just proves that you prefer to ignore context and reality to "prove" your point..thereby nullifying it completely.

Subban has a 9m cap hit playing for Nashville. How he got there really is not relevant when discussing trade value.

Price, Gallagher, Pacioretty - all great contracts.

 

[Drydenwasthebest]

Sorry but YOU are wrong and the fact that you keep spinning this stuff is hilarious.

The reason why Subban was signed to that deal is completely irrelevant to an acquiring team.

Why would Colorado or Dallas or any other team give two craps WHY his cap hit is $9M per year??? All they know is that IF they make his acquisition, that's what it's going to be against the cap on their team.

It doesn't matter to that team if PK was taxed ZERO percent and he gets to keep it all or if he's taxed 100% and gets to keep none of it. The Canadiens, Senators and Leafs all have their challenges tax-wise and this isn't a secret. It's not being ignored to validate an argument, it's being ignored because it's not relevant to the discussion.

You are confusing the arguments. You and Petrov were stating that Subban is not worth 9 million partially because he is getting paid more than Stamkos and Hedman. I pointed out that Subban is NOT getting paid more than Stamkos and Hedman due to the tax situations in their respective home towns. That is the context you and Petrov are ignoring. Subban was given the 9 million because it was the only way to get him signed in Montreal due to the FACT that he gets paid less at that amount than Hedman and Stamkos get with their supposedly lower paying contracts. CONTEXT is key. Stamkos and Hedman did NOT take a hometown discount, they got paid more because only Tampa, Dallas, Florida, and Nashville have a below 40% personal income tax rate. None of Dallas, Florida, or Nashville were going to be able to offer Stamkos or Hedman enough money to compete with what they got from Tampa. As I pointed out, even the Leafs would have had to offer over 11 million for Stamkos to come close to the net salary he will take home on his current contract. Stamkos and Hedman did not sign for a discount, they signed for the most amount of net cash that they could get.

Now, if you want to change the argument to saying it does not matter why Subban was given the contract he was given, and that only the amount he gets counts towards his value, then you are still wrong. He received significant offers from the Oilers, received a significant player in Weber, and is considered one of the very best in the entire NHL. Nashville obviously felt he was easily worth what he will be paid in Nashville. Considering almost every hockey pundit out there says Nashville won the trade, it sems that context is still against you and proves you to be wrong in your assessment of Subban and his contract value.

So, keep the arguments separate and remember what they are for future reference.

Oh, and your statement about Benn not getting 10 million is also true and false. Again, he did not get 10 million in gross, but Dallas is one of the 4 teams that have a personal income tax rate of just over 38%. So, Benn will bring home a sheep load more money than Kane or Toews even though he signed for a lower gross. Try to follow things: getting a 10 million dollar contract is not good if you take home less money. THAT is why Benn, Stamkos, and Hedman all "signed for less". In other words, they DID NOT sign for less, they got MORE!

 

[Drydenwasthebest]

Subban has a 9m cap hit playing for Nashville. How he got there really is not relevant when discussing trade value.

Price, Gallagher, Pacioretty - all great contracts.

Well, it seems obvious that the Predators believe he is worth the contract since they gave him a significant raise by bringing him there and have his contract affecting their cap, right?

Yes, Price, Pacioretty and Gallagher are all on great contracts. 9 million for a Norris winning and multi Norris nominated player is fair value, too.

 

[Kafka]

every time I see Subban and Barrie in the same sentence, I remember this:

When I see Colorado and Subban in the same sentence, I think of this classic turnover. Subban lead the league in turnovers during the last two seasons. And largely.
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/therrien-subbans-individual-mistake-cost-us-the-game/

 

[yababy]

Re my post above. It doesn't matter how MTL got to $9 million, the fact is $9 million impacts his value. Other, similar players count for less against the cap, it is what it is and it impacts his value.

+1
That's why Adam Larsson's value was so high. he's on a value contract for 5 more years.

 

[Oleg Petrov]

You are confusing the arguments. You and Petrov were stating that Subban is not worth 9 million partially because he is getting paid more than Stamkos and Hedman. I pointed out that Subban is NOT getting paid more than Stamkos and Hedman due to the tax situations in their respective home towns. That is the context you and Petrov are ignoring. Subban was given the 9 million because it was the only way to get him signed in Montreal due to the FACT that he gets paid less at that amount than Hedman and Stamkos get with their supposedly lower paying contracts. CONTEXT is key. Stamkos and Hedman did NOT take a hometown discount, they got paid more because only Tampa, Dallas, Florida, and Nashville have a below 40% personal income tax rate. None of Dallas, Florida, or Nashville were going to be able to offer Stamkos or Hedman enough money to compete with what they got from Tampa. As I pointed out, even the Leafs would have had to offer over 11 million for Stamkos to come close to the net salary he will take home on his current contract. Stamkos and Hedman did not sign for a discount, they signed for the most amount of net cash that they could get.

Now, if you want to change the argument to saying it does not matter why Subban was given the contract he was given, and that only the amount he gets counts towards his value, then you are still wrong. He received significant offers from the Oilers, received a significant player in Weber, and is considered one of the very best in the entire NHL. Nashville obviously felt he was easily worth what he will be paid in Nashville. Considering almost every hockey pundit out there says Nashville won the trade, it sems that context is still against you and proves you to be wrong in your assessment of Subban and his contract value.

So, keep the arguments separate and remember what they are for future reference.

Oh, and your statement about Benn not getting 10 million is also true and false. Again, he did not get 10 million in gross, but Dallas is one of the 4 teams that have a personal income tax rate of just over 38%. So, Benn will bring home a sheep load more money than Kane or Toews even though he signed for a lower gross. Try to follow things: getting a 10 million dollar contract is not good if you take home less money. THAT is why Benn, Stamkos, and Hedman all "signed for less". In other words, they DID NOT sign for less, they got MORE!

As you said it's all about context. Subban is worth less than Hedman within the context of a trade because of the $9 million cap charge not his actual salary.

I agree that comparing Hedman and Subban's cap charges on their face is tricky because of the reasons you have pointed out, however when analyzing $9 million vs $7.9 million in the context of the trade, it is relevant.

 

[Homesick]

I believe that the following deal with EDM would have been equitable for both teams

Hall
4OA
Klefbom
Yakupov

for
Subban
9OA

however, it is rumored that Bergevin insisted on Draisaitl instead of Hall, and RNH instead of Yak.

This stopped Chiarelli from pulling te trigger on the trade early. Wen Columbus dropped the bombshell of picking Dubois instead of Puljujarvi, everything fell apart.

Well Bergevin is simply a ****ing idiot. RNH, Draisaitl, Puljujarvi, and Klefbom for Subban???? Then he takes Weber(who Nashville fans have said all year is declining already) I doubt it was Puljujarvi dropping if all those assets were already going

 

[danyhabsfan]

When I see Colorado and Subban in the same sentence, I think of this classic turnover. Subban lead the league in turnovers during the last two seasons. And largely.
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/therrien-subbans-individual-mistake-cost-us-the-game/

Burns, Thornton, Doughty and Karlsson complete the top 5 in giveaways.
All of them are superstars.

 

[Bender]

You are confusing the arguments. You and Petrov were stating that Subban is not worth 9 million partially because he is getting paid more than Stamkos and Hedman. I pointed out that Subban is NOT getting paid more than Stamkos and Hedman due to the tax situations in their respective home towns. That is the context you and Petrov are ignoring. Subban was given the 9 million because it was the only way to get him signed in Montreal due to the FACT that he gets paid less at that amount than Hedman and Stamkos get with their supposedly lower paying contracts. CONTEXT is key. Stamkos and Hedman did NOT take a hometown discount, they got paid more because only Tampa, Dallas, Florida, and Nashville have a below 40% personal income tax rate. None of Dallas, Florida, or Nashville were going to be able to offer Stamkos or Hedman enough money to compete with what they got from Tampa. As I pointed out, even the Leafs would have had to offer over 11 million for Stamkos to come close to the net salary he will take home on his current contract. Stamkos and Hedman did not sign for a discount, they signed for the most amount of net cash that they could get.

Now, if you want to change the argument to saying it does not matter why Subban was given the contract he was given, and that only the amount he gets counts towards his value, then you are still wrong. He received significant offers from the Oilers, received a significant player in Weber, and is considered one of the very best in the entire NHL. Nashville obviously felt he was easily worth what he will be paid in Nashville. Considering almost every hockey pundit out there says Nashville won the trade, it sems that context is still against you and proves you to be wrong in your assessment of Subban and his contract value.

So, keep the arguments separate and remember what they are for future reference.

Oh, and your statement about Benn not getting 10 million is also true and false. Again, he did not get 10 million in gross, but Dallas is one of the 4 teams that have a personal income tax rate of just over 38%. So, Benn will bring home a sheep load more money than Kane or Toews even though he signed for a lower gross. Try to follow things: getting a 10 million dollar contract is not good if you take home less money. THAT is why Benn, Stamkos, and Hedman all "signed for less". In other words, they DID NOT sign for less, they got MORE!

Nah...take a look at all my posts, whenever I've mentioned Subban, I'm talking about his trade value in relation to his cap hit.

I'm not sure how else to explain this. If Jamie Benn had a cap hit of $550K but had a backdoor deal with the owner of the Dallas Stars to sell stolen jewels to the Russian Mafia that would earn him $400M per year, it wouldn't ****ing matter because it's only the cap hit against the overall teams cap that's important! I don't care how much $$$$ Jamie Benn pockets, how much he has left over, what he does with his money...it's only the cap hit that matters.

You keep harping about why the Habs had to pay so much to keep PK, it doesn't...****in' matter!! I don't care if he held someone hostage to get that contract, it's SIGNED! Why would it matter to a team acquiring him? The ONLY thing that matters is that the cap hit is STILL $9M!!!

If you want to start to compare and talk value on individual players and start including tax rates for different states, you're going to be arguing with yourself because no other poster on HFboards is doing that. (because it's NOT relevant despite what you seem to think)

 

[Eb]

PK for Buff

This is interesting.

 

[Eb]

What about Chara for Subban? I think Chara fits all the positives that Bergevin listed for Weber.

Hard shot, great leader, big body.

 

[Ainsy01]

gtfo here with Chara.

 

[Ainsy01]

hard to think that Giordano + wouldnt have gotten it done..

 

[Spilot23]

every time I see Subban and Barrie in the same sentence, I remember this:

I'm just gonna leave it there Everyone makes mistakes dude same with your video about Barrie falling. But yeah I would want Subban over Barrie of course.