Speculation: Russo on the status of Kaprizov’s contract negotiations

[AKL]

if all the good players should be able to pick where they play, this league would be boring as f***.

You mean you don't like watching some combination of Moscow, St. Petersburg, Kazan and Omsk play in the Gagarin Cup finals every year for more than a decade?

 

[rynryn]

You mean you don't like watching some combination of Moscow, St. Petersburg, Kazan and Omsk play in the Gagarin Cup finals every year for more than a decade?

i'm not a cheat-code kind of guy.

 

[Zine]

Maybe that's a discussion you need to have with guys like Spurgeon, Koivu, Brodin, who have or will have spent their entire careers here. Or Ek who just signed an 8 year deal to stay here through his prime years. Or guys like Foligno who rave about how great it is and try to get their family to come here. Or Zucker and potentially Dumba, as players who didn't want to leave but were forced out by certain circumstances.

Minnesota has a problem with star players because they haven't drafted or developed any, not because Minnesota is inherently a bad place for good players to play.

.......and the inability to lure quality free agents. When you list a guy the caliber of Spurgeon as a success story, yea, something is wrong in paradise.

I mean I don't need to tell you Minnesota has gotten past the 2nd round twice in the past 17 years. AND you'll probably be more than mediocre for the next few years. This isn't normal, nor is is just poor drafting.

Other fan bases can accept when their teams have mega-problems. You're just taking things too personally. Mellow out.

 

[Zine]

You mean you don't like watching some combination of Moscow, St. Petersburg, Kazan and Omsk play in the Gagarin Cup finals every year for more than a decade?

KHL has it's own problems. Like big time. But that has nothing to do with Minnesota, Kaprizov, or this discussion.

That you need to throw a red herring at me is kind of telling. But whatever.

 

[AKL]

KHL has it's own problems. Big time. But that has nothing to do with Minnesota, or this discussion.

That you need to throw a red herring at me is kind of telling. But whatever.

I didn't throw anything at you, I made an offhand remark in response to another poster, it had nothing to do with you. Mellow out bud, you're taking things too personally.

 

[Zine]

I didn't throw anything at you, I made an offhand remark in response to another poster, it had nothing to do with you. Mellow out bud, you're taking things too personally.

 

[rynryn]

well, it's all irrelevant to the point whether the Wild are attractive place to play or not. Because when it comes down to it Kaprizov isn't a fee agent, as much as he wants to be, and Wild aren't obligated to trade him somewhere he wants to play. If being traded away from MIN is his goal in these negotiations he's making himself look like a worse trade target. So is he an idiot?

 

[AKL]

well, it's all irrelevant to the point whether the Wild are attractive place to play or not. Because when it comes down to it Kaprizov isn't a fee agent, as much as he wants to be, and Wild aren't obligated to trade him somewhere he wants to play. If being traded away from MIN is his goal in these negotiations he's making himself look like a worse trade target. So is he an idiot?

Is he an idiot, or has he just always kinda gotten what he wants and never really been told no before?

If he's always just been given what he wants and hasn't really had any consequences for the actions he makes, can't blame him for thinking he can do it again. Combined with this specific agent, it was a powder keg waiting for a spark. Of course I'm just speculating.

 

[Dickie Dunn]

I'm having more respectful conversations with others on this so I'll pass on the one between you and me... especially after how aggressive you got.

Passive aggressive is better?

 

[Ban Hammered]

well, it's all irrelevant to the point whether the Wild are attractive place to play or not. Because when it comes down to it Kaprizov isn't a fee agent, as much as he wants to be, and Wild aren't obligated to trade him somewhere he wants to play. If being traded away from MIN is his goal in these negotiations he's making himself look like a worse trade target. So is he an idiot?

His agent might be one...

 

[Dickie Dunn]

Why would Guerin offer a bridge deal now? He’s made more than one offer that would already make Kaprizov the highest paid player in Wild history. Second, only one party here has threatened to disengage and play elsewhere. And third, why negotiate against himself?

 

[Sota Popinski]

Whatever reason for that I don't know, but Minnesota has been doing something wrong in not catering to players and providing a lucrative environment.

What a steaming pantload this is. "I don't know what they're doing wrong, but they are doing something wrong." You clearly have no clue what you're talking about. We supposedly overpaid Parise and Suter and gave them free run of the place, but we aren't catering to the player's enough and aren't providing a "lucrative environment." Whatever.

 

[TS Quint]

Show me in the CBA where it says that GMs have to offer at least one contract length that is just RFA years. You having the opinion that they have to offer a 1-3 year deal and them being forced to by rule are two completely different things.

Because you are not understanding what good faith negotiation is.

Then why not just offer him $6m for 8 years and nothing else? And if he doesn't like it he can go back to Russia. Its not different than what you are proposing. If you are going to be that way about go big.

 

[Dickie Dunn]

Because you are not understanding what good faith negotiation is.

Then why not just offer him $6m for 8 years and nothing else? And if he doesn't like it he can go back to Russia. Its not different than what you are proposing. If you are going to be that way about go big.

Good faith doesn’t mean you go below your minimum position. It simply means that you are willing to budge from your preferred position.

 

[AKL]

Because you are not understanding what good faith negotiation is.

How To Negotiate In Good Faith by Katherine Shonk for Harvard Law School

Because I know you're not going to bother to click and read the whole thing, I've highlighted the key parts here:

In current business negotiations, to negotiate in good faith means to deal honestly and fairly with one another so that each party will receive the benefits of your negotiated contract. When one party sues the other for breach of contract, they may argue that the other party did not negotiate in good faith.

One party is for sure trying to make multiple fair offers that will be a compromise between short/long term and low/high AAV. It's the Wild.

Generally, parties in labor-management negotiation are expected to agree on an effective bargaining process, consider and respond to one another’s offers, and not do anything to undermine the bargaining process or the authority of parties’ representatives.

One party has made several offers. It's the Wild
One party has reportedly declined to actively engage in the process. It's Kaprizov.
One party has done something to try to undermine the bargaining process by floating a fake rumor of a competing contract in order to increase pressure on the other party. It's Kaprizov.

Why might someone choose not to negotiate in good faith? Often, they are seeking to take advantage of you by engaging in deception or hard-bargaining tactics.
At times, a party may also engage in a negotiation with no desire to reach an agreement or with no intention of implementing any agreement reached.

One party has engaged in deceptive practices in the form of a fake rumor of a competing offer in order to increase pressure on the other party. It's Kaprizov.
One party has firmly dug their heels in, engaging in hard-bargaining tactics, and reportedly refused to come off three years. It's Kaprizov.

The researchers identified a few clues to identifying false negotiators. Specifically, they:

• tend to respond slowly, dragging out the negotiation process;
• sometimes ramble about unrelated issues; and
• are more likely to mention constraints that, they claim, limit their ability to do a deal.

One party has opted to drag this out for as long as possible. It's Kaprizov.

It's extremely important to know what negotiating in bad faith is if you're going to keep throwing the term around. For some reason, you (and others), think it means trying to buy some of his UFA years, or not giving him the term and money he wants, or whatever. That's not what it means. That is a normal part of negotiating a contract with an RFA.

You can make the case that both sides are being stubborn and bullheaded about it, and both sides could have handled it better, but if you're going to start throwing the term "negotiating in bad faith" around, one party has been a much more prolific culprit, and it's not the side you think it is.

 

[rynryn]

what people are complaining about being "bad faith" is simply hardball tactics, which is where one party uses their leverage to force or coerce a disadvantageous agreement on the other party.

 

[Dickie Dunn]

what people are complaining about being "bad faith" is simply hardball tactics, which is where one party uses their leverage to force or coerce a disadvantageous agreement on the other party.

Well yeah, of course. But you wouldn’t tolerate your mortgage company using the same tactics as the Sinaloa Cartel would use. And you don’t expect this level of nastiness when one party is attempting to make the other party incredibly wealthy. The vast majority of player deals are no where near like this one.

 

[krutovsdonut]

good faith is a massively overused term in negotiating. kaprisov is trying to use the threat of a khl holdout to get an above market deal. he's essentially saying "pay me or i'll take less money and play at home" and minny is trying to figure out if he is bluffing.

whether or not kaprisov is truly prepared to walk away from minnies best offer to take less is not necessarily a function of maximum dollars in his pocket. it's also a function of bloodyminded negotiating where he is prepared to risk getting much less to try to get the most minny will pay.

the benefits are therefore not the guiding principle, and definitely not the fair sharing of the benefits.

nothing wrong with that but hard to describe it as good or bad faith.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

Because you are not understanding what good faith negotiation is.

Then why not just offer him $6m for 8 years and nothing else? And if he doesn't like it he can go back to Russia. Its not different than what you are proposing. If you are going to be that way about go big.

Because management isn't the assholes that some people in this thread are trying to make them out to be.

 

[Seras]

When a player is drafted, their RFA years are designed for them to give more than the team, and get less than the team. Their UFA years are designed for the player to get more than the team, and give less than the team.

Kaprizov hasn't given anything throughout his RFA years, but you expect the Wild to give him his UFA years? Why? What has he done to earn that? He didn't hold up his end of the bargain, and you're okay with that, but when the Wild refuse to give, it's not fair?

The Wild don't have the obligation to do what's best for Kaprizov or what you think is fair to Kaprizov, just as Kaprizov doesn't have to do what's best for the Wild or what we think is fair to the Wild. What you're seeing right now is that coming to a head. This is what happens when a player makes certain decisions. There are consequences. The Wild are not responsible for amending those consequences for him. They have no obligation to give to him what he hasn't given to them.

The Wild are not doing anything to Kaprizov that he didn't do to them. A team gets 7 RFA years from a player when drafted. Kaprizov will have given, at most, 4 of those, which means he took 3 RFA years from the organization. The Wild are asking for 2 of them back. It's not "unfair".

He was good at hockey, and you can't easily replace him, he and his agent likely know this.

 

[Dickie Dunn]

good faith is a massively overused term in negotiating. kaprisov is trying to use the threat of a khl holdout to get an above market deal. he's essentially saying "pay me or i'll take less money and play at home" and minny is trying to figure out if he is bluffing.

whether or not kaprisov is truly prepared to walk away from minnies best offer to take less is not necessarily a function of maximum dollars in his pocket. it's also a function of bloodyminded negotiating where he is prepared to risk getting much less to try to get the most minny will pay.

the benefits are therefore not the guiding principle, and definitely not the fair sharing of the benefits.

nothing wrong with that but hard to describe it as good or bad faith.

This is what people think negotiations are like because it is what they picture. The reality is that most do not play out like this and clearly parameters for the negotiation went out the window almost immediately. That is when they get nasty.

 

[rynryn]

such a bizarre case. Starting positions:

MIN: Here's a ton of money but we own you for 8 years

KK: Give me a ton of money but i get to do what i want in three years. If you don't I'll just play in Russia.


Positions now:

MIN: Here's a ton of money but we want two UFA years instead of five

KK: Give me a tone of money but i get to do what i want in three years.

 

[krutovsdonut]

This is what people think negotiations are like because it is what they picture. The reality is that most do not play out like this and clearly parameters for the negotiation went out the window almost immediately. That is whrn they get nasty.

it probably has turned nasty.

 

[AKL]

such a bizarre case. Starting positions:

MIN: Here's a ton of money but we own you for 8 years

KK: Give me a ton of money but i get to do what i want in three years. If you don't I'll just play in Russia.


Positions now:

MIN: Here's a ton of money but we want two UFA years instead of five

KK: Give me a tone of money but i get to do what i want in three years. oh yeah, the Russia thing was a lie btw

Yup

 

[topshelf15]

Dont understand why he just doesnt sign...9 mil if true is fantastic money for a winger...And he can always ask to be traded later if he doesnt like the team direction