TSN Habs Article (subban, contract extension possible this year)

[Frozenice]

Do we know for fact that he wanted a 5 and 5?

Price and Pacioretty are two of our more important players and won't be getting raises any time soon.

Gionta will be gone. Markov's either coming at a discount or he'll be goners and Diaz or NB will be replacing him at a reduced rate.

Even if the cap goes up negligibly, we'll still be fine cap wise.

Gionta takes care of PK's raise. Markov will roughly take care of Eller and Emelin's raise. Briere will be only around for another year after. Where's the problem?

nvrmnd

 

[Frozenice]

and Galchenyuk and Gallagher will be up for raises but guess what?

They'll be getting bridge contracts too because MB set the precedent with PK.

So you can't just look at PK's case in isolation. MB had to set the precedent and he did it with his most important player.

You can actually argue that MB HAD to give PK a bridge contract.

I'd bet real money that Galchenyuk will go to Russia before accepting a bridge contract.

One thing I've learned over the years is how quickly things change with young people, they will do things differently because they aren't tied down to the past. Older people have roots, they are more tied down to how things should be done. If young players figure out that going to Europe from when they're 22 - 26 is the best thing for them career-wise, it's what they'll do.

 

[dackelljuneaubulis02]

We can always find players to spend money on. For arguments sake, say we didn't have Gomez and Kaberle's salaries on the books now, we would be looking to spend all that cap space, but wait, we've already spent it. See how it works. Same thing here, the cap space will be gone before Gionta and Markov are gone, trust me.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[dackelljuneaubulis02]

I'd bet real money that Galchenyuk will go to Russia before accepting a bridge contract.

One thing I've learned over the years is how quickly things change with young people, they will do things differently because they aren't tied down to the past. Older people have roots, they are more tied down to how things should be done. If young players figure out that going to Europe from when they're 22 - 26 is the best thing for them career-wise, it's what they'll do.

I'll bet you REAL money that Galchenyuk never goes to the KHL.

 

[Frozenice]

I have no idea what you're talking about.

For a year and a half all I heard was the same arguments about getting rid of Gomez and Kaberle and then all our problems would be solved. And now it's when we get rid of Gionta, Briere and Markov.

I just don't see it, our team will still be lacking some core pieces when Markov and Gionta are gone, I think our problems will be bigger then they are now. I'd even say when Markov goes we won't be making the playoffs.

 

[Frozenice]

I'll bet you REAL money that Galchenyuk never goes to the KHL.

Because he won't be forced to take a bridge contract or he'll sign an offer sheet. That's a much different bet then what I was proposing.

 

[Sorinth]

So just to clarify, say we locked up PK last year. How much cheaper would PK's cap hit be?

If the cap goes up year after year as it always has then there's really a lot of bellyaching over nothing.

He got PK very cheap for two years when we have both Gionta and Markov on the books taking up unnecessary cap space AND during the time where the cap was at it's lowest.

THAT'S the key. MB saved 3-4 mill a year in these two years instead of saving one or two when the cap will only go up.

Come on guys. You can disagree with this move but to think it's idiotic is just well idiotic.

He saved 2-3m not 3-4 but in any case the money saved last year was meaningless because it wasn't spent. Even this year we can afford PK at 5m. And if it had prevented us from throwing money at Briere & Desharnais all the better.

Most fans think we will be a contender in about 2-3 years, and so far that seems to be what Bergevin has been planning for. We could use an extra 3m in cap space during that time much more than last year and this year. Especially since Bergevin seems to be still in a rebuild mode rather than a going for it mode.

Do we know for fact that he wanted a 5 and 5?

Price and Pacioretty are two of our more important players and won't be getting raises any time soon.

Gionta will be gone. Markov's either coming at a discount or he'll be goners and Diaz or NB will be replacing him at a reduced rate.

Even if the cap goes up negligibly, we'll still be fine cap wise.

Gionta takes care of PK's raise. Markov will roughly take care of Eller and Emelin's raise. Briere will be only around for another year after. Where's the problem?

The problem is that Markov and Gionta are not easily replaced by rookies. Replacing Gionta with a rookie and spending all the money on PK doesn't make us a better team, it makes us worse unless that rookie turns out to be star. Replacing Markov is even harder, you basically have to pray that Beaulieu is an all-star from the get go just to be as good as we are right now.

and Galchenyuk and Gallagher will be up for raises but guess what?

They'll be getting bridge contracts too because MB set the precedent with PK.

So you can't just look at PK's case in isolation. MB had to set the precedent and he did it with his most important player.

You can actually argue that MB HAD to give PK a bridge contract.

So how come Stepan, Kadri & Franson are on the verge of holding out. How come they don't realize that a precedent has been set?

Your deluding yourself if you think PK caving in will effect what Galchenyuk wants. He will compare himself to guys who got long term deals. And if Galchenyuk is one of our top players but we insist on giving less than 3m then Galchenyuk will sit out just like PK did. Will Galchenyuk's father convince him to sign a cheap bridge deal or will he tell his son that he should demand a trade?

Having your best players sit out in contract disputes is a terrible management.

 

[WG]

Do we know for fact that he wanted a 5 and 5?

Price and Pacioretty are two of our more important players and won't be getting raises any time soon.

Gionta will be gone. Markov's either coming at a discount or he'll be goners and Diaz or NB will be replacing him at a reduced rate.

Even if the cap goes up negligibly, we'll still be fine cap wise.

Gionta takes care of PK's raise. Markov will roughly take care of Eller and Emelin's raise. Briere will be only around for another year after. Where's the problem?

If you make Gionta and Markov just evaporate, and all you do is give their salary to pay raises to players the team already has, the team gets worse. I don't see a replacement for Gionta coming from the prospect pool, it is unlikely that Collberg or Thomas will be ready for such a role next year.

As to Markov, we have seen at least the role he holds for the PP and how greatly he was missed when he was out the prior couple of seasons. I don't see Diaz as a direct replacement nor do I see Beaulieu as being ready yet.

PK-Gorges-Tinordi-Emelin-Diaz-Beaulieu isn't good enough IMO. I'd try to bring back Markov for 2 more years (Gonchar's 2/$10 is a reasonable guess) or make a run at a more impactful FA defenseman, but that still leaves a top 6 forward slot vacant with not much money to fill it unless one of the young forwards makes a huge leap.

Take out Markov and Gionta, team has $41M committed already to 2014. Add about $15 for PK, Eller and Emelin. That's $56. You still need 2 more D signed (at this point the only NHL D under contract are PK, Emelin, Gorges, Tinordi and Drewiske) and you need a forward who can play with Plekanec and give the team 25 goals. At this point I'd say MB could add an impact forward or an impact D but not both.

It can be done, no doubt. The team could move some of the other high priced players to make room for a legit scoring winger like Vanek. I am a little dismayed, though, at how casually some folks just assume we can toss Gio and Markov overboard, without adequately replacing them, without the team suffering.

 

[Ginu]

It was extremely stupid, not prudent to trade 2 years at a reduced rate for 5-8 at an increased rate. MB **** the bed.

Why don't people understand that PK might not have had the year he had without that bridge contract? Performance is a product of circumstance. It's stupid to say what you did.

 

[Frozenice]

Why don't people understand that PK might not have had the year he had without that bridge contract? Performance is a product of circumstance. It's stupid to say what you did.

Say PK scored 10 less points, how would I know that wasn't good enough? If he improved his game over the year before why wouldn't I be happy with his game?

That's like saying Pittsburgh should sign Crosby to 1 year deals because that would motivate him to be even better. Crosby wouldn't be happy, that's the only thing we can be sure of.

 

[THE HOFF]

6m x 6 years : 36m

bergy knows what to do. he did the right thing getting PK to sign that 2 year contract... teaches him values.

 

[THE HOFF]

Why don't people understand that PK might not have had the year he had without that bridge contract? Performance is a product of circumstance. It's stupid to say what you did.

this post gives me hope in this fanbase

 

[dackelljuneaubulis02]

For a year and a half all I heard was the same arguments about getting rid of Gomez and Kaberle and then all our problems would be solved. And now it's when we get rid of Gionta, Briere and Markov.

I just don't see it, our team will still be lacking some core pieces when Markov and Gionta are gone, I think our problems will be bigger then they are now. I'd even say when Markov goes we won't be making the playoffs.

MB didn't sign Gionta and Markov. Those were the last regime's signings. Briere is only for two years. Big difference from Gionta and Markov.

Because he won't be forced to take a bridge contract or he'll sign an offer sheet. That's a much different bet then what I was proposing.

Galchenyuk's already making 3.2whatever. Do you think he'll be that quick to dart from being 'forced' to sign for 5 mill a year for a couple years instead of the 7-8 he'll get in good time? Some teams actually have signed their respective stars to decent deals. Look at Pacioretty on our very own team.

It's not unprecedented that a player takes a bit of a discount to stay with the team he's with. It happens more than not actually.

He saved 2-3m not 3-4 but in any case the money saved last year was meaningless because it wasn't spent. Even this year we can afford PK at 5m. And if it had prevented us from throwing money at Briere & Desharnais all the better.

Most fans think we will be a contender in about 2-3 years, and so far that seems to be what Bergevin has been planning for. We could use an extra 3m in cap space during that time much more than last year and this year. Especially since Bergevin seems to be still in a rebuild mode rather than a going for it mode.




The problem is that Markov and Gionta are not easily replaced by rookies. Replacing Gionta with a rookie and spending all the money on PK doesn't make us a better team, it makes us worse unless that rookie turns out to be star. Replacing Markov is even harder, you basically have to pray that Beaulieu is an all-star from the get go just to be as good as we are right now.



So how come Stepan, Kadri & Franson are on the verge of holding out. How come they don't realize that a precedent has been set?

Your deluding yourself if you think PK caving in will effect what Galchenyuk wants. He will compare himself to guys who got long term deals. And if Galchenyuk is one of our top players but we insist on giving less than 3m then Galchenyuk will sit out just like PK did. Will Galchenyuk's father convince him to sign a cheap bridge deal or will he tell his son that he should demand a trade?

Having your best players sit out in contract disputes is a terrible management.

When our Cup window opens that's exactly when the Gallies will be up for raises THUS the bridge contract policy. Instead of them getting 7 and 5 million they'll be more likely getting 5 and 3 THUS creating cap room for a couple years. See how that works?

How many players have actually signed offer sheets in the last 5 years? People on here are making it sound like it happens all the time.

It's not like this bridge contract policy is so crippling and oppressive. There's many ways that an organization deals with players that makes them want to stay there.

If you make Gionta and Markov just evaporate, and all you do is give their salary to pay raises to players the team already has, the team gets worse. I don't see a replacement for Gionta coming from the prospect pool, it is unlikely that Collberg or Thomas will be ready for such a role next year.

As to Markov, we have seen at least the role he holds for the PP and how greatly he was missed when he was out the prior couple of seasons. I don't see Diaz as a direct replacement nor do I see Beaulieu as being ready yet.

PK-Gorges-Tinordi-Emelin-Diaz-Beaulieu isn't good enough IMO. I'd try to bring back Markov for 2 more years (Gonchar's 2/$10 is a reasonable guess) or make a run at a more impactful FA defenseman, but that still leaves a top 6 forward slot vacant with not much money to fill it unless one of the young forwards makes a huge leap.

Take out Markov and Gionta, team has $41M committed already to 2014. Add about $15 for PK, Eller and Emelin. That's $56. You still need 2 more D signed (at this point the only NHL D under contract are PK, Emelin, Gorges, Tinordi and Drewiske) and you need a forward who can play with Plekanec and give the team 25 goals. At this point I'd say MB could add an impact forward or an impact D but not both.

It can be done, no doubt. The team could move some of the other high priced players to make room for a legit scoring winger like Vanek. I am a little dismayed, though, at how casually some folks just assume we can toss Gio and Markov overboard, without adequately replacing them, without the team suffering.

Gionta's production will be replaced by the natural progression of
Galchenyuk and Gallagher. Prust can fill in that spot and be more effective. Prust creates offense while not getting 'points'. Prust will bring more of what we actually need in the top 9. Prust might not have as many points as Gionta but he'll increase the production of his linemates more than Gionta would.

Markov is a different story. Markov is still a PP beast but he's a borderline defensive liability out there. He still reads the play and can intercept passes but his lack of mobility is really hurting him out there.

NB and Tinordi won't be in their prime but they should still be effective with another year of AHL under their belts.

It's either we keep Markov or Diaz. We either save money by not having to give Diaz a raise or Markov's salary is coming off the books.

 

[Kriss E]

Why don't people understand that PK might not have had the year he had without that bridge contract? Performance is a product of circumstance. It's stupid to say what you did.

*Might* is the key word here. Now, if you followed PK over the years dating back from his Jr years, why would you assume that him signing a good deal would actually affect his progression and development???
All you have to do is listen to his post draft interview. This guy was dead serious about wanting to help the Habs get that next Stanley Cup. His work ethic during practice is so intense that it pisses off his teammates. Unlike guys like Ribeiro, his ''fights'' during practice with teammates isn't from slacking off and acting like a fool, it's from battling too intensely. Have you seen his summer training? Has PK been caught acting childish or immaturely outside the rink?? All you hear about this is how intense he is, how dedicated he is, how serious he is. So he's young, a little immature in the sense that he'll leave his jersey on the floor and be obnoxious about music. Boo freaking hoo.
This guy is a professional through and through.
So why would anybody assume that him signing a longer term deal would suddenly means he packs it in?
I mean, if he's the type of player to just sit on a big contract, then why would he not do it on an even bigger one??
None of it makes sense. All you have is a speculation. One that really has no backing other than looking at other players. But that's just it, they're other players. They're not PK. Crosby (and a bunch of other players) signed bigger deals off their ELC, why would PK not fall in their category? The category of players that still compete hard and improve despite signing bigger deals off their ELC? Why? What leads you to believe that PK would drop his performance had he signed a longer deal instead of his ELC? Because all the signs point to him actually not being driven by cash (him agreeing to a seriously undervalue contract is proof enough).

MB didn't sign Gionta and Markov. Those were the last regime's signings. Briere is only for two years. Big difference from Gionta and Markov.

Gionta and Markov cannot be replaced internally. If we're going to replace them, it'll be via free agency. That is precisely why having PK signed to a cheap long term deal (say around 5M) instead of what will most likely be a more expensive deal (now that he's won the Norris), would have helped us.

Galchenyuk's already making 3.2whatever. Do you think he'll be that quick to dart from being 'forced' to sign for 5 mill a year for a couple years instead of the 7-8 he'll get in good time? Some teams actually have signed their respective stars to decent deals. Look at Pacioretty on our very own team.

It's not unprecedented that a player takes a bit of a discount to stay with the team he's with. It happens more than not actually.

If Galchenyuk is able to rack up close to a ppg average, then I don't see why he wouldn't be getting a raise.
But the issue with PK wasn't the bridge deal. That much is debatable. The issue was to play a game of chicken with that pretty much made him signed a very undervalue deal. If PK had signed a 4M deal, then there wouldn't be an issue. The problem is we sat him out until he agreed to a deal that saw him make just 500K more than Emelin.

When our Cup window opens that's exactly when the Gallies will be up for raises THUS the bridge contract policy. Instead of them getting 7 and 5 million they'll be more likely getting 5 and 3 THUS creating cap room for a couple years. See how that works?

How many players have actually signed offer sheets in the last 5 years? People on here are making it sound like it happens all the time.

It's not like this bridge contract policy is so crippling and oppressive. There's many ways that an organization deals with players that makes them want to stay there.

Right, but how much will PK, Eller and Emelin be making? And will we have lost Markov and Gionta? Those guys won't be replaced by anybody from our current ranks.

Again, a bridge deal is debatable. What was stupid was playing this game of chicken with one of your key players, arguably your best Dman at the time, and definitely your best Damn today.

Gionta's production will be replaced by the natural progression of
Galchenyuk and Gallagher. Prust can fill in that spot and be more effective. Prust creates offense while not getting 'points'. Prust will bring more of what we actually need in the top 9. Prust might not have as many points as Gionta but he'll increase the production of his linemates more than Gionta would.

Markov is a different story. Markov is still a PP beast but he's a borderline defensive liability out there. He still reads the play and can intercept passes but his lack of mobility is really hurting him out there.

NB and Tinordi won't be in their prime but they should still be effective with another year of AHL under their belts.

It's either we keep Markov or Diaz. We either save money by not having to give Diaz a raise or Markov's salary is coming off the books.

Gionta's contribution wasn't solely offensive. That is an underrating of Gionta's contribution. Over the past few years, he's been a key player on Plekanec's wing. People always crap on Gionta because of his lack of creativity in the offensive zone, but they fail to admire his solid defensive contribution. Him and Plekanec have been very key players in shutting down the opposing top lines. They are the two consistent players that have handled the tougher match ups and actually do well over the past few years. Gallagher and Galchenyuk are not ready to take on bigger defensive roles, they still need sheltered minutes, which is why signing Briere (another player that needs sheltering, and happens to be small) made very little sense.
NB and Tinordi are just prospects at this point. There's no way to know how their progression will go. MB knows this, that's why Diaz and Murray are both on our team. Maybe it'll turn up for the better in a year, maybe not. That's why having PK signed to a deal that would have secured him for the next 4 years at 5M would have helped us. In the case that we need to replace Markov, and that our prospects aren't ready, then we would have had a couple of extra million in wiggle room.

Markov and Gionta only amount to a little over 10M.
PK should get a raise that adds at least 3.5M to his cap (that's me being seriously nice). Then you have Eller and Emelin to add in. Let's say both of them get raises that adds up to 4M (very reasonable). Then that just leaves us with a few million to replace both Markov and Gionta, two players that hold key roles in our current roster.

It's just not the ideal situation.

 

[dackelljuneaubulis02]

*Might* is the key word here. Now, if you followed PK over the years dating back from his Jr years, why would you assume that him signing a good deal would actually affect his progression and development???
All you have to do is listen to his post draft interview. This guy was dead serious about wanting to help the Habs get that next Stanley Cup. His work ethic during practice is so intense that it pisses off his teammates. Unlike guys like Ribeiro, his ''fights'' during practice with teammates isn't from slacking off and acting like a fool, it's from battling too intensely. Have you seen his summer training? Has PK been caught acting childish or immaturely outside the rink?? All you hear about this is how intense he is, how dedicated he is, how serious he is. So he's young, a little immature in the sense that he'll leave his jersey on the floor and be obnoxious about music. Boo freaking hoo.
This guy is a professional through and through.
So why would anybody assume that him signing a longer term deal would suddenly means he packs it in?
I mean, if he's the type of player to just sit on a big contract, then why would he not do it on an even bigger one??
None of it makes sense. All you have is a speculation. One that really has no backing other than looking at other players. But that's just it, they're other players. They're not PK. Crosby (and a bunch of other players) signed bigger deals off their ELC, why would PK not fall in their category? The category of players that still compete hard and improve despite signing bigger deals off their ELC? Why? What leads you to believe that PK would drop his performance had he signed a longer deal instead of his ELC? Because all the signs point to him actually not being driven by cash (him agreeing to a seriously undervalue contract is proof enough).


Gionta and Markov cannot be replaced internally. If we're going to replace them, it'll be via free agency. That is precisely why having PK signed to a cheap long term deal (say around 5M) instead of what will most likely be a more expensive deal (now that he's won the Norris), would have helped us.


If Galchenyuk is able to rack up close to a ppg average, then I don't see why he wouldn't be getting a raise.
But the issue with PK wasn't the bridge deal. That much is debatable. The issue was to play a game of chicken with that pretty much made him signed a very undervalue deal. If PK had signed a 4M deal, then there wouldn't be an issue. The problem is we sat him out until he agreed to a deal that saw him make just 500K more than Emelin.



Right, but how much will PK, Eller and Emelin be making? And will we have lost Markov and Gionta? Those guys won't be replaced by anybody from our current ranks.

Again, a bridge deal is debatable. What was stupid was playing this game of chicken with one of your key players, arguably your best Dman at the time, and definitely your best Damn today.


Gionta's contribution wasn't solely offensive. That is an underrating of Gionta's contribution. Over the past few years, he's been a key player on Plekanec's wing. People always crap on Gionta because of his lack of creativity in the offensive zone, but they fail to admire his solid defensive contribution. Him and Plekanec have been very key players in shutting down the opposing top lines. They are the two consistent players that have handled the tougher match ups and actually do well over the past few years. Gallagher and Galchenyuk are not ready to take on bigger defensive roles, they still need sheltered minutes, which is why signing Briere (another player that needs sheltering, and happens to be small) made very little sense.
NB and Tinordi are just prospects at this point. There's no way to know how their progression will go. MB knows this, that's why Diaz and Murray are both on our team. Maybe it'll turn up for the better in a year, maybe not. That's why having PK signed to a deal that would have secured him for the next 4 years at 5M would have helped us. In the case that we need to replace Markov, and that our prospects aren't ready, then we would have had a couple of extra million in wiggle room.

Markov and Gionta only amount to a little over 10M.
PK should get a raise that adds at least 3.5M to his cap (that's me being seriously nice). Then you have Eller and Emelin to add in. Let's say both of them get raises that adds up to 4M (very reasonable). Then that just leaves us with a few million to replace both Markov and Gionta, two players that hold key roles in our current roster.

It's just not the ideal situation.

Gionta being 'creatively limited' is an understatement.

As for his defense, he's not exactly what he was when he first got here; creating all sorts of havoc in the neutral zone and stealing pucks. He's still solid defensively but the loss of him would be so negligible to our team defense that it would be totally offset by having a player like Prust playing in the top 9.

Remember that Gionta isn't leaving this year so by the time he's gone I'm sure the Gallies will be ready for increased defensive duties. Eller's been emerging as a defensive stalwart as well.

Gionta's easily replaced eternally.

Markov I admit is a bit trickier. Diaz did pace for roughly Markov's totals last year and showed great PP awareness. NB is no lock but he's looking like a fairly safe bet to be a NHL regular by '14-15. Same with Tinordi. Nygren even has a shot but we definitely have to wait and see on him.

Now NB doesn't have Markov's smarts (no upcoming UFA D man probaly does either) but he does have elite mobility while Markov is looking mighty might slow. There's definitely a trade off there.

If Markov stays then he'll obviously be had for a discount that allows us to give adequate raises to Emelin and Eller(he got paid really good money for being injured for practically 3 years. I'm sure that can only help MB out). If Markov stays than Diaz is gone and won't be getting a raise.

What about the wiggle room that will be caused by Gallagher and Galchenyuk getting 'cap friendly' bridge contracts that were made possible by PK's case?

MB may have 'played chicken' but you can't ignore the fact that he won. People just assume that MB was a complete and total dick in negotiations. How come nobody assumes that maybe MB finally got PK on board with his vision instead of him just bullying PK into begrudgingly signing a contract? That's hardly the only scenario.

This is all assuming the cap doesn't go up one cent which is incredibly unlikely.

There's definitely calculated risk in what MB did with PK but in the long term (especially an organization like ours which is consciously building through the draft) MB had to make an assertive decision of how he wanted to deal with young RFAs. A decision that would influence the rest of his tenure with the club.

A decision that I"m sure involved more finesse than the alleged need of having to 'teach PK a lesson in humility'.

 

[habsfanatics*]

Why don't people understand that PK might not have had the year he had without that bridge contract? Performance is a product of circumstance. It's stupid to say what you did.

What is stupid is this post and how little you know about PK Subban. The lowball offer had nothing to do with PK's performance, here's a straw, grasp at it.

 

[dackelljuneaubulis02]

What is stupid is this post and how little you know about PK Subban. The lowball offer had nothing to do with PK's performance, here's a straw, grasp at it.

Hasn't PK said that he gets fuel from all the boos he gets around the league?

Does that sound like the personality type that wouldn't be effected at all by a 'lowball' offer?

I don't see why there's such huge diversity in opinion over this issue.

I can definitely see why some don't agree with what he did with PK but I fail to see why some seem to think that MB has crippled us with this move and it's such a huge gaffe on his part.

That way of thinking is just ridiculous.

 

[habsfanatics*]

Gionta being 'creatively limited' is an understatement.

As for his defense, he's not exactly what he was when he first got here; creating all sorts of havoc in the neutral zone and stealing pucks. He's still solid defensively but the loss of him would be so negligible to our team defense that it would be totally offset by having a player like Prust playing in the top 9.

Remember that Gionta isn't leaving this year so by the time he's gone I'm sure the Gallies will be ready for increased defensive duties. Eller's been emerging as a defensive stalwart as well.

Gionta's easily replaced eternally.

Markov I admit is a bit trickier. Diaz did pace for roughly Markov's totals last year and showed great PP awareness. NB is no lock but he's looking like a fairly safe bet to be a NHL regular by '14-15. Same with Tinordi. Nygren even has a shot but we definitely have to wait and see on him.

Now NB doesn't have Markov's smarts (no upcoming UFA D man probaly does either) but he does have elite mobility while Markov is looking mighty might slow. There's definitely a trade off there.

If Markov stays then he'll obviously be had for a discount that allows us to give adequate raises to Emelin and Eller(he got paid really good money for being injured for practically 3 years. I'm sure that can only help MB out). If Markov stays than Diaz is gone and won't be getting a raise.

What about the wiggle room that will be caused by Gallagher and Galchenyuk getting 'cap friendly' bridge contracts that were made possible by PK's case?

MB may have 'played chicken' but you can't ignore the fact that he won. People just assume that MB was a complete and total dick in negotiations. How come nobody assumes that maybe MB finally got PK on board with his vision instead of him just bullying PK into begrudgingly signing a contract? That's hardly the only scenario.

This is all assuming the cap doesn't go up one cent which is incredibly unlikely.

There's definitely calculated risk in what MB did with PK but in the long term (especially an organization like ours which is consciously building through the draft) MB had to make an assertive decision of how he wanted to deal with young RFAs. A decision that would influence the rest of his tenure with the club.

A decision that I"m sure involved more finesse than the alleged need of having to 'teach PK a lesson in humility'.

Because that's not what happened, revising history, most reports had them way too far apart, Bob Mackenzie even speculated he would eventually be traded. PK called a meeting with his entire family the weekend prior to accepting the deal, if he was on board and happy with MB he wouldn't have done this. This was a lot closer to being a complete wreck than many are letting on.

PK's character and commitment to the CH are the reasons he's still a hab. MB unnecessarily played chicken with our greatest asset. He got lucky in a spot where luck shouldn't even have entered into the equation.

 

[habsfanatics*]

Hasn't PK said that he gets fuel from all the boos he gets around the league?

Does that sound like the personality type that wouldn't be effected at all by a 'lowball' offer?

I don't see why there's such huge diversity in opinion over this issue.

I can definitely see why some don't agree with what he did with PK but I fail to see why some seem to think that MB has crippled us with this move and it's such a huge gaffe on his part.

That way of thinking is just ridiculous.

Like I said, if it helps you sleep at night, keep clinging to these silly notions, how many superstars do we know that stopped playing after their contract? It's an entirely made-up scenario, because it almost never happens. Some pla\yers decline sooner, but it would have happened regardless of the contract situation.

You people can't be serious

 

[Sorinth]

Galchenyuk's already making 3.2whatever. Do you think he'll be that quick to dart from being 'forced' to sign for 5 mill a year for a couple years instead of the 7-8 he'll get in good time? Some teams actually have signed their respective stars to decent deals. Look at Pacioretty on our very own team.

It's not unprecedented that a player takes a bit of a discount to stay with the team he's with. It happens more than not actually.

The 3.2 is only with bonuses, unless he's winning scoring titles and individual trophies he's not actually making that money.

If you want a player to take a discount to stay then you don't offer them such a small salary that they feel they have to sit out the beginning of the season. Had we given Subban the long term deal he was looking for or even a bridge deal at a fair price then he would be much more likely to take a discount to stay.

When our Cup window opens that's exactly when the Gallies will be up for raises THUS the bridge contract policy. Instead of them getting 7 and 5 million they'll be more likely getting 5 and 3 THUS creating cap room for a couple years. See how that works?

How many players have actually signed offer sheets in the last 5 years? People on here are making it sound like it happens all the time.

It's not like this bridge contract policy is so crippling and oppressive. There's many ways that an organization deals with players that makes them want to stay there.

2 players signed offersheets just last season, and the Flyers were rumored to have given out an offer sheet to Subban which he didn't sign because he wants to be a Hab.

Don't confuse the idea of a bridge contract and the low-ball offer Subban got. Subban was already a top pairing defenceman, he was worth way more than the 2.85m we gave him. Had we given him fair value on a bridge contract then Bergevin's position would've been reasonable.

If either Gally is a 1st line player and putting up 70+ points they will sit out if we offer them the same low-ball offer we gave Subban. If we offer them fair value on either a long term deal or a bridge contract they'll sign. Nobody sits out to get more years, it's about the money.

Where are you getting your numbers from? The only players who got 7m or more after their ELC are guys who were winning scoring titles. If Gallagher is scoring 30 goals a season and we offer him less than 3m he's going to sit out.

And even if we get them super cheap for 2 years like Subban we will then have a 2 year window before we have to pay them a premium. Why not sign them to long term deals at a fair price so that our window is more than 2 years.

Gionta's production will be replaced by the natural progression of Galchenyuk and Gallagher. Prust can fill in that spot and be more effective. Prust creates offense while not getting 'points'. Prust will bring more of what we actually need in the top 9. Prust might not have as many points as Gionta but he'll increase the production of his linemates more than Gionta would.

Markov is a different story. Markov is still a PP beast but he's a borderline defensive liability out there. He still reads the play and can intercept passes but his lack of mobility is really hurting him out there.

NB and Tinordi won't be in their prime but they should still be effective with another year of AHL under their belts.

It's either we keep Markov or Diaz. We either save money by not having to give Diaz a raise or Markov's salary is coming off the books.

When Gionta goes we lose his 25-30 goals. Are you really suggesting that the Gallys will score 25-30 more goals in 2 years then they will this year? If you honestly think Plekanec will get more points playing alongside Prust then he would alonside Gionta you're higher than a kite.

As for Markov, he was our most used defenceman last season and went up against the oppositions best players. If he was such a liability then how in the hell did we finish 2nd in the East. If you are playing a borderline defensive liability 25min a game against top lines you won't win many games.

Either you don't actually watch games or don't understand what you're seeing if you think Markov is bad defensively. He may not have been as good as he was 3-4 years ago but back then he was Elite, last season he was only good.

 

[Sorinth]

Why don't people understand that PK might not have had the year he had without that bridge contract? Performance is a product of circumstance. It's stupid to say what you did.

He also might have won the Hart and led us to the Stanley Cup had we given him a long term deal. It's stupid to claim a great player is only great because of his contract.

 

[Habs 4 Life]

I really hope something get's workout out with both sides during the season and he doesn't end up missing time again next year. He's deserved his contract

Lock him up MB!

 

[Beaker]

Hes the only player I know will be worth the money, no matter the amount he gets.

 

[Sterling Archer]

6m x 6 years : 36m

bergy knows what to do. he did the right thing getting PK to sign that 2 year contract... teaches him values.

There's about a ZERO percent chance that PK will only get $6M per for 6 years. No way he gets less than Price does.

PK is in the $6.5++ range. The only way I can see him getting just $6.5 is on a 7 or 8 year deal. Something like what Karlson got or what Piertrangelo will likely get.

 

[montreal]

What's stupid is playing a game of chicken with one of your best players for unwarranted reasons.

I don't see it as playing a game of chicken. I saw it as MB trying to get Subban to buy into what he was selling. So far it looks like it worked, as long as he can get him signed long term now.

It was stupid because there was a lot of risk and very little reward.

I don't agree on there being a lot of risk, other then pissing off Subban so much that he demanded to be traded. But when you have a rookie GM there's going to be some learning curves. In the end we can say that the reward was very high so perhaps the GM knew what he was doing after all.