B21

Safe for work, right?

Since the Sharks have finally got everyone signed, I figured it is as good a time as any to discuss our defensive corps. Feel free to depict who you think will be your top pair, second pair and bottom pairing. Who will be your 7th, and how you coach employs the units. PP, PK and 5 on 5. Who are in the system that may make the jump to the big leagues. Discuss their strengths and weaknesses, pricetag and term, etc

With all the turnover in Pittsburgh and the injuries to Maatta and Pouliot that may cost both of them a few weeks of the season this is going to be hard - but here goes....

(Caveat: This is once everyone is healthy.)

1/2 - Paul Martin & Kris Letang.  Letang is as offensively gifted as they come.  He can make the big play defensively but that's usually evened out by the big gaffe. Martin is a perfect complement. Strong in his own end, smart with the puck and is your textbook "puck moving defenceman. Both are capable of quarterbacking the PP.

3/4 - Olli Maatta & Christian Erhoff.  Martin/Letang "lite". Erhoff not quite as gifted offensively as Letang but not nearly as "bad" defensively. Maatta I think ends up a better offensive player than Martin but not quote as good (bit still not bad) defensively.

5/6 - Rob Scuderi and either Robert Bortuzzo or Simon Depres. In an ideal world, this is Bortuzzo/Depres.  But Scuderi was signed to be the shut-down guy...so short of him rapidly losing another step I think you see a lot of mixing and matching depending on the opponent.

The Kids. Scott Harrington, Brian Dumoulin, Derrek Pouliot, Phillip Samuelsson.  By all accounts, Harrington is ready to step in and fill the "Brooks Orpik" role. Pouliot's injury will slow down his development a bit but - as @flyercanuck told me - he could use some seasoning in the A. As for Dumoulin and Samuelsson - simply a numbers game but I have no worries of they were called into service due to injuries to the guys above them. Not spectacular but solid.

I was lukewarm to the Scuderi signing because of the lenght of the deal (cap hit was OK) and the log jam he now creates.

However, the Erhoff signing gives the Pens flexibility. It allows a Pouliot or a Dumoulin to get more experience. If it's clear they are capable - it's only a 1 year deal for Erhoff.  If they become a trade chip the Pens can always try and extend Erhoff.  Worst case - neither are ready and Erhoff walks as a F/A after the season.

Great find. Thank God Pyatt is gone!

Yeah - it took a lot of work.

www.pittsburghpenguins.com/roster 

I was actually surprised they were updated. And agree on Pyant 100%.

Always curious....

Erhoff - #10

Downine - #23

Spaling - #13

Hornqvist - #72

Greiss - #1

Comeau - #17 (So I guess that spells the end for Pyatt.  )

  GREAT pick up by the Pens. I always imagined Recchi working with the kids in a coaching capacity.....they will get a nice bang for their buck outta this guy. Could not imagine a better guy to help shape the youngsters games. Rutherford made a nice solid move here!!

Yeah - have to agree here. The Recching Ball still lives in Pittsburgh. This moves makes a lot of sense.

That's great. Let's see what he's got!

I think the kid gets a fair shake....finally.  One of, if not my biggest, issues w/ Pepto Bylsma was his handling of Depres.

  Something tells me this is the last contract Despres signs that is under 2 mill

We can only hope.

Obviously, JR did not watch many Flyers games this season. He was THE reason they even made the playoffs this season. How many games this year did Mason make 35 saves and the Flyers won them? Quite a few. BTW, which year did JR win a Stanley Cup? He was a great player, but man does he love to hear himself talk.  If the Flyers had any kind of mobility and speed on their d, then he could talk about the fact that Mason might not be good enough.  Outside of Ed Belfour, who the hell was on any of his teams that was better than Mason?

This.

@B21@Polaris922

 

I'd take Letang in a heartbeat on the Sharks. I'd even take the whole salary as long as I did not need to give up certain prospects for him. God our need for a Left handed Dman to play alongside Braun.....

Even despite the question marks on his health.

 

But that will never happen. The fact that most of our players have NMC's, and certain prospects and younger players have been declared untouchable(Hertl, Nieto, Mueller, Braun, Vlasic).

 

I am still trying to figure out if we should be ade at you for unloading Kennedy on us? Or if you are mad at us for Unloading Doug Murray on you We did turn the pick for Murray into a trade up for Mirco Mueller lol.

Straight up for (edit) Pavelski?

It would not surprise me, however, as was discussed in depth in a thread earlier this spring, is Letang not in some way damaged goods.  I get the the fact that he would not be playing if not cleared, but I think I read somewhere that this could happen again.  What team would be willing to trade for him, especially with the contract he carries.  I would think he would brink some type of risk health wise where ever he goes.  Please no one misinterpret me.  I wish no ill will on him health wise.  I just feel health wise he is a risk.   There are too few studies regarding stroke victims and returning back to competitive sports.  Therefore I don't know any team that will be willing to trade for him, just for that fact alone.

If the Pens can get $.80 on the $1.00 for Letang?  I'd consider.  It's not just what you would get in return - it's also what you could use that cap space for.

Tyler Myers + $2,000,000 in cap space? Where do I sign?

Apparently Letang can be asked to give a list of a 12 team no trade list prior to each season.  Thus the rumors are a plenty these days as Montreal and Pittsburgh were said to be discussing possible trade scenarios.  I don't see this as a Subban for Letang swap though unless Montreal thinks that they can't sign Subban long term or under $7.2M

 

Letang is also rumored to be swapped for Tyler Meyers.  This move makes some sense for both teams, Meyers has a NMC and a NTC that doesn't go into effect until 16-17.  Financially this is a great move by Pittsburgh but I don't see Letang having Buffalo as a team he'd be willing to be traded to this season.

 

I'd be surprised actually if Letang is moved this year.  Too long of a contract for too much money.

I agree it's unlikely though I think Buffalo would have a shot at his "list" if he has to submit 12 teams he cannot be traded to.  Trying to think like Kris Letang....

Edmonton

Calgary

Winnipeg

Ottawa

Florida

Tampa Bay

Nashville

Columbus

Dallas

Phoenix

New Jersey

NY Islanders

don't forget this disaster by the Isles.....

 

Wait - I'm confused....

Whew. That's really confusing! I honestly know nothing about football, so this is all completely new to me. I really like the idea of restructuring though - makes it more relevant to the player's and team's actual situations. It would have allowed us, for example, to keep Briere if we could have a sane restructuring mechanism.

 

In your opinion, does an 'ideal' cap/contract structure exist in a professional sports league? 

I like the restructuring, too.  It allows you to keep a good team together longer though it eventually will catch up with you.  The money owed/cap hit doesn't go away - it's just deferred really.  You need the two-pronged approach to salaries, too.  Base salary and signing bonus...have to be able to move salary from one to another.

Is there an ideal system now? No.  But something combining elements of the NFL, NHL and NBA would work for me.

I like a hard cap - no luxury tax if you go over (like the NBA and MLB do).

I like the "Larry Bird Rule" and the mid-leven exception in the NBA.

I like the system the NFL set up as far as how the guaranteed money works. You have to guarentee something.  If that system were in place in the NHL, for example, maybe only half of VLC's salary is guaranteed.

But - the NFL system only works because the NFL has - by far - the best revenue sharing system.  There is still an advantage for larger markets but when your (arguably) most successful franchise of all time is based in Green Bay, WI (Population 107,000 / Metro 306,000) you are doing something right.

According to Forbes, in 2013, all of the NFL's franchises were among the 53 most valuable franchises in the world. Says a lot.

Ok, I think I get it. What is the guaranteed money (i.e. how is it calculated)? Has it been considered pretty punitive/harsh to walk away from contracts? What's been the players' take on that?

Well the signing bonus - agreed to by the team and player - is all guaranteed.  I don't think there is a formula for the rest of the guaranteed money.  It's up to the team and player to come to terms on that.

The players agree to all of the in the last round of collective bargaining but the NFLPA is probably the weakest of the 4 major sports unions, too.

They may have conceded a lot of this in order to get a rookie wage scale in place during the last CBA.

@brelic

Here's where it gets fun.

You can "restructure" deals at any point. The Steelers have done it with Big Ben several times.  He's a rare example of a long-term deal where you are almost assured of him playing out the contract.

Example:  Say Ben's cap hit for 2014 is $20,000,000.  $18,000,000 base (doesn't matter if it's guaranteed or not - he's playing so he gets paid) and $2,000,000 of pro-rated signing bonus.  The total bonus was $20,000,000 over the life of a 10 year deal. 2 years are left on the deal after 2014.

The Steelers can take part of that $18,000,000 base and turn it into a "signing bonus". That means it gets pro-rated over the remaining years of the contract.  It's a short term fix if a team is up against the cap but...it can (and often does) cause cap issues down the road.

Example: $10,000,000 of that base gets moved to a signing bonus.  The base for 2014 is now $8,000,000.

That $10,000,000 gets added to the balance of the signing bonus. The balance was $6,000,000 - or a $2,000,000 cap hit for 2014, 2015 and 2016.  Now it's $16,000,000 or just over $5,333,000 cap hit for 2014, 2015 and 2016.  Tack that onto Ben's cap hit for 2014 and it's now $13,333,000 and not $20,000,000.

But you added $3,333,333 to his hit in 2015 and 2016 and added to that "dead" money if you cut him (not likely but still).

But he does that now. I wonder if it might actually have the perverse effect of helping small market teams. If they were reluctant before to commit 7-years and that much money to a UFA, the fact that they could get out of it halfway through for non-performance and no (or minimal) penalty might make them more likely to open the purse strings.

 

Does that make sense?

It does.  It might work but if the punitive end of a failed long term deal is not enough I can see larger markets just outbidding the smaller markets.

Holmgren does/did that now because he's had outs...and gotten lucky.  He found takers for Carter and Richards and was able to buy our Bryz and Briere.  Your stuck with VLC, Streit and Pronger. 

I don't know anything about the NFL. So how do their contract structures work? They are non-guaranteed, right? Do they have length restrictions? Do large signing bonuses seem to affect smaller market teams (if such a thing exists in football)? Do they have a salary cap?

 

Yes - the annual base salary is not always guaranteed. Only the signing bonus is along with whatever base salary the team and player agree is guaranteed. I'm not sure about length restrictions but the punitive nature of the deals keeps teams from signing absurdly long contracts to lessen the cap hits (yes on their being a cap as well). When you hear a player has signed a 5 year, $60,000,000 deal with a $11,000,000 signing bonus and $30,000,000 guaranteed you take it with a grain of salt.

That deal was the deal Mike Wallace signed w/ Miami.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/miami-dolphins/mike-wallace/

You see how "punitive" the deal is if the Dolphins decide to get out of the deal early ("dead" money).  The cap hit is what the player is actually being paid plus the pro-rated signing bonus.  The "dead" money is taking whatever is left of the "guaranteed" money hitting the cap...all at once.

The Dolphins were smart. They had a lot of cap space for 2014 so a large amount of the guaranteed money hits the cap this season. If they had cut Wallace after 2013 (the first year of the deal) he would have counted $26,800,000 (!!!) against their cap (or about 20%). Hence, the guaranteed base salary was all of 2013, 2014 and part of 2015.

Since none of the 2016 or 2017 base salary is guaranteed you'll see that the only "dead" money if they cut Wallace is what is left of the pro-rated signing bonues.

In other words - if Mike Wallace underperforms from 2013 - 2015 he's not a Miami Dolphin in 2016.

Makes sense, no?

Absolutely. I agree on that point. I don't know that the cap will rise $20M in 5 years, but it could certainly happen.

 

At the end of the day, though, my personal beef has never been about the average annual value of contracts - it is with the length and the fact that there's no way out of them for most teams. I understand that the GMs are the ones handing these out, but shouldn't you, as an employer, be able to shed an employee after X number of years who simply isn't performing? As it stands right now, there is absolutely no incentive for any of these 'employees' to continue their performance or to even get better once that contract is signed - their money is guaranteed. Intrinsic motivation is not enough, and any other business in the real world knows that. There needs to be sane exit clauses.

I agree...to a point.  The exit clause should be punitive as well though.  Or else the Paul Holgrems of the world are going to keep handing out long-term deals to star players until they get one right.  In that regard, I like that the NFL does with the signing bonuses. The bonus is a pro-rated hit over the life of the deal but if you cut the guy you have the option to eat the balance for the next 1 or 1-2 seasons.

That's just how he rolls... he goes both ways

Hey - I drink Coke and Pepsi.  It's all about whatever is on sale.

This is a timely article:

http://www.thehockeynews.com/blog/long-term-deals-great-if-you-give-them-to-the-right-players/

 

There's a lot in there to discuss.

 

The first issue I would raise is the author stating that Kane and Toews signed for "substantially under market value". Here's the full quote:

 

 

I find that statement a bit puzzling. As UFAs, they would have gotten shorter contracts by one year or more. That's a rule-based certainty. The other part of it is whether or not you believe the FA market next year would have given them - individually - more than $10.5M per season. I have a hard time believing that, because Kane and Toews - together - are worth more to the Hawks than they are to other teams individually. We'll never know I guess.

 

The other aspect of the article that is weird is this guy is judging these new long-term contracts - Kane, Toews, and Bergeron (8 years, $52M) - right now and pronouncing them great deals. I think he completely misses the boat on this entire debate - a long-term contract can only be judged as a success or failure at the end of the term, or close to it (or if it starts out poorly right from the get-go, e.g. VLC). How he can say that the Bergeron deal as one of the "biggest bargains in the NHL" when it has not even started is puzzling. Will a 35-year old Bergeron be 'worth' $6.5M to a Bruins team that is likely to look very different than what it does now? No one knows... but other similar long-term contracts that I have seen have not worked out well precisely because they overcommit and there's no easy way out.

 

He's right on one point though - it's important to give long-term contracts to the right players, and quality management teams can identify that more than mediocre management. 

 

Look at the Flyers long-term contracts:

 

Pronger

Briere

Timonen

Hartnell (6 years the first time, 6 years the second time)

Bryzgalov

Carter

Richards

JVR

Giroux (starts this year)

VLC (only one year in)

 

How many of those do you think worked out for the Flyers?

He makes a good point about how the annual cap hit stays the same relative to a cap that will (likely) increase each year.  Those deals may seem like to much now but what if (and I know it's an "if") the cap is at $90,000,000 in 5 years?  I think that's part of the reason why the Crosby and Giroux deals look like such bargains right now.

He's some food for thought, too.  All of the players who  - if they were free agents right now - would command at least $8,000,000(ish) per year are signed to deals that take them well into the end of the decade and often beyond.

Crosby - 2025

Malkin - 2022

Giroux - 2022

Getzlaf - 2021

Perry - 2021

Datsyuk - 2017

OV - 2021

Suter - 2025

Weber - 2026

Doughty - 2019

Keith - 2023

Quick - 2023

Rask - 2021 

The next free agents to be "worthy" (i/m/h/o) of a lengthy $8,000,000+ will be Stamkos and Kopitar after the 2016 season then Tavares after the 2018 season.

 Think he's with UnderArmor too. And something like Frito Lay (that's the "punching bag" Crosby) Verizon, Kellogs. Walk through a supermarket in Canada, he's everywhere.

 

 Oh and CoverGirl lipstick too. Or is that just a "should have" one? 

It's L'Oreal. Not cover girl.    Though I doubt he is with Reebok and Under Armour.  That's like being a spokesman for Coke and Pepsi.

Makes sense he'd be on more in Canada.

FWIW, Crosby makes $4,000,000 per year in endorsements. (Per Forbes. 2012).

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbadenhausen/2012/11/28/sidney-crosby-tops-list-of-the-nhls-highest-paid-players/

This includes Reebok, Gatorade, Tim Hortons and Bell Canada.  This is the most of any NHL player.  Nothing to shake a stick at but not "OMG".

Crosby is widely considered the "face" of the NHL and one of it's most marketable players. Comparable players in other leagues...

Peyton Manning: $10,000,000

LeBron: $42,000,000

Kobe: $34,000,000

Even Carmelo Anthony ($9,000,000) and Amar'e Stoudamire ($6,500,000) make more in endorsements.

So would I. And I honestly wonder how much of the ratchet negotiation structure is sincerely the player telling his agent to get him X amount of dollars versus the agent really setting the stage in terms of expectations for the player.

 

I think non-guaranteed contracts could go a long way toward solving some of these incongruities - and it wouldn't even have to be an all or nothing proposition. For example, a contract might be only guaranteed for 50% of the length - if the team chooses to terminate the contract after year 4 of 8, say, they could, with no cap penalty. The league could even implement a 5% (of the total value) termination fee or something. The player gets some measure of stability and the team gets some measure of flexibility. 

 

I understand that it's been a non-starter in the past so we'll have to wait and see how the league fares over the next 7 seasons. But the current normal buyout structure is untenable for a majority of the teams.

I agree completely.  At the end of the day though, teams and players will find a way to structure the deals so the player is getting the "maximum" guaranteed money he's looking for.  In the NFL, it's the signing bonuses.  In the NHL - using your scenario - the contracts will be as frontloaded as the league allows.  Just like someone is willing to pay a superstar $10,000,000 per year there will be someone willing to set up...say...an 8 year, $80,000,000 deal where the money paid out in the first 4 years (reasonable for a player to actually play) is 75% on the total contract value.  $10 million cap hit but the actual salary each year (in millions) is 15, 15, 15, 15, 5, 5, 5 and 5. The NHL would have to allow that (unlike - for example - the Kovy deal - with 500K actual salary at the tail end of the deal).

 I agree. 

 

 But to play devils advocate, again you could argue Crosby could play for minimum wage and still come out a multi-millionaire. You could also argue Crosby took the hometown discount so the Pens could get some Sharps and Hossas, but ended up with Dupuis' and Bennetts. Which hasn't resulted in any more cups. So why not just take the money? 

I don't think Crosby's hometown discount was all that much.  Could he have gotten $10 million per? Sure.  So he saved the Pens $1,300,000 per - or about the difference between Chuck Kobasew and Chris Kunitz.  If he took $7,000,000 maybe Hossa (or someone of a similar skill set) is a Penguin.

Does he really make that much in endorsements?  Aside from Reebok, I've never seen him in a commercial.

The only problem with enforcing this 'embellishment' thing, especially in regards to falling, is that poor Scott Hartnell will be penalized RELENTLESSLY because the officials will keep thinking he falls down on purpose!

 

And he will go bankrupt with fines from the league too!

 

No one will care that THAT IS HOW HE PLAYS! 

He just....falls.....can't help it....he is trying NOT to...but, well, he and gravity, simply don't get along....

You didn't know? It wasn't an apple that fell onto Sir Isaac Newton's head. It was Hartnell.

That's a good question. I have no idea how things work internally - if anything, I imagine the NHLPA is more involved with the agents in terms of negotiating directives, no? Does the PA have to approve all deals? In other words, could Crosby go out and get a $3M contract if he wanted to?

I'm not sure but I think the NHLPA has enough clout to turn a player(s) into a pariah if they would do something along those lines (such as Crosby taking $3,000,000 per year for example).  That said, any contract THAT far off the norm could not be used as a comparable for other contracts.

Capitals: "So OV - Sid signed for $3,000,000 a year for 8 years. Let's start there, da?"

OV: "Nyet. $10,000,000 per. Dollars. Not rubles."

But let's just say Crosby signed for....$7,000,000 per.  You are the Hawks negotiating with Kane and Toews.

"Look fellas. Really - $10,500,000 is nice but your families are set for generations at $7,000,000 per, no? That saves us $6,000,000 per season. Do you want us to keep Hossa and Sharp on your wings and win a few more Cups? Or do you want more money + Chuck Kobasew and Chris Conner?"

Easy for me to say - but I'd take the $7,000,000 in a heartbeat.

I'm not sure he can; at least not without the NHLPA having a fit because it lowers salaries for all players. 

I was actually wondering how much...influence?....the NHLPA had on the Kane and Toews deals.