Jump to content

Oilers resign Gagner: 3 Yrs, 4.8mill per


Guest J0e Th0rnton

Recommended Posts

I don't think that it is a bad deal. I would have guessed he would get $4.5 million based off of this past season, and then they overpaid a bit for the last 2 years to eat up a couple of UFA years. He's a good player with real potential, and if he plays like he did this past season throughout the contract, it is worthwhile.

So yeah. I don't have a problem with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If things hadn't worked out, Gagner was scheduled to become the youngest UFA in the history of the NHL. So, the question really becomes "what would 24 year old Sam Gagner be worth on the open market, with 30 teams bidding on him?".

The answer: a lot more than $4.8M and over a lot longer than 3 years. Teams would have been lining up to throw money at a UFA who's age means that he's going to get better, not worse.

Let's say the Oilers allowed this to go to arbitration and they accepted whatever he came up with (and they would have). The "risk" that Gagner has a 60 point season is pretty high. For the first bit of the season, he's going to play centre between Taylor Hall and Jordan Eberle, and he'll get gravy PP minutes. He's going to get points in this situation. Then, after Ryan Nugent-Hopkins comes back, Gagner will slot in between David Perron and Nail Yakupov, who will all get buttery soft easy minutes (with the Gordon line taking the toughest draws, and the Hall line getting the 2nd toughest). Gagner will again be put in a position to pile up points. If/when that happens, the Oilers are looking a negotiating with a young UFA who will have every little bit of the leverage.

I think this deal represents pretty good value for Craig MacTavish, who was put in this situation by the imbecile Steve Tambellini.

This is a good day for the Oilers.

JR

Edited by JR Ewing
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Waaay too much imo for a guy that has only shown small glimpses of living up to his promise. I think he's in that 3.5 mil range...

I just think when you've got the forward log jam they've got, they'd have been better off dealing him for defense/goaltending.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was taken aback a tad when I heard he was asking for 5.5, thought it was a bit to much. The 4.8 he got is fair market value for a young promising forward who is on an upwards pts trajectory. Fair deal for both sides IMHO.

That 5 point game really helped out his pt totals for the short season, wonder if he would have got 4.2-4.4 without that big game.....who knows?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Waaay too much imo for a guy that has only shown small glimpses of living up to his promise. I think he's in that 3.5 mil range...

I just think when you've got the forward log jam they've got, they'd have been better off dealing him for defense/goaltending.

So, how much do you figure a 60 point player who is 24 years old is worth on the open market? Do you think you can snag him for $3.5M?

But here's the other thing... What log jam are you talking about? Gagner's a centre. If Gagner's gone, here's what they have at centre:

NHL

Ryan Nugent-Hopkins

Boyd Gordon

AHL

Anton Lander

Marco Arcobello

Andrew Miller

Will Acton

Ryan Martindale

Two NHL centres, one of whom is a checker and not suited to the task. They could bring in Grabovski, but he's going to want money in Gagner's neighbourhood anyway.

I'm all for the trading players when I have an extra amount of talent, but the Oilers are weaker at centre than they are on the blueline.

JR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

60 pt player??... he had ONE projected year at that pace and multiple 40'ish years.

Log jam... you cannot have 75% of your salary locked up in forwards and that's what it looks like for you guys. Wing, center, whatever... can you really have your 5th or 6th best forward making 5 mil +/-??

The only positive thing is that it is a relatively short deal. By the time the other young guys are demanding cash, he can be dealt then.

Edited by fishbulb
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@fishbulb He was a bit of a late bloomer. Some guys take longer than others. I'll eat my shorts if he does not reach 60 pts this year. Players these days are paid on projections, and as rad stated in another thread, 50 pts is the typical threshold for 4 mill players these days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

60 pt player??... he had ONE projected year at that pace and multiple 40'ish years.

Quite right, and this year he's going to go from centering Hall and Eberle while Hopkins is hurt, and then move down to a hyper-sheltered line with Perron and Yakupov. Lots of PP minutes the entire time. Even if he was a 3C playing up, you know the points are going to come because by virtue of the talent he's playing with.

Log jam... you cannot have 75% of your salary locked up in forwards and that's what it looks like for you guys. Wing, center, whatever... can you really have your 5th or 6th best forward making 5 mil +/-??

Wing, centre, whatever? I suppose we're in agree to disagree here, but if Gagner is dealt for a defenseman, they don't have anybody to play his minutes. It's not as simple as saying to a winger "Hey, I know you haven't played centre since you were 12, but do you want to give it a shot here against NHL players?"

If Sam Gagner is gone, the Oilers only have 2 NHL centres. Speaking as a fan that's spent 20 years watching his team trade players without a suitable replacement, it's just lousy management to do it.

The only positive thing is that it is a relatively short deal. By the time the other young guys are demanding cash, he can be dealt then.

It may be the right time to deal him then. Maybe they'll have more than two other centres who can play NHL minutes. That would be a good thing; that would place the team in a position where they can consider a trade.

Until that time, by signing this deal, they've avoided negotiations with the NHL's youngest UFA ever, who would fetch a much higher price than $4.8M. Dollar values on contracts aren't signed in a bubble. The player's age, development, the CBA, other players... All of those things come into play, and Gagner held some very nice cards here, and gets paid a bit more than usual for what you'd see.

Under these circumstances, the contract is good for Edmonton. Otherwise, the arbitrator probably settled for about $500,000 less (in between the Oilers pitch and Gagner's) and he walks away for nothing the year after.

JR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@fishbulb WOW, it's very odd how his face off winning percentage goes WAY up on the pp and in the offensive zone. I don't recall seeing such a differential, wonder why that is??

The PP increase makes perfect sense: it happens league-wide. The PP team has an extra player to help win the draw. That being said, I don't know if the author is splitting up ES offensive zone faceoffs and PP faceoffs. If not, the advantage from PP faceoffs would distort those ES draws and create a statistical illusion. However, as I said, I don't know how if he's splitting them up.

I wouldn't mind seeing Gagner's FO% go up, but faceoffs aren't hugest deal in the world anyway, and are over-emphasised, generally speaking. Statistically speaking, a player needs to win about 76 more faceoffs than he loses in order to create a goal differential of 1, and a team going from 50% to 60% in the dot would gain about 12 goals, or 2 wins.

That being said, I'd rather win a faceoff than lose one. Given Gagner's history on draws, I would use him primarily in offensive zone faaceoffs situations and PP when I get the chance, sheltering him from as many DZ faceoffs as possible. I'd be stunned if Eakins ends up using him very differently.

JR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@JR Ewing Are you Sam Gagner's agent?

You can draw upon whatever stats you'd like, but I don't think it's a surprise that both cup finalists were beasts on draws. The flyers also struggle to win faceoffs and it puts SO MUCH pressure on the goalies/dmen to come up big time and again especially when the draw takes place in the d-zone.

I'm not as much interested in the big picture of faceoffs vs wins as I'd be interested in the importance of winning so called "big draws"... ie) 30 secs left in the game up by one....

Toronto was missing Bozak's faceoff ability BIG TIME against the Broons this past playoffs... pretty sure winning a few extra faceoffs and controlling more of the game during the last 10 mins would have been nice.

Edited by fishbulb
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@JR Ewing Are you Sam Gagner's agent?

Heh.

No, but I can see how you're getting that idea. He's not a perfect player by any means, but he's a good, young 2C.

You can draw upon whatever stats you'd like, but I don't think it's a surprise that both cup finalists were beasts on draws. The flyers also struggle to win faceoffs and it puts SO MUCH pressure on the goalies/dmen to come up big time and again especially when the draw takes place in the d-zone.

The Bruins were a very good faceoff team this year. The Blackhawks, though, were quite normal. The average team won 1430 faceoffs in 2013, the Hawks won 1436, 0.8 points above average. There IS big picture stuff which shows no correlation between faceoff ability and things like Wins, GF, GA, PP%, PK%, but that's fine.

I'm not as much interested in the big picture of faceoffs vs wins as I'd be interested in the importance of winning so called "big draws"... ie) 30 secs left in the game up by one....

Toronto was missing Bozak's faceoff ability BIG TIME against the Broons this past playoffs... pretty sure winning a few extra faceoffs and controlling more of the game during the last 10 mins would have been nice.

I agree, which is why I suggested earlier that Gagner is a poor candidate to take those draws. Taking tough draws would be part of the reason that MacTavish signed Boyd Godron:

http://stats.tabita.org/faceoffs/player/boyd_gordon

Please don't take me too literally, here: I didn't say that faceoffs have no importance, I said that they're over-emphasized, generally speaking. The data DOES show that the frequency of shots against rises after a defensive zone faceoff loss. I agree that a scenario like the one you mention isn't one of those situations, and it calls for a quality faceoff man.

I would never suggest otherwise, because all other things being equal, I'll take the guy who can win them.

JR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@JR Ewing "The PP increase makes perfect sense: it happens league-wide. The PP team has an extra player to help win the draw."

Of course, that makes sense, should have thought of that.

In genreal, face offs are important because it leads to puck possession, can't score if you don't have the puck...lol. I do get what you are saying though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@JR Ewing "The PP increase makes perfect sense: it happens league-wide. The PP team has an extra player to help win the draw."

Of course, that makes sense, should have thought of that.

In genreal, face offs are important because it leads to puck possession, can't score if you don't have the puck...lol. I do get what you are saying though.

This has been measured, actually: that puck possession period after winning a draw is about ten seconds. After that, the frequency of shots and scoring chances is right back to what it is the rest of the game. This matches up well with we see in the overall numbers: no correlation between faceoff percentages and things like GF and GA (which have direct linear relationship with winning). Some teams that score a lot with a lot of their faceoffs, and other teams which score a lot don't.

Where faceoff have their moments are in those high leverage situations which fishbulb described: key moments in the game, late while protecting a lead or trying to get it back. I think only a fool would suggest that having a good faceoff man in unimportant at those times.

JR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@JR Ewing "This has been measured, actually: that puck possession period after winning a draw is about ten seconds. After that, the frequency of shots and scoring chances is right back to what it is the rest of the game. This matches up well with we see in the overall numbers: no correlation between faceoff percentages and things like GF and GA (which have direct linear relationship with winning). Some teams that score a lot with a lot of their faceoffs, and other teams which score a lot don't."

Did not know that, learn something new every day. I'm kinda old school like that, it's hard for me to convert to the new stats like Corsi etc, although I know they are super valuable learning tools. Gotta get more into that kinda stuff just to find out more about the game I love.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...