Trading Simmonds

[OccamsRazor]

On 8/29/2017 at 1:53 PM, aziz said:

 sweeney isn't being the dumb GM thinking short-term and making the overall salary situation in the league worse.

 

 

I am on his side. Someone has to put their foot down and keep this stuff from getting out of hand.

 

From reports i have seen they are not even close. He wants around 7.5mill per year.

 

 

And as you said that just isn't enough for one year in my book i would (if i'm a Bruin fan be more open to a 4 or 5 year deal to start with.

 

Just like with Draisaitl 8 year 68 mill for one one 70 points season to me is crazy too.

 

Sure his number went up slightly year by year over the 3 year entry level deal. But when you compare the two they are close in numbers.

 

Draisaitl- GP 191 G 50 A 87 P 137 -12 8 GWG PPG 10

 

Pastrnak- GP 17S G 59 A 64 P 123 +26 6 GWG PPG 10

 

 

So i can see why he wants that type of money so you can more blame their X- GM setting the market for 21 year old forwards.

 

The only difference is Leon was the 3rd overall in 2014 and David as the 25th pick.

[vis]

2 hours ago, elmatus said:

I expect that's exactly why we're seeing players taking contracts that involve the majority payout in the form of signing bonuses rather than standard salary. They're adjusting to what they know is likely to happen in the next short bit.

Yes, buyout protection is a big reason for these types of contracts.  Of course, if there are compliance buyouts as part of the next CBA, I can imagine the NHLPA and owners potentially agreeing that, not withstanding the language in the CBA, salary AND bonus amounts will be included in the calculation of cap savings for compliance buyouts.   With respect to regular buyouts in the next CBA, I'm sure the "bonus-as-buyout-protection" structure will be another issue for the NHLPA and owners to fight over.

 

Also, bonuses shift risk to the owners during the lockout.  If I recall correctly, bonuses are payable during the lockout whereas salary is not.  In effect, the bonus is guaranteed money - even during the lockout.  So the players receiving bonuses have some income during the lockout and the owners paying bonuses have some economic pressure to avoid a lengthy lockout.  Would love to know how much $$$ each team has tied up in bonuses vs. salaries.  IIRC, practically all of McDavid's contract is structured as a bonus payments.

[AJgoal]

1 hour ago, vis said:

Also, bonuses shift risk to the owners during the lockout.  If I recall correctly, bonuses are payable during the lockout whereas salary is not.  In effect, the bonus is guaranteed money - even during the lockout.

 

Essentially. Bonuses are payable on the first day of the league year, which is July 1 each year. The CBA doesn't expire until September. So bonuses are paid before a lockout could occur.

[King Knut]

5 hours ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

 

I am on his side. Someone has to put their foot down and keep this stuff from getting out of hand.

 

From reports i have seen they are not even close. He wants around 7.5mill per year.

 

 

And as you said that just isn't enough for one year in my book i would (if i'm a Bruin fan be more open to a 4 or 5 year deal to start with.

 

Just like with Draisaitl 8 year 68 mill for one one 70 points season to me is crazy too.

 

Sure his number went up slightly year by year over the 3 year entry level deal. But when you compare the two they are close in numbers.

 

Draisaitl- GP 191 G 50 A 87 P 77 -12 8 GWG PPG 10

 

Pastrnak- GP 17S G 59 A 64 P 123 +26 6 GWG PPG 10

 

 

So i can see why he wants that type of money so you can more blame their X- GM setting the market for 21 year old forwards.

 

The only difference is Leon was the 3rd overall in 2014 and David as the 25th pick.

 

I agree it's too much.  But I think you have to let the market sort itself out or this kind of thing is going to keep happening.

 

The problem isn't necessarily players asking for this stuff, it's teams giving it to them.  Once a few of them get denied, it'll stop pretty quickly.  

 

He's not arbitration eligible apparently, so let the sucker sit.  see how his team mates like that.  

 

You can try talking sense into the Agent, you can try giving him a seriously incentive laden contract that COULD amount to 7.5 million if he scores 80 points and 40 goals (still a cap problem, but at least it ensures you're paying for what you're getting).  

 

6 million for 4-5 years would be a lot, but I think the max of what the market would bear.  At the end of that, he's a UFA entering the prime of his career and can cash in for 8-9 million somewhere if he stays on the path he's on now.

 

More realistically I'd give him 5 million for 5-6 years, which amounts to the same benefit of UFA timing for him. 

 

7.5 is just kind of crazy and unrealistic for his agent.  Deny him.  GO to camp.  See how long it takes him to cave.  This really seems like a case of a young kid being sweet talked by a a hole of an agent with dollar signs in his eyes.  

 

I honestly thought he'd agree to the 6 million and just iron out the duration.  7.5?  Sweeny's absolutely got to play hard ball.  You're done kid.  

 

Draisaitl is just a moronic deal.  McDavid?  I get it.  He's a 20 year old MVP but even so... that's too much money for any one player IMHO.  He goes down (Brandon Manning anyone?) and you're screwed.  Draisaitl however?  where the hell did the Oilers get off deciding that kid was worth that?  I'm so confused.  

 

The long and short is though that if these clubs are willing to cave to these demands, it's never going to end.  Just like an arbitration lawyer would claim that Simmonds' deal is an aberration well below market value, the same lawyer could easily claim that 7.5 or 8.5 million for these kids for that duration is an aberration in the other direction.

 

 

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

If the Flyers are out of contention by the trade deadline this year, I think Simmonds is gone and you'll probably see an auction between 10 to 12 teams wanting him. It also wouldn't be a rental because there's one more year on Simmonds' deal, so I think it's very logical the Flyers could end up with a young roster player, a blue chip prospect and multiple draft picks for him. So, if Nashville came calling and were offering Fiala, Fabbro and a 1st one year and a second the next, I'd hope Hextall would be all over that. I think that's the kind of deal you'll see for Simmonds.

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

8 hours ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

 

I am on his side. Someone has to put their foot down and keep this stuff from getting out of hand.

 

From reports i have seen they are not even close. He wants around 7.5mill per year.

 

 

And as you said that just isn't enough for one year in my book i would (if i'm a Bruin fan be more open to a 4 or 5 year deal to start with.

 

Just like with Draisaitl 8 year 68 mill for one one 70 points season to me is crazy too.

 

Sure his number went up slightly year by year over the 3 year entry level deal. But when you compare the two they are close in numbers.

 

Draisaitl- GP 191 G 50 A 87 P 137 -12 8 GWG PPG 10

 

Pastrnak- GP 17S G 59 A 64 P 123 +26 6 GWG PPG 10

 

 

So i can see why he wants that type of money so you can more blame their X- GM setting the market for 21 year old forwards.

 

The only difference is Leon was the 3rd overall in 2014 and David as the 25th pick.

 

That's why the next CBA, you can bet owners are going to ask that contracts not be guaranteed. That's where it's heading. The owners want an NFL-style system with regards to contracts and you can also bet that the owners will want the revenue split to be more in their favour than the players. The next CBA discussion is going to get ugly, real fast.

[Howie58]

I am surprised to see the eight year deal.  You'd think the wise people would conclude that is a lifetime in this sport. 

 

 

[King Knut]

37 minutes ago, BobbyClarkeFan16 said:

If the Flyers are out of contention by the trade deadline this year, I think Simmonds is gone and you'll probably see an auction between 10 to 12 teams wanting him. It also wouldn't be a rental because there's one more year on Simmonds' deal, so I think it's very logical the Flyers could end up with a young roster player, a blue chip prospect and multiple draft picks for him. So, if Nashville came calling and were offering Fiala, Fabbro and a 1st one year and a second the next, I'd hope Hextall would be all over that. I think that's the kind of deal you'll see for Simmonds.

 

Nashville would be a good fit for him.  They need him up front to put in some goals and they're built to win now.

[King Knut]

35 minutes ago, BobbyClarkeFan16 said:

 

That's why the next CBA, you can bet owners are going to ask that contracts not be guaranteed. That's where it's heading. The owners want an NFL-style system with regards to contracts and you can also bet that the owners will want the revenue split to be more in their favour than the players. The next CBA discussion is going to get ugly, real fast.

 

The one part of the equation that is absolutely unnecessary is the owners.   They're not needed and they need to realize that going into things.  It's really not all about them.  Functionally, the only service they provide to a profitable team is organizational structure.  This could be reproduced fairly easily by managers that a player owned team or league would pay for their services instead of the other way around.  

Not saying it's going to happen, but the owners need to keep their own importance in check and realize this. I despise the way the NFL doesn't guarantee contracts.  That's literally the opposite of what a contract is.  It's idiotic and the NFL players union should have flipped out over it (not the worst problem that stupid union has on it's hands with the concussion problems).  

 

Seriously... if Hockey isn't profitable enough for you the way it is, then GET THE HELL OUT OF THE BUSINESS.  

 

That said, they could also stop screwing themselves over by giving 21 year old 2nd line centers who haven't done much 8 year deals worth 8.5 million bucks.  If one or two teams would play hardball back at these kids and keep things realistic, that wouldn't happen again.  The Oilers didn't need that kid.  They had McDavid and a bunch of other talent.  They could have sat the punk and let him rot while he sorted out his ego.

 

 

[AJgoal]

Just now, King Knut said:

you can try giving him a seriously incentive laden contract that COULD amount to 7.5 million if he scores 80 points and 40 goals (still a cap problem, but at least it ensures you're paying for what you're getting).  

 

 

No you can't. Incentives are available on ELCs and 35+ contracts only.

[jammer2]

13 hours ago, elmatus said:

 

I have to wonder if we're going to see teams make foolish signings (salary and term), knowing they have a new CBA coming and will likely get some freebee buyout options. I expect that's exactly why we're seeing players taking contracts that involve the majority payout in the form of signing bonuses rather than standard salary. They're adjusting to what they know is likely to happen in the next short bit.

 

 Yes, for sure GM's are signing some of these risky deals with the outright knowledge they have a get out of jail free card. It's literally guaranteed as part of the CBA, because both sides profit. The players get bought out, can stick the money in their pocket and go out an get another deal, which turns out to be just gravy. Then the GM's get to take their worst mistake and be free of it, so seeing how both sides make out like bandits, it's a given. 

[jammer2]

5 hours ago, King Knut said:

Draisaitl is just a moronic deal.  McDavid?  I get it.  He's a 20 year old MVP but even so... that's too much money for any one player IMHO.  He goes down (Brandon Manning anyone?) and you're screwed.  Draisaitl however?  where the hell did the Oilers get off deciding that kid was worth that?  I'm so confused.  

 

 

 You get the feeling that one of these GM's is gonna hand out an outrageous deal to a one year wonder eventually.  Would hate to the be GM left holding the hot potato on that one. If these kids keep getting paid after just one year of respectable production, a total flop will inevitably get rich...that should put an end to this mess real quick....lol. 

 

 Some high draft pick's agent who kinda sorta shows promise will sucker somebody in. For instance, a guy like Ryan Nugent Hopkins has an outstanding 3rd year and WHAM...never hit's those numbers ever again. 

[OccamsRazor]

4 hours ago, BobbyClarkeFan16 said:

 

That's why the next CBA, you can bet owners are going to ask that contracts not be guaranteed. That's where it's heading. The owners want an NFL-style system with regards to contracts and you can also bet that the owners will want the revenue split to be more in their favour than the players. The next CBA discussion is going to get ugly, real fast.

 

 

Sounds about right they are the ones handing out the deals only turn around and bitch about em...

[King Knut]

21 hours ago, AJgoal said:

 

No you can't. Incentives are available on ELCs and 35+ contracts only.

 

I meant more in theory as we seemed to be working on this in the abstract as a way to combat this sort of thing in the next CBA.

[aziz]

On 8/30/2017 at 5:23 PM, King Knut said:

The one part of the equation that is absolutely unnecessary is the owners.   They're not needed and they need to realize that going into things.  It's really not all about them.  Functionally, the only service they provide to a profitable team is organizational structure.

 

????

 

no.  i mean: no.  no, no.  

 

what????

 

they own the franchises.  they literally pay the salaries.  if they run out of money, the team goes away.  if they aren't making the money they'd hoped to, the team goes away.  i mean, wtf, they are absolutely necessary.  people act like $6.5mil (which isn't enough to convince pastrnak to *play* the game of hockey) comes from a monopoly game, like this isn't actual cash.  pastrnak isn't satisfied with enough money to buy 6 bugatti veyrons EVERY YEAR, and the owners, i.e., the ones whose wallets are on the line, are chopped liver.  is it any wonder there is a big labor problem in pro sports?  the entitlement of the players to unlimited recompense and the relegation of the guys signing checks to irrelevance is just amazing.  with a labor base that believes this and a fan base supporting it, who is surprised?  it should be pastrnak's god given right to a garage FILLED with exotic cars after having a single season worthy of attention.

 

wtf.

 

On 8/30/2017 at 5:23 PM, King Knut said:

This could be reproduced fairly easily by managers that a player owned team or league would pay for their services instead of the other way around.  

 

I'd be curious to see this.  have lemieux and gretz and whoever else put their cash together and create a collective league, where all gate and merchandising proceeds are collected into one pot, and salaries are determined centrally (because if there are no per-team owners, the individual teams don't have their own bank accounts with which to negotiate, you are looking at a fixed salary league).  announce the plan, and tell the hold outs like pastrnak there is an option, they don't have to be crushed under the iron boot of an NHL owner only offering them $6.5mil for 7 years.  they can accept a committee-decided salary and be assigned to a team that doesn't have individual financial obligations.  sounds like fun, would totally work.

 

On 8/30/2017 at 5:23 PM, King Knut said:

Seriously... if Hockey isn't profitable enough for you the way it is, then GET THE HELL OUT OF THE BUSINESS.

 

i mean, i guess that's one approach, going scorched earth.  the other would be to modify the business so it is profitable enough for you.  except that appears to specifically be a thing some fans don't want.  thus your suggestion they fold first.

 

i don't get it.  it's like some fans actively want the NHL product to get worse, in the name of players getting a 7th veyron for christmas.  we are but a few years from teams regularly having to trade their 22 year olds because they can't afford to re-sign them (rendering the concept of draft position just shy of worthless).  i guess that's a thing fans can support, if they want to.  dunno why they would want to, though.

[RonJeremy]

Simmons has to be traded, we are already saddled with Giroux and Voraceks big contracts.Imagine  If Simmons has a 40 goal season in his contract year,  the demands will be insane, even another  30 goal year, he will want big $. When you have a 30 yr old guy looking for a monster contract for 8 yeas and maybe you get 3 to 4 more good seasons out of him and then you have a diminished player and a huge cap hit for 4 more years. You have to be like the Patriots, when a player gets up there and is due a big payday, get rid of him. As long as you make the right trades and draft well, you will be able to keep the team going for years. 

 

[ruxpin]

8 hours ago, RonJeremy said:

Simmons has to be traded, we are already saddled with Giroux and Voraceks big contracts.Imagine  If Simmons has a 40 goal season in his contract year,  the demands will be insane, even another  30 goal year, he will want big $. When you have a 30 yr old guy looking for a monster contract for 8 yeas and maybe you get 3 to 4 more good seasons out of him and then you have a diminished player and a huge cap hit for 4 more years. You have to be like the Patriots, when a player gets up there and is due a big payday, get rid of him. As long as you make the right trades and draft well, you will be able to keep the team going for years. 

 

Hey, haven't seen you around here in awhile. Good to see you back. 

 

As callous as it sounds (because Simmonds is one of the few flyers I like individually) your post is absolutely right. 

[King Knut]

15 hours ago, aziz said:

 

????

 

no.  i mean: no.  no, no.  

 

what????

 

they own the franchises.  they literally pay the salaries.  if they run out of money, the team goes away.  if they aren't making the money they'd hoped to, the team goes away.  i mean, wtf, they are absolutely necessary.  people act like $6.5mil (which isn't enough to convince pastrnak to *play* the game of hockey) comes from a monopoly game, like this isn't actual cash.  pastrnak isn't satisfied with enough money to buy 6 bugatti veyrons EVERY YEAR, and the owners, i.e., the ones whose wallets are on the line, are chopped liver.  is it any wonder there is a big labor problem in pro sports?  the entitlement of the players to unlimited recompense and the relegation of the guys signing checks to irrelevance is just amazing.  with a labor base that believes this and a fan base supporting it, who is surprised?  it should be pastrnak's god given right to a garage FILLED with exotic cars after having a single season worthy of attention.

 

wtf.

 

 

I'd be curious to see this.  have lemieux and gretz and whoever else put their cash together and create a collective league, where all gate and merchandising proceeds are collected into one pot, and salaries are determined centrally (because if there are no per-team owners, the individual teams don't have their own bank accounts with which to negotiate, you are looking at a fixed salary league).  announce the plan, and tell the hold outs like pastrnak there is an option, they don't have to be crushed under the iron boot of an NHL owner only offering them $6.5mil for 7 years.  they can accept a committee-decided salary and be assigned to a team that doesn't have individual financial obligations.  sounds like fun, would totally work.

 

 

i mean, i guess that's one approach, going scorched earth.  the other would be to modify the business so it is profitable enough for you.  except that appears to specifically be a thing some fans don't want.  thus your suggestion they fold first.

 

i don't get it.  it's like some fans actively want the NHL product to get worse, in the name of players getting a 7th veyron for christmas.  we are but a few years from teams regularly having to trade their 22 year olds because they can't afford to re-sign them (rendering the concept of draft position just shy of worthless).  i guess that's a thing fans can support, if they want to.  dunno why they would want to, though.

 

Im not sure why you think I want the NHL to get worse.  

 

Im just saying that it's a climate the owners and GMs are ultimately responsible for, so I have little pity for them if they end up overpaying.  They created and indulged the lopsided market and they'll have to endure the correction if they want it corrected.  It's how markets are supposed to work (unless Tim Geitber and Ben Bernanke are going to bail you out). 

 

Ultimately my point about the owners thatbi wish wish they'd realize is that if the league folded tomorrow, these guys would still be playing hockey somewhere (Olympics for starters) and it wouldn't take them long to get paid. And we'll all probably pay to go see them if we're able. 

 

There was brief chatter about a player run league cropping up two strikes ago.  It'll never happen, but I've been interested since.   

 

The salaries come from revenue that the players drive.  The owners are merely providing the organizational structure.  It wouldn't be quick or easy to replace but I think it would eventually happen. 

 

[radoran]

4 hours ago, ruxpin said:

Hey, haven't seen you around here in awhile. Good to see you back. 

 

As callous as it sounds (because Simmonds is one of the few flyers I like individually) your post is absolutely right. 

 

Simmonds is the first jersey I bought since LeClair and I'd trade him if it made the team better.

 

I'd hate doing it, but I would.

[AJgoal]

Trading Simmonds would suck on so many levels. But it's probably going to end up being the right move. 

[RJ8812]

On 30/08/2017 at 1:35 PM, BobbyClarkeFan16 said:

If the Flyers are out of contention by the trade deadline this year, I think Simmonds is gone and you'll probably see an auction between 10 to 12 teams wanting him. It also wouldn't be a rental because there's one more year on Simmonds' deal, so I think it's very logical the Flyers could end up with a young roster player, a blue chip prospect and multiple draft picks for him. So, if Nashville came calling and were offering Fiala, Fabbro and a 1st one year and a second the next, I'd hope Hextall would be all over that. I think that's the kind of deal you'll see for Simmonds.

For Simmonds, I'd the main piece if the package be a player who is already NHL ready

[RonJeremy]

@ruxpin, thanks.  It's a grim reality to face ,that we will end up trading Simmonds. He is the only current Flyer who plays old time Flyer hockey, but as we discussed we probably can't afford him, but if we get the right deal, then it's got to be done. For the first time in a number of years , we have many reasons to be optimistic. Hexy is building an impressive team and for the first time in Flyers history, we have a bonanza of young defenseman and several top notch goaltending prospects. Soon enough, we will have the best defense in hockey.  Think about that, how many years did we have to always trade for our dmen.  It seems like every year  ....our best dmen  through our history were all traded for, Dailey,.Howe, McCrimmon, Desjardins, Timonen and Pronger, just to name a few, and forgot about the countless stiffs we traded for.  We never had enough depth on our blue line as soon as our top guy went down it was over , we always relied too much on Howe and then Desjardins and then Timmo and after that Pronger .  When Hart or Sandstorm step in ,another 30 year headache will be cured.  We haven't had great goaltending since Parent, Pelle was gone too quick and Hexy was only exceptional for a couple of years after the hamstring injuries he was never the same....We are  finally gonna have depth and talent in net and on defense. No more goalie carousel...

all we need are a few more forwards and we are in business.