View Single Post
02-21-2013, 07:02 AM
Colorado Avalanche
Registered User
Colorado Avalanche's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Lieto
Country: Finland
Posts: 19,448
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by TatteredTornNFrayed View Post
And the thing is nearly all comparables say that the Avs are way closer to reality than O'Reilly's demands are. Several days ago, someone brought up that his agents preferred comparing Evander Kane as a comparable contract instead of Duchene, since they felt Duchene signed below his market.

So at the time I thought to myself 'OK, let's look at it from their point of view and compare him to E. Kane's contract instead of Duchene'. So again, since the entire NHL pays primarily for production, I thought I'd do a very simple comparison to see if they had a strong point that $3.5M is an unfair offer in comparison to Kane's deal.

I used a highly simplistic formula, and I am sure Sherman uses something much more sophisticated, but a simple comparison should still get us into the right ballpark. I just compared points and goal production and scaled the salary linearly based on each of those comparisons. Then I weighted the goal-scaled salary twice as important as the point-scaled salary, and did a weighted average. I ran the numbers two ways, once on all 3 years, and once comparing only last season (2011/12). And I came up with $3.4 million one way, and $3.49 million the other way. I forget which was which but they turned out nearly the same both ways in this comparison. And don't forget that Kane's deal was for 6 years, buying out 2 UFA years, not just 1.

So on a goals/point comparable basis with E. Kane, over a 6-year deal, O'Reilly's comparable deal would be about $21M / 6YR. If they'd argue that Ryan should get an additional bump above that due character etc, I'd think OK I'll give you a bump for that, but then I'd remove the benefit of the doubt of using a linear scaling, since elite production is significantly more rare and harder to secure than average production, and so in the end you probably still end up somewhere in a similar range. Again, this is oversimplified, but it should give us a ballpark idea.

I think the $7M/2y is totally justified, and I think even their $17M /5 deal isn't that bad either. I personally would have come up to about $18-19M on a 5 year deal, and I said the same thing a long time ago, and still feel that way. But I can see them not wanting to even offer that until O'Reilly brought his request down to that range. It sounds like their requests stayed in that $4.5M+ for 5 years range, and that is so far above reality that I can see not wanting to egg them on by creeping the offer up until they came WAY down. But obviously the time for all of those kind of negotiations is long past.

I compared him to Kane instead of Duchene, and I still am of the opinion that he is out to lunch.

I'm not saying he doesn't have the potential to be as good as those guys. I'm just saying he hasn't produced enough yet to earn it. Avs obviously believe in drafting and trading for character players, but I agree they should still pay based on production.
I think Avalanche made right decision on this. I don't think It's worth paying 4,5+ million and 5 years for O'Reilly. I know he's good, BUT he just doesn't deserve it YET. I think he will be worth that much, but he hasn't done enough to warrant contract like that YET. Paying someone just for potential is kinda stupid. We can't start giving every RFA huge deals. That's what gets you in trouble. He would have gotten paid after his 2 year bridge deal. Avalanche is not cheap when it comes to UFAs, Jones 4 million, PAP 4 million, Stastny 6,7 million or whatever. Just wait till you're old and produced enough and you will be paid.

Colorado Avalanche is offline