HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Los Angeles Kings
Notices

Kings open contract talks with Jonathan Quick

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-28-2012, 01:56 PM
  #176
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
I am not speculating on the Rinne deal. I am drawing a logically conclusion given the data at hand. People do it all the time. Speculation would be something like Rinne must have had pictures of Poile with farm animals.

Well, if that's the only risk through the end of the 2021 season then the Kings should definitely just do it.
You are drawing you're own logical conclusion, but not everyone's obviously. It seems many people don't agree with you on that either. And what is this 'data' you speak of? All you have is speculation, not data. Not proof, speculation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
Why just the Rinne and Lundqvist contracts?

As I said if I was negotiating on the Kings behalf, I would start by saying the Rinne contract is out of the norm. Then you come to Lundqvist who has been at the top of his game for quite some time. Quick deserves something approaching that, but he doesn't have the resume that Lundqvist has in terms of length of superior play.

Maybe you guys can get a little more snippy and convince me of your winning argument.
No ones being snippy, not from my reading. If you choose to take it as such, go ahead.

I'd like to see what you'd say to Quick's agent if he said Quick wants a 7-8 year deal or he's going to test UFA waters. What then? What if 5 years isn't an option for Quick? You letting him walk?

As for your 'negotiating,' if I'm Quick's agent, I counter by saying Rinne's contract isn't out of line at all, point to the fact that statistically speaking, Rinne and Quick are almost mirror images of one another, but Quick has a better playoff resume courtesy his Conn Smythe performance, and state that Rine's contract is completely related, especially given the close timeframe between it's signing and now.

I'd also highlight the fact that Lundqvist's deal was signed to begin in the 2008-2009 season, when the cap was $56,700,000. A cap hit of $6,875,000 in a cap of $56.7 million is 12.1 per cent of the total cap at the time. If Quick got $7.1 million, that would be 10.1 per cent of the reported $70.2 million cap for 2012-2013, so on a percentage basis, Lundqvist was noticeably paid more than Quick.

12.1 per cent of a $70.2 million cap would be $8.49 million, Quick's nowhere near that number, so Lundqvist as a proper comparible is indeed flawed and his cap number should be adjusted to represent it's true value.

kingsfan is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 01:58 PM
  #177
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,532
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post
You're argument isn't anymore convincing, especially in the real world. We are dealing with the reality of the situation. In your fantastical scenario, Quick and his agent would balk. Thankfully it appears they are close to a lengthy extension. Once the details are announced we'll see who was closer to reality.
What fantastical scenario is that the 5 years and $33M I suggested earlier?

What I am saying has nothing to do with what he actually signs for with the Kings. They could take as big a risk as Nashville and it would still be a risk.

But if the deal comes in close to what you are suggesting, congrats Ziggy you win the internets.

KINGS17 is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 02:08 PM
  #178
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,532
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsfan View Post
You are drawing you're own logical conclusion, but not everyone's obviously. It seems many people don't agree with you on that either. And what is this 'data' you speak of? All you have is speculation, not data. Not proof, speculation.


No ones being snippy, not from my reading. If you choose to take it as such, go ahead.

I'd like to see what you'd say to Quick's agent if he said Quick wants a 7-8 year deal or he's going to test UFA waters. What then? What if 5 years isn't an option for Quick? You letting him walk?

As for your 'negotiating,' if I'm Quick's agent, I counter by saying Rinne's contract isn't out of line at all, point to the fact that statistically speaking, Rinne and Quick are almost mirror images of one another, but Quick has a better playoff resume courtesy his Conn Smythe performance, and state that Rine's contract is completely related, especially given the close timeframe between it's signing and now.

I'd also highlight the fact that Lundqvist's deal was signed to begin in the 2008-2009 season, when the cap was $56,700,000. A cap hit of $6,875,000 in a cap of $56.7 million is 12.1 per cent of the total cap at the time. If Quick got $7.1 million, that would be 10.1 per cent of the reported $70.2 million cap for 2012-2013, so on a percentage basis, Lundqvist was noticeably paid more than Quick.

12.1 per cent of a $70.2 million cap would be $8.49 million, Quick's nowhere near that number, so Lundqvist as a proper comparible is indeed flawed and his cap number should be adjusted to represent it's true value.
Data:
1) Suter scheduled to be UFA now.
2) Weber RFA now and possibly UFA after next season.
3) Nashville has been known as a "budget" team and not a "cap" team in the past.
4) The time is right for Nashville to contend, and to do that they believe they must hold onto Rinne, Suter, and Weber.
5) Rinne's contract is up for negotiation.

Logical conclusion: Nashville management overspends on Rinne to prove to Suter and Weber that they are willing to make a big financial commitment in an attempt to win a championship in the hope that they will re-sign.

I said I would start with 5 years and $33M. If term is more important to Quick, I would consider it. Before doing that I would rather seen them go to 5 years $35M.

What makes Rinne's contract in-line? Simply because the Preds were dumb enough to give it to him? Is Rinne a better goaltender than Lundqvist? Won more than Ward? You can compare Quick and Rinne's stats, that's fine and it's what you did. That's not what I am doing. I am saying Rinne's contract is overpayment. Agree with Quick's agent what Rinne should be making instead of what he is making and you now have a comp.

KINGS17 is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 02:40 PM
  #179
King'sPawn
Enjoy the chaos
 
King'sPawn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 8,011
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
Data:
1) Suter scheduled to be UFA now.
2) Weber RFA now and possibly UFA after next season.
3) Nashville has been known as a "budget" team and not a "cap" team in the past.
4) The time is right for Nashville to contend, and to do that they believe they must hold onto Rinne, Suter, and Weber.
5) Rinne's contract is up for negotiation.

Logical conclusion: Nashville management overspends on Rinne to prove to Suter and Weber that they are willing to make a big financial commitment in an attempt to win a championship in the hope that they will re-sign.
That's still speculation, given that there is no quote to support your conclusion. And given that Suter is going to test free agency and the Predators weren't willing to spend enough on him to make him happy, it seems to be the wrong conclusion.

Quick is on par with the best goalies in the world, especially with his conn smythe. How would he NOT be compared to them salary and term wise?

King'sPawn is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 02:43 PM
  #180
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
Data:
1) Suter scheduled to be UFA now.
2) Weber RFA now and possibly UFA after next season.
3) Nashville has been known as a "budget" team and not a "cap" team in the past.
4) The time is right for Nashville to contend, and to do that they believe they must hold onto Rinne, Suter, and Weber.
5) Rinne's contract is up for negotiation.

Logical conclusion: Nashville management overspends on Rinne to prove to Suter and Weber that they are willing to make a big financial commitment in an attempt to win a championship in the hope that they will re-sign.
Where your logic fails is your assertion to use the word "overspends" I'm not saying I disagree with you, but just because Rinne upped the bar for goalie contracts does not mean he's overpaid. There is also zero proof that if Weber and Suter aren't in Nashville that Rinne wouldn't have been signed, and signed to the exact same contract. The only part of your 'logic' that seems logical is the comment "they are willing to make a big financial commitment in an attempt to win a championship"

There has never been any proof that the Rinne contract is tied to Weber and Suter at all, that's just speculation on your behalf.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
I said I would start with 5 years and $33M. If term is more important to Quick, I would consider it. Before doing that I would rather seen them go to 5 years $35M.
And if Quick wanted 7-8 years, what would you offer?

Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
What makes Rinne's contract in-line? Simply because the Preds were dumb enough to give it to him? Is Rinne a better goaltender than Lundqvist? Won more than Ward? You can compare Quick and Rinne's stats, that's fine and it's what you did. That's not what I am doing. I am saying Rinne's contract is overpayment. Agree with Quick's agent what Rinne should be making instead of what he is making and you now have a comp.
They are virtually identical in evenry major statistic, were signed to contracts (assuming Quick signs his extension July 1) about eight months apart and are close even in terms of accolades. How is his contract NOT in-line? Rinne and Quick's careers at the NHL level are almost identical. How is that not completely in-line?

Also, considering Rinne has been nominated for the Vezina in two straight years, it could be argued that based on the last two years, Rinne is equal to Lundqvist. I'd still give a slight edge to Lundqvist personally, but that doesn't mean Rinne's cap hit should be lower. As I said earlier, look at the percentage of the cap Lunqvist conumed when he reupped in 2008. It's much higher that Rinne's. Inflation of salaries must be factored in here, it's something all unions do, not just the NHLPA.

Finally, once again you've done nothing to show why Rinne's contract is an overpayment. You can believe that, and that's fine, but how is it an overpayment? I'm not saying it is or isn't, I'm simply saying that regardless of your thought on the contract, it will be used in the negotiations, it will be a comparible and if it's an overpayment, then be ready for Quick to get overpaid too.

kingsfan is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 03:04 PM
  #181
Monarchist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 872
vCash: 500
More important than what Rinne got: what would, say, Chicago or Edmonton pay Quick as a UFA?

If Rinne got $14 million/year or $1.4 million/year, it's really only relevant as a sign of what the market says someone like Quick is worth.

Important similarities between Rinne and Quick:
  • All major statistical measures.
Important differences indicating Quick will have a higher cap hit:
  • Higher salary cap.
  • Conn Smythe.
Important differences indicating Quick will have a lower cap hit:
  • Rinne's contract was not front loaded at all, and a front loaded contract with a somewhat lower cap hit is worth the same based on the time value of money. Quick could get a contract structured somewhat like Richards or Richards.
  • Quick basically cannot sign a contract under this CBA unless the Kings sign or trade him. Signing now reduces uncertainty as to what he will be able to get.
  • If Quick does not sign now, he could cut his hand making a sandwich, get his foot bitten by a golf cart, get attacked by a snake while golfing, etc. and lose out on his best opportunity to be totally set for life. Any of this could happen during the full length of next season/during a lengthy lockout.
  • I have the feeling Quick wants to stay and win with this ****in' team and not get shipped to Edmonton or similar.

Monarchist is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 03:10 PM
  #182
jfont
Registered User
 
jfont's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 15,336
vCash: 500
Awards:
10 year extension per Hammond!

jfont is online now  
Old
06-28-2012, 03:10 PM
  #183
MsWoof
Registered User
 
MsWoof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,806
vCash: 500
10 year extension just re-tweeted by Bob McKenzie, no numbers yet.

MsWoof is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 03:10 PM
  #184
palffytofrovlov
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,107
vCash: 500
Hammond says 10 year deal for Quick!!!! I have to think the cap hit will be less then 7 with that long term deal

palffytofrovlov is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 03:10 PM
  #185
1971kingsfan
Registered User
 
1971kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 23
vCash: 500
holy crap Quick gets 10yr deal!!!

1971kingsfan is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 03:10 PM
  #186
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 30,800
vCash: 500
Oh hey look, according to Kings17, I win the internets!

Ziggy Stardust is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 03:16 PM
  #187
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post
Oh hey look, according to Kings17, I win the internets!
Well won too.

The way DL operates, it's either short term deals (1-3 years) or long term (6-apparently 10 years). No way he was going to let Quick walk at 31.

kingsfan is offline  
Old
06-28-2012, 03:18 PM
  #188
Live in the Now
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Live in the Now's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: LA
Country: United States
Posts: 30,793
vCash: 1027
And with that, we migrate.

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1219149

Live in the Now is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:34 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.