HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Subban and that bridge contract..(what to expect with his next extension)

View Poll Results: Bridge contract
Bridge contract was a smart deal. It was a good move for both parties 107 54.04%
Should have signed him long term (likely cheaper) when we had the chance. Bit of a blunder by MB. 91 45.96%
Voters: 198. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-11-2013, 02:15 PM
  #251
habsfanatics
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3,671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
Oh lord, you knew what I meant, it was a typo. I fixed it over an hour ago. Get over it.

I provided the links which had the reports from McKenzie and Dreger, two of the most reputable insiders in the business. I didn't make the numbers out of this air as you accused me of doing.

The Habs wanted a 2 year 5 million deal (yes yes it was a typo, it doesn't change what I was saying before), while Subban reportedly wanted 4.5 to 5.5 million on a longer deal, some reports suggesting at least 5 years. I didn't pull these numbers out of my ass as you suggested. We could have potentially signed Subban long-term for cheaper. Of course it remains to be seen how much he will actually get on his next deal, but considering he originally asking for 4.5 after only two seasons, I wouldn't be surprised to see his agent ask for more.



The article says McKenzie reported that they were approximately 3 million dollars apart. The authors of the article suggested the 5.5 million. McKenzie was on Habs radio several times and said that Subban was asking around 4.5 million a year.

You're just being obtuse.

And I quoted it long before you fixed it. I had no idea you made a typo. I just came back here and it was changed.

He wanted 4.5 million short term. Not for 6 years.

habsfanatics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 02:18 PM
  #252
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,439
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsfanatics View Post
I didn't write that, Andy did, try following the conversation. He'd since edited his post, of course it doesn't make any sense. He says Bob mac said 4-4.5 million long term and then posted an article saying upwards of 5.5m to support his claim. There was zero chance pk was signing here long term for 4.5 million. I've seen you post this before and there is not a single ounce of evidence to support this.
And do you have a single ounce of evidence to support your claim that he wouldn't of accepted 4.5m? All we know for sure is that Subban wanted to get paid what he felt he was worth. If his only two options were signing a 2 year 5.75m deal or a 5 year 22.5m deal I personally think he would've taken the 20 million.

Sorinth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 02:18 PM
  #253
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,959
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsfanatics View Post
And I quoted it long before you fixed it. I had no idea you made a typo. I just came back here and it was changed.

He wanted 4.5 million short term. Not for 6 years.
Are you being dense on purpose?

Quote:
Meanwhile, Subban is reportedly looking for a much longer term deal, and for a lot more money as well. Bob McKenzie had previously reported that the Canadiens and Subban were approximately $3 million apart in their offers, meaning that Subban is looking for upwards of $5.5 million per season.
Source:http://lastwordonsports.com/2013/01/...ith-pk-subban/

Quote:
Subban is said to be after a long-term deal that will keep him at the club for at least five years.
Source:http://www.torontosun.com/2013/01/26...contract-talks

Andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 02:21 PM
  #254
Frozenice
the random dude
 
Frozenice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,295
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strik_IX View Post
I honestly don't understand how people think the bridge contract was that bad. The most important thing to me would be to lock up Subban for as long as possible. Thanks to the bridge contract MB can lock up Subban for a full 10 years, not 4, not 6... 10!

His cap hit will indeed be greater and more money will be spent, but he's earned it. To top it off, we can sign him for as much as 6 of his UFA years which pretty much includes the majority if not all of his prime years.

How was this not the right decision?
If Subban signs an offer sheet to play elsewhere maybe you'll see things differently. Oh, he won't because that isn't in the script.

Frozenice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 02:24 PM
  #255
Ezpz
No mad pls
 
Ezpz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 3,670
vCash: 50
Subban wanted a deal that took him right to UFA with possibly buying up one year. Now we get him for two years + 8 more when he signs an extension avoiding a Komisarek situation.

Ezpz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 02:27 PM
  #256
Strik_IX
No excuses!
 
Strik_IX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Montréal
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,872
vCash: 1395
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frozenice View Post
If Subban signs an offer sheet to play elsewhere maybe you'll see things differently. Oh, he won't because that isn't in the script.
I honestly don't think that's going to happen. I'm quite confident that MB will sign him to an extension before he even reaches free agency. If Subban actually gets to a point where he is able to sign an offer sheet then MB is clearly not as good of a GM as I band many others believe he is.

Strik_IX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 02:32 PM
  #257
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,439
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strik_IX View Post
I honestly don't understand how people think the bridge contract was that bad. The most important thing to me would be to lock up Subban for as long as possible. Thanks to the bridge contract MB can lock up Subban for a full 10 years, not 4, not 6... 10!
His cap hit will indeed be greater and more money will be spent, but he's earned it. To top it off, we can sign him for as much as 6 of his UFA years which pretty much includes the majority if not all of his prime years.

How was this not the right decision?
Why do people keep claiming this. It makes no sense, first of all we could have signed him before the lockout and given him any number of years. And second if you are worried that he wants to become a UFA, the bridge deal makes it arguably more likely as he will now be 1 year away when his contract runs out so the temptation to will be there.

Sorinth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 02:33 PM
  #258
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,959
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezpz View Post
Subban wanted a deal that took him right to UFA with possibly buying up one year. Now we get him for two years + 8 more when he signs an extension avoiding a Komisarek situation.
If that is the case, then yes, I understand Bergevin's position. However, when Bergevin spoke of the bridge contract he didn't speak in those terms. Instead he spoke about how one needs to prove that they deserve the contract, that PK first needs to learn how to be a better man and team player. That he still needs to prove himself in the league, which suggests that Bergevin didn't know what he had in PK an chose to wait rather than him thinking about the UFA years.

Where the controversy arises (though I don't think it's a huge one, we're just discussing an option that was available that some think should have been take and seen more as a blip than a blunder) is that many thought PK had already proven enough and were certain that he can only get better. In other words, they knew what we had in PK. They saw PK and his agent's term as underpaying for what PK had already shown and even more so, for what he still had left to show, which many were confident he would do. This was seen as a missed opportunity to sign a player who is already good now, for much lower than what he was worth. In cap world, that is only a positive.

Of course, we are all happy PK got the Norris and of course he deserves the money he will be getting and that there is nothing wrong with paying a player what he is worth. It doesn't change the fact that we missed an opportunity to sign a player less then what he was worth. Sort of how like many on these boards hold against Gainey the fact that he could have signed him for 2.9 million a year during the season had he not had his "stupid no-during-the-season-negotiations" rule.

Andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 02:37 PM
  #259
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,439
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezpz View Post
Subban wanted a deal that took him right to UFA with possibly buying up one year. Now we get him for two years + 8 more when he signs an extension avoiding a Komisarek situation.
If it was Subban's goal to hit UFA as soon as possible he's in the ideal situation to do that right now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strik_IX View Post
I honestly don't think that's going to happen. I'm quite confident that MB will sign him to an extension before he even reaches free agency. If Subban actually gets to a point where he is able to sign an offer sheet then MB is clearly not as good of a GM as I band many others believe he is.
Well we were already in a position where Subban was receiving offer sheets. Wasn't it reported that the Flyers offered him one which he rejected?

Sorinth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 02:50 PM
  #260
Strik_IX
No excuses!
 
Strik_IX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Montréal
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,872
vCash: 1395
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
Well we were already in a position where Subban was receiving offer sheets. Wasn't it reported that the Flyers offered him one which he rejected?
First of all, MB didn't have much time to sign him before the lockout, Subban's contract had already expired. Now he has a year to extend him before he hits RFA status, which should be quite enough.

Secondly, if Subban rejected the Flyers' offer, what makes you think he will sign one this time around? He did go on the record saying his focus was Montreal, that he wanted to play here, that he didn't want to look at offer sheets, etc.

Strik_IX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 03:09 PM
  #261
habsfanatics
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3,671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
Yes, he was, are you really this thick, seriously? He was resigned to the fact the long term deal wasn't coming. He wanted his fair value in a long term deal, failing that he wanted his money in a short term deal, he got neither.

You still haven't once shown what you claimed and I'm not expecting that to change.

habsfanatics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 03:10 PM
  #262
Agnostic
11 Stanley Cups
 
Agnostic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,035
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
If that is the case, then yes, I understand Bergevin's position. However, when Bergevin spoke of the bridge contract he didn't speak in those terms. Instead he spoke about how one needs to prove that they deserve the contract, that PK first needs to learn how to be a better man and team player. That he still needs to prove himself in the league, which suggests that Bergevin didn't know what he had in PK an chose to wait rather than him thinking about the UFA years.

Where the controversy arises (though I don't think it's a huge one, we're just discussing an option that was available that some think should have been take and seen more as a blip than a blunder) is that many thought PK had already proven enough and were certain that he can only get better. In other words, they knew what we had in PK. They saw PK and his agent's term as underpaying for what PK had already shown and even more so, for what he still had left to show, which many were confident he would do. This was seen as a missed opportunity to sign a player who is already good now, for much lower than what he was worth. In cap world, that is only a positive.

Of course, we are all happy PK got the Norris and of course he deserves the money he will be getting and that. there is nothing wrong with paying a player what he is worth It doesn't change the fact that we missed an opportunity to sign a player less then what he was worth. Sort of how like many on these boards hold against Gainey the fact that he could have signed him for 2.9 million a year during the season had he not had his "stupid no-during-the-season-negotiations" rule.
Translation: "there's nothing wrong with paying someone what they're worth except you should always be looking to pay someone less than they're worth".



Can't wait for tomorrows life nugget.

Agnostic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 03:14 PM
  #263
Ezpz
No mad pls
 
Ezpz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 3,670
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
If it was Subban's goal to hit UFA as soon as possible he's in the ideal situation to do that right now.



Well we were already in a position where Subban was receiving offer sheets. Wasn't it reported that the Flyers offered him one which he rejected?
Wat. His contract expires two years before he's UFA eligible and will likely get an 8 year extension. He's not getting a one/two year deal. He's not going to hit UFA until his prime is over now instead of directly when he turns 27/8 like Suter.

Ezpz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 03:15 PM
  #264
montreal
Go Habs Go
 
montreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Balearic Islands
Posts: 23,306
vCash: 500
I still think the bridge contract was the way to go, they got Subban to buy into the new way of things and he went on to have his best season. Of course if they can't get Subban locked up long term for the next contract then it would be a disaster but when you have one of the best young defensemen in the NHL, he'll get paid for sure. As for costing the Habs more down the road, I could care less, as long as he's locked up long term, happy with his contract and playing like he can then both sides win which is what you want.

montreal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 03:21 PM
  #265
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,959
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
Translation: "there's nothing wrong with paying someone what they're worth except you should always be looking to pay someone less than they're worth".



Can't wait for tomorrows life nugget.

I personally can't wait until the day you stop acting condescending.

In the context of a cap world, getting talent at a discount is a positive. Also, isn't paying Subban less than what he's worth exactly what Bergevin did with his bridge deal? Considering Subban's role on the team since his rookie season and his contribution, he's definitely underpaid for what he brings.

Like I said, the habs had the opportunity to get Subban at a discount and missed the boat. Similar to how you yourself would bring up the fact that Streit could have been signed to a discount, aka less than what he was worth, during the season had "my hero" and "idiot" Bob Gainey hadn't had a policy of not negotiating during the year.

Lastly, there is nothing inconsistent with being okay with Subban getting paid more that he has proven more and being happy had we signed him at a discount.

Also are you able, for once on this board, to debate without acting like a dick?


Last edited by Andy: 06-11-2013 at 03:34 PM.
Andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 03:58 PM
  #266
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 23,248
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsfanatics View Post
The nonsense is coming from a poster who feels the need to involve himself in a conversation without reading the posts.

Signing for 27 million when your worth is substantially more than that is freaking stupid.
Right, so signing for a little more than 5M makes more sense..

But you're right, Subban wanted Weber money, he wanted 110M. Sure. That's what makes sense.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 04:11 PM
  #267
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,439
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezpz View Post
Wat. His contract expires two years before he's UFA eligible and will likely get an 8 year extension. He's not getting a one/two year deal. He's not going to hit UFA until his prime is over now instead of directly when he turns 27/8 like Suter.
Unless he does like Weber and decides to go to arbitration which would take him until he's UFA age.

Sorinth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 04:20 PM
  #268
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,439
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal View Post
I still think the bridge contract was the way to go, they got Subban to buy into the new way of things and he went on to have his best season. Of course if they can't get Subban locked up long term for the next contract then it would be a disaster but when you have one of the best young defensemen in the NHL, he'll get paid for sure. As for costing the Habs more down the road, I could care less, as long as he's locked up long term, happy with his contract and playing like he can then both sides win which is what you want.
I find it hard to credit the contract with his attitude simply because we all know how hard he worked in the offseason before getting a contract so it sounds dubious.

I don't think it has hurt Subban's likelyhood of signing long term but it was a useless risk to take. We payed him significantly less than he was worth simply because we could. That's not a great way to foster a strong relationship. Had we given him around 4m on short term deal the whole bridge thing would make a lot more sense.

Sorinth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 04:35 PM
  #269
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 30,407
vCash: 500
The key part Bergevin and co wanted to see was PK becoming more of a team player. I think that was a big success. If you give young players too much money too soon often they don't reach full potential or don't perform because of the pressure from a huge contract, perfect example is Myers(Buffalo).

Monctonscout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 04:35 PM
  #270
MasterDecoy
Carlos Danger
 
MasterDecoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Beijing
Posts: 9,861
vCash: 1707
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezpz View Post
Subban wanted a deal that took him right to UFA with possibly buying up one year. Now we get him for two years + 8 more when he signs an extension avoiding a Komisarek situation.
and that right there is a very good reason to have liked the bridge contract

MasterDecoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 04:43 PM
  #271
SouthernHab
Registered User
 
SouthernHab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,880
vCash: 500
Hot topic.

We will soon see if Bergevin made a mistake or not. The offseason trading and signing period is about to start.

If Bergevin takes the money that he saved on Subban's bridge contract and signs an impact player or two to this roster, then the bridge contract is worth it.

However, if Bergevin does not make any big moves in the offseason, then we will have every right to question his decision making.

Should be a lot of fun here on the boards.

SouthernHab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 04:48 PM
  #272
Ezpz
No mad pls
 
Ezpz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 3,670
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernHab View Post
Hot topic.

We will soon see if Bergevin made a mistake or not. The offseason trading and signing period is about to start.

If Bergevin takes the money that he saved on Subban's bridge contract and signs an impact player or two to this roster, then the bridge contract is worth it.

However, if Bergevin does not make any big moves in the offseason, then we will have every right to question his decision making.

Should be a lot of fun here on the boards.
It's not even just the off-season. It's also the trade deadline and the off-season where Galchenyuk and Gallagher also sign bridge contracts. It's a continuous cycle of saving money on our young players because we didn't cave in and pay Subban early.

Ezpz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 04:59 PM
  #273
Agnostic
11 Stanley Cups
 
Agnostic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,035
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
If that is the case, then yes, I understand Bergevin's position. However, when Bergevin spoke of the bridge contract he didn't speak in those terms. Instead he spoke about how one needs to prove that they deserve the contract, that PK first needs to learn how to be a better man and team player. That he still needs to prove himself in the league, which suggests that Bergevin didn't know what he had in PK an chose to wait rather than him thinking about the UFA years.

Where the controversy arises (though I don't think it's a huge one, we're just discussing an option that was available that some think should have been take and seen more as a blip than a blunder) is that many thought PK had already proven enough and were certain that he can only get better. In other words, they knew what we had in PK. They saw PK and his agent's term as underpaying for what PK had already shown and even more so, for what he still had left to show, which many were confident he would do. This was seen as a missed opportunity to sign a player who is already good now, for much lower than what he was worth. In cap world, that is only a positive.

Of course, we are all happy PK got the Norris and of course he deserves the money he will be getting and that there is nothing wrong with paying a player what he is worth. It doesn't change the fact that we missed an opportunity to sign a player less then what he was worth. Sort of how like many on these boards hold against Gainey the fact that he could have signed him for 2.9 million a year during the season had he not had his "stupid no-during-the-season-negotiations" rule.
Bergevin was universally lauded for his success in the Subban negotiations, he's a GM of the Year nominee now. He's applying a framework in contract negotiation that sets expectations and is consistent. There is no need to Chicken Little this by second guessing what is clearly a good decision.

Agnostic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 05:03 PM
  #274
waitin425
Registered User
 
waitin425's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,109
vCash: 500
I think if he plays like he did this year, next, then.....6-8 years at 7 million.

If his production drops off a bit then same term but 5.5-6 million

waitin425 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2013, 05:09 PM
  #275
E = CH²
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 15,947
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monctonscout View Post
The key part Bergevin and co wanted to see was PK becoming more of a team player. I think that was a big success. If you give young players too much money too soon often they don't reach full potential or don't perform because of the pressure from a huge contract, perfect example is Myers(Buffalo).
But that's something people say after all this **** goes down but truly, no one knows if a player under performs because he got his big contract or if it's a combination of many reasons. And there are plenty of counter examples to yours (Toews, Kane, etc).

E = CH² is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 02:12 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.