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
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.
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.
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.
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?
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
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
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.
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.
I have to think the cap hit will be less then 7 with that long term deal
