(Re-signing)PK Subban re-ups in montreal for 8 years

[Toews]

That's what I was wondering. But some high horse kids kept telling me stuff about arbitration that had nothing to do with my question.

But your question has everything to do with arbitration. None of us will know the full details as we weren't sitting there when PK was negotiating with Bergevin. But a couple of things are obvious, Subban and Bergevin could not agree upon a deal before arbitration. So they had the arbitration hearing where Montreal's offer was 5.25 and Subban countered with 8.5mil.

This was entirely separate from the 8 year deal they were negotiating, so after the hearing they sat down once more. Both sides now know that failing to come to an agreement 48 hours after arbitration means that they could not sign a deal till January 1st 2015. Both sides now are under the gun to make sure that they either come to an agreement or wait 5 months till they can try again. They chose to come to an agreement and signed the 8 year deal.

Also the "high horse" comment seems unnecessary, it is obvious that most of the replies made in this thread were made without reading any of the previous posts which is rather frustrating. People keep posting the same thing despite it being corrected like 5-6 times in this thread.

[Toews]

It makes sense to me. The first 2 years are his RFA years so he is making less. Years 3-6 he will be age 27-32 so those SHOULD be his most productive years. Years 7-8 he will be age 33-34 and may start to be slowing down production wise so his salary will dip a little accordingly.

I wonder why they didn't front load the contract though, especially since that seems to be the more preferential option amongst players. Maybe they could have shaved some money if they had offered it as an option. Not something that would have made a whole lot of difference but it is always an option for richer teams.

[qwijibo]

I wonder why they didn't front load the contract though, especially since that seems to be the more preferential option amongst players. Maybe they could have shaved some money if they had offered it as an option. Not something that would have made a whole lot of difference but it is always an option for richer teams.

I can think of a few reasons they didn't front load it

First. Subban is technically a RFA for the first 2 seasons so they want to pay him accordingly fir those 2. To give him a huge pay check up front after offering $5.25 to the arbitrator for this season would make them look bad. Especially considering they will be dealing with Galchenyuk and Gallagher next season (who they will be looking to give bridge deals)

Second. The new CBA really limits how much you can front load contracts. You can only vary the Sakarya by so much year to year. There's no more adding on a couple of years at the end at a very low salary to bring the cap hit down. Especially considering this likely won't be a retirement contract for Subban. Given that, it makes sense for them to structure the deal to pay Subban according to what they believe he will likely be worth each season rather than a level salary or a front loaded one.

[gizmo2337]

Montreal really screwed up the whole process in handling this one. Hold out...then sign bridge deal. Hold out again and then overpay at the last second...for max term? What the frack are they doing?!! IMO they could of had him for 7-8 if handled properly.

[slappipappi]

The bridge contract killed them. Couldn't just pay him then and could have signed him to $6-$7 mill max per year for 6-8 years.

Oh well, lesson learned I guess. 8 years $72 mill.

On the bridge contract, he wanted to sign 5 year at about $5.5M IIRC. Would have taken out on FA year, and left him ready to take on UFA at age 27.

THis contract takes him through his prime years, it might end up being cheaper in the long run. PLus they'll renegotiate with him after this contract when his leverage is less.

The Toews/Kane contracts taught us that signing guys in their prime years without the cheap tack on years in their regressing years will be more costly in cap hit.

Players who sign 8 year contracts at ages 24-25 will get paid big time as they are giving up their prime years and becoming UFA's at an older age.

[qwijibo]

Montreal really screwed up the whole process in handling this one. Hold out...then sign bridge deal. Hold out again and then overpay at the last second...for max term? What the frack are they doing?!! IMO they could of had him for 7-8 if handled properly.

Ever think Subban and his agent may have played role in how things have played out ? Bergevin had no problem getting Price signed to a long term deal. But Subban has been a problem in both negotiations. Let's not forget it was Subban that held out last time around. And it was Subban that elected salary arbitration this time around, not the team.

Could they have gotten him cheaper a couple summers ago? Probably. But the rumour at the time was he wanted a 5?year deal. Which means he would be UFA three years from now. I wonder how much they would have had to pay him then after three more years of the cap. ( and salaries) rising.

I'm fine with how Bergevin has handled this. Bridge contracts make sense for the most part. You shouldn't just hand a young and mostly unproven player a blank cheque until they prove they're worth it. By using the bridge deal Montreal maintained enough cap flexibility to make the Vanek deal last spring. They went deep in the playoffs but It didn't take them to the cup.

But imagine if Price hadn't been hurt and Vanek would have performed better in the playoffs. Bergevin would have been hailed as a genius for handling the cap so well and bring able to take on a big ticket player like Vanek while giving up only a pick and a prospect.

Yes. It'll cost the more right now than if he had been signed to a longer term deal 2 years ago. But over a 10 year period? I have to think if Montreal had signed him to a 5 year deal 2 years ago and then had to try to re-sign him again in 3 years they would have ended up paying MUCH MORE in the long run.

It's all about the big picture and both the long term and the short term.

[qwijibo]

On the bridge contract, he wanted to sign 5 year at about $5.5M IIRC. Would have taken out on FA year, and left him ready to take on UFA at age 27.

THis contract takes him through his prime years, it might end up being cheaper in the long run. PLus they'll renegotiate with him after this contract when his leverage is less.

The Toews/Kane contracts taught us that signing guys in their prime years without the cheap tack on years in their regressing years will be more costly in cap hit.

Players who sign 8 year contracts at ages 24-25 will get paid big time as they are giving up their prime years and becoming UFA's at an older age.

On the bridge contract, he wanted to sign 5 year at about $5.5M IIRC. Would have taken out on FA year, and left him ready to take on UFA at age 27.

THis contract takes him through his prime years, it might end up being cheaper in the long run. PLus they'll renegotiate with him after this contract when his leverage is less.

The Toews/Kane contracts taught us that signing guys in their prime years without the cheap tack on years in their regressing years will be more costly in cap hit.

Players who sign 8 year contracts at ages 24-25 will get paid big time as they are giving up their prime years and becoming UFA's at an older age.

Exactly. So many people are taking a snapshot view of what his new contract is costing today without taking details like this into consideration.

[Mr X]

These contracts are getting stupid. It just takes away from the game for me. The NHL is gonna turn into the NBA or NFL. Players making ridiculous money and partying and getting coked up every night.

Lol you don't think that's the case already? I would argue that guys who don't party when they are making multi-millions in their twenties are the exception, not the other way around. It's about doing your weird things outside of the public eye. Derek Jeter for example has a great reputation but probably partied harder than anyone.

I don't think you actually understand how contracts work in the NBA or NFL. Longest contract in the NBA is 5 years. In the NFL, contracts are year-by-year and a very small percentage of players get a large guarantee in their contracts.

Anyways, Subban's deal is what it is. You have to pay young talent to keep it. I'll bet if Subban would get an even bigger contract if say he hit unrestricted free agency either now or in two years.

[slappipappi]

I wonder why they didn't front load the contract though, especially since that seems to be the more preferential option amongst players. Maybe they could have shaved some money if they had offered it as an option. Not something that would have made a whole lot of difference but it is always an option for richer teams.

Options aren't allowed in the NHL. All contracts are guaranteed, and the cap hit is the amount of money divived by the length of the contract. And there is now a limit to how much a contract can vary from year to year.

[Pears]

Montreal really screwed up the whole process in handling this one. Hold out...then sign bridge deal. Hold out again and then overpay at the last second...for max term? What the frack are they doing?!! IMO they could of had him for 7-8 if handled properly.

They probably could've had him at 5x5 two years ago really.

[Herberts Vasiljevs]

First a white Aventador and now this?Damn, PK's got it going pretty good that's for sure. Pretty inspirational too, considering that his dad didn't have much at all when he moved to Canada.

[EmployeeoftheMonth]

Well usually players will take less for longer deals.

So if he wanted 9 mil over 8 years, that would mean he would likely want 10.5 or 11 on a short term one.

Sorry, but Subban is not worth Toews and Kane type money, and he's getting into that territory with this deal.

Unless of course the team wanted the longer contract.

There's no guarantee the cap goes up of course but thinking realistically it's probably going to. Look at most of the examples people have foolishly used in this thread like Weber and Keith etc etc. These players right now are seen as great deals because of where the cap is compared to where it was when they signed. When that offer sheet was given to Weber people were losing their crap at how much it was.

In a couple years this contract will look great I would imagine. IMO Subban is leaving money on the table. I image he'd make more money with two 4 year contracts.

Our presumptions are meaningless. We don't know if I'm right about the team wanting more years or if they gave it to PK along with more money. The former seems more likely.

It's an ok contract for now. It probably could have been better had the team not dicked around the last contract but oh well. Few years this will likely maybe squeak into the top 50 salaries in the league.

If Keith would get 10M right now Montreal is getting a good deal signing Subban for 9M over 8 years. Signing a 25 year old who's not that far removed from a 31 year old Keiths skill level. That's pretty damn good. Should have been less but imo that only could have happened if the last contract negotiation wasn't handled so poorly.

[THERETOOL]

too much

[Caboose]

It has to do with how Montreal manages their cap over the next 8 years though.

As far as I know the team's cap situation is not applicable to an arbitration hearing.

Correct me if I'm wrong, though.

[Toews]

They probably could've had him at 5x5 two years ago really.

And probably ended up paying him 10mil+ at an 80M+ cap, its all very much relative. This contract lasts till he is 33, the next one would be another maximum term contract till he is 36. It all also depends on what people see as Montreal's cup window. If in the next 3 years Habs are contenders yet fail to win a Cup then you could say that Bergevin's mistakes might have cost the Habs a Cup.

But for those who think PK was pissed about the arbitration business.

http://www.torontosun.com/2014/08/02/bergevin-emotions-interfered-with-subban-talks

Now you can say, "oh he is just saying that". But these guys are professionals, this was also a player elected arbitration. Subban knew full well how these things go as he has an agent to guide him through the process. He is mature and smart enough to realise that this a business and there is a process to these things. I doubt he took any of this personally.

[gizmo2337]

Ever think Subban and his agent may have played role in how things have played out ? Bergevin had no problem getting Price signed to a long term deal. But Subban has been a problem in both negotiations. Let's not forget it was Subban that held out last time around. And it was Subban that elected salary arbitration this time around, not the team.

Could they have gotten him cheaper a couple summers ago? Probably. But the rumour at the time was he wanted a 5?year deal. Which means he would be UFA three years from now. I wonder how much they would have had to pay him then after three more years of the cap. ( and salaries) rising.

I'm fine with how Bergevin has handled this. Bridge contracts make sense for the most part. You shouldn't just hand a young and mostly unproven player a blank cheque until they prove they're worth it. By using the bridge deal Montreal maintained enough cap flexibility to make the Vanek deal last spring. They went deep in the playoffs but It didn't take them to the cup.

But imagine if Price hadn't been hurt and Vanek would have performed better in the playoffs. Bergevin would have been hailed as a genius for handling the cap so well and bring able to take on a big ticket player like Vanek while giving up only a pick and a prospect.

Yes. It'll cost the more right now than if he had been signed to a longer term deal 2 years ago. But over a 10 year period? I have to think if Montreal had signed him to a 5 year deal 2 years ago and then had to try to re-sign him again in 3 years they would have ended up paying MUCH MORE in the long run.

It's all about the big picture and both the long term and the short term.

I think the main point is "why so long to sort out a deal"? This deal happened "during" the arbitration hearing while the judge was in the decision making process? Don't know how you slice it, but it sounds poorly handled. If there was a deal to be done, it could have been done earlier.

Edit.

Both sides should share a little disgrace.

[elvis15]

I think the main point is "why so long to sort out a deal"? This deal happened "during" the arbitration hearing while the judge was in the decision making process? Don't know how you slice it, but it sounds poorly handled. If there was a deal to be done, it could have been done earlier.

Edit.

Both sides should share a little disgrace.

One could assume they were getting closer and closer prior to the arbitration but no one was willing to show their hand and cave. They have to go through arbitration if they haven't signed a deal by then, so that gave them an extra 48 hours after to negotiate.

Whether the arbitration amounts factored into changing the resulting contract we don't really know, but both sides found a little extra push obviously to get a deal done by that point.

[JamesB]

To the people dumping on DeNiro, If he was asking $8.5 for 1 year, why is he getting MORE for a longer term? If anything it should have been less but given the security of a long term deal.

What happened is they played chicken with Subban and his contract, and Montreal blinked. It's that simple.

I have to agree that Montreal blinked. According to Subban the bargaining situation "improved" when the owners (the Molson famility) got involved.

Bergivin probably believes this is a bad hockey deal, but the Molsons were getting nervous about fan reaction. So I think the high price tag is a business descision not a hockey decision.

These long term high price deals usually work out badly. If the cap goes up and if Subban is a star for the next 8 yearr, the deal will look good. But too many things can go wrong. The worst possibility is that Subban has some nagging injutry the limits his playing time and his performance while he still gets paid the full amount (with a full cap hit of 9 million per year.)

But even at his current performance level 9 million is too much. I know he won the Norris, but that win was a stretch and is not likely be repeated. No GM in the league would take Subban over Weber, Doughty, Keith and probably at least 2 or 3 other D's. Subban is an exciting player but makes more than his share of mistakes (which is why he was on the bench in the Olympics).

There is a lot uncertainty, but it is a lot better than even money that Montreal regrets this contract.

[Metal Face Doom]

good signing and worth it. cap is continuously going up. salaries are based off the cap.

[Bruce Boudreau]

Next Habs Captain. You know he wants it.

Question is will they give it to him or Markov.

I think so. Late last year it was quite obvious he was taking a leadership role plus he loves the spotlight.

What position in Montreal has more spotlight than the goalie or captain of the Habs?