[Rumor] Boeser Camp Eyeing 4 Year Deal Worth $28M

[xereau]

What a perfect scenario this is, this way we can sign him to 6-8yrs one year before UFA.

Edited July 14, 2019 by xereau

[KanNuck]

21 hours ago, The Great Canucks said:

Why would we trade for Lucic now? That was the rumored trade at the deadline, not now.

Why would we trade for Lucic ever lol

[Canuck Surfer]

5 hours ago, coastal.view said:

'm sure i'm missing something here

No you are not really?  Of course they would prefer the money up front.  And in contract bonuses. Which have to be paid regardless of lockouts. But there is reason to madness.

 

The specific clause is in the last year of an RFA's contract; to retain rights the players team has to tender a 1 year qualifying offer for 10% higher than the base salary of the previous contracts last year. So Meir signed a 4 year deal averaging $6 mill. With a $10 mill salary the last year. So unless the team declines to qualify him? Meier is going to make $11 mill the year after.  After which he is UFA.

 

So if the team wants to keep they have to pay possibly even higher than the UFA market, on a long term deal.

 

It delivers huge leverage to the player at the end of an RFA deal. 

 

 

 

A tactic successfully used by Ryan O'Reilly. 

[coastal.view]

4 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

No you are not really?  Of course they would prefer the money up front.  And in contract bonuses. Which have to be paid regardless of lockouts. But there is reason to madness.

 

The specific clause is in the last year of an RFA's contract; to retain rights the players team has to tender a 1 year qualifying offer for 10% higher than the base salary of the previous contracts last year. So Meir signed a 4 year deal averaging $6 mill. With a $10 mill salary the last year. So unless the team declines to qualify him? Meier is going to make $11 mill the year after.  After which he is UFA.

 

So if the team wants to keep they have to pay possibly even higher than the UFA market, on a long term deal.

 

It delivers huge leverage to the player at the end of an RFA deal. 

 

 

 

A tactic successfully used by Ryan O'Reilly. 

well first a little hair splitting

a 10% bump in salary is not required for a last contract year of that value

he could be qualified for 10 million

 

the tactic assumes the player improves to that extent to make the qualifying offer worthwhile to the team ?

 

but really the player is betting on his own failure to reach that value

in order to get to free agency

to me that seems a bit counter intuitive to most truly competitive athletes

or it is signalling to the team that the player really wants to move on after this contract

 

the real valued athlete

will get max value on their next contract

regardless of free agency happening

but i guess to most players that is not a guarantee for their more modest skills

 

[mll]

8 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

No you are not really?  Of course they would prefer the money up front.  And in contract bonuses. Which have to be paid regardless of lockouts. But there is reason to madness.

 

The specific clause is in the last year of an RFA's contract; to retain rights the players team has to tender a 1 year qualifying offer for 10% higher than the base salary of the previous contracts last year. So Meir signed a 4 year deal averaging $6 mill. With a $10 mill salary the last year. So unless the team declines to qualify him? Meier is going to make $11 mill the year after.  After which he is UFA.

 

So if the team wants to keep they have to pay possibly even higher than the UFA market, on a long term deal.

 

It delivers huge leverage to the player at the end of an RFA deal. 

 

 

 

A tactic successfully used by Ryan O'Reilly. 

10% is only for salaries under 660K.  Up to 1M it's 5% and after that they just have to match base salary.  10M is Meier's qualifying offer.

Someone on HF posted a link to an interview he gave in German where he talks of big ticket contract after this one is up.  They first discussed contract length and only once that was agreed they started talking money.   Via google translate:

 

"We had a clear idea of what we wanted. We are very satisfied with what we have now. When it runs out, I'm 26 years old and ready for the big ticket."
The big ticket?
"To negotiate freely with other teams, I would have to be 27 years old when the contract expires. My fourth year contract with San Jose brings in $ 10 million. The club then has the right to extend my contract for another year, provided that it pays back those ten million.
Then in the next five years, I would get an average wage of $ 6.8 million.
If San Jose does not pay the ten million for a fifth year, I can bargain with other franchises."

[Canuck Surfer]

20 minutes ago, mll said:

10% is only for salaries under 660K.  Up to 1M it's 5% and after that they just have to match base salary.  10M is Meier's qualifying offer.

Someone on HF posted a link to an interview he gave in German where he talks of big ticket contract after this one is up.  They first discussed contract length and only once that was agreed they started talking money.   Via google translate:

 

"We had a clear idea of what we wanted. We are very satisfied with what we have now. When it runs out, I'm 26 years old and ready for the big ticket."
The big ticket?
"To negotiate freely with other teams, I would have to be 27 years old when the contract expires. My fourth year contract with San Jose brings in $ 10 million. The club then has the right to extend my contract for another year, provided that it pays back those ten million.
Then in the next five years, I would get an average wage of $ 6.8 million.
If San Jose does not pay the ten million for a fifth year, I can bargain with other franchises."

I did have that math.  Not perfect. Mucked it up on 10% required over last year.

 

But pretty close...

 

7 hours ago, Canuck Surfer said:

Meier, I agree btw might be the best comparable, is yes, $6 million.  But with $10 mill the last year, which means they have to qualify him at $10 mill a year.

 

And with arbitration rights. Add the 5th year at $10 mill / 5 years = $34 mill or $6.8 mill AAV and UFA at the youngest possible age.

 

You come up with the same figures.

 

 

Meier is more physical, but I do not agree better.  If JB gets Brock at 4 x $5.5 mill I say job well done!

 

 

 

[mll]

10 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

I did have that math.  Not perfect. Mucked it up on 10% required over last year.

 

But pretty close...

 

 

Not about the numbers.  Found his quote interesting with your comment about leverage.  

[Canuck Surfer]

1 minute ago, mll said:

Not about the numbers.  Found his quote interesting with your comment about leverage.  

Meh, same, same.  Gets $10 mill or becomes UFA early.  

 

Or gets long term deal he wants.

 

Seems like leverage?

 

I could be splitting hairs.  

[mll]

4 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

Meh, same, same.  Gets $10 mill or becomes UFA early.  

 

Or gets long term deal he wants.

 

Seems like leverage?

 

I could be splitting hairs.  

He is agreeing with you.  

[Provost]

11 hours ago, xereau said:

What a perfect scenario this is, this way we can sign him to 6-8yrs one year before UFA.

... or he gets to the end of his contract, files for arbitration, gets his 1 year deal awarded and is then a UFA.

 

Four and five year deals are the worst idea from the team perspective.  It is retaining the least amount of club control.

 

A two or three year deal, or a six plus year deal is what the team would want.

[tas]

13 minutes ago, Provost said:

... or he gets to the end of his contract, files for arbitration, gets his 1 year deal awarded and is then a UFA.

 

Four and five year deals are the worst idea from the team perspective.  It is retaining the least amount of club control.

 

A two or three year deal, or a six plus year deal is what the team would want.

or maybe there's enough trust and understanding between the two sides, in addition to a mutual desire to keep him in vancouver for his entire career, that the team can afford throw brock a bone. 

[Provost]

13 minutes ago, tas said:

or maybe there's enough trust and understanding between the two sides, in addition to a mutual desire to keep him in vancouver for his entire career, that the team can afford throw brock a bone. 

That is just dumb and based on absolutely nothing aside from wet dreams of fans.

 

Is he signed yet?  If they are all pushing towards the same goal, then the negotiation should have been really easy.

 

Agents have a legal fiduciary obligation to look after the interests of their clients and not those of the team. His agent will be fighting for the largest dollars and term that gives his client the most control going forward.

Edited July 14, 2019 by Provost

[tas]

1 hour ago, Provost said:

That is just dumb and based on absolutely nothing aside from wet dreams of fans.

 

Is he signed yet?  If they are all pushing towards the same goal, then the negotiation should have been really easy.

 

Agents have a legal fiduciary obligation to look after the interests of their clients and not those of the team. His agent will be fighting for the largest dollars and term that gives his client the most control going forward.

of course. and what I'm saying is, by showing brock a sign of good faith now (not fighting him on term, allowing him to have that ufa leverage when his deal is up), maybe he'll be inclined not to wield it like a hammer when the time comes. 

 

if they fight him hard now, when they have all the real leverage, you bet your ass they'll be fighting him hard forever, since he'll have all the leverage moving forward. 

[Provost]

22 hours ago, tas said:

of course. and what I'm saying is, by showing brock a sign of good faith now (not fighting him on term, allowing him to have that ufa leverage when his deal is up), maybe he'll be inclined not to wield it like a hammer when the time comes. 

 

if they fight him hard now, when they have all the real leverage, you bet your ass they'll be fighting him hard forever, since he'll have all the leverage moving forward. 

Wish in one hand and crap in the other... see which one fills up first.

Edited July 15, 2019 by Provost

[Provost]

Wish in one hand and crap in the other, see which one fills up first...

[Viper007]

On 7/13/2019 at 5:32 PM, hammertime said:

Timo Mier is the most recent comparable so if were comparing. Timo also scored 10 more points and played better away from the puck than Brock. He signed for 6x4 so imo that puts Brock around 5.5 x 4. If he wants to bet on himself he can do a cheep 1 year deal and re negotiate if he proves hes better than his current average.

Timo also played on a far superior team. I'm sure Brock would've gotten that 10 points if he were playing on the sharks.  If we do what you suggest and sign him to a 1 year show me deal, and Brock ends up scoring 40 goals/80 pts.  He'll then want even more money.  Do you want to risk that?  And really screw up any future cap structure?  You structure a deal just like you did with Bo Horvat.  Overpay in the early years, and by the end of the contract, it is a good cap hit.  I would be happy if BB signs for 6 mill x 4 years, like Timo Meier, just pay it straight out instead of the 10 mill back end deal.  I would be even more impressed if they can get a max term deal say 8 mill x 8 years.

[hammertime]

3 hours ago, Viper007 said:

Timo also played on a far superior team. I'm sure Brock would've gotten that 10 points if he were playing on the sharks.  If we do what you suggest and sign him to a 1 year show me deal, and Brock ends up scoring 40 goals/80 pts.  He'll then want even more money.  Do you want to risk that?  And really screw up any future cap structure?  You structure a deal just like you did with Bo Horvat.  Overpay in the early years, and by the end of the contract, it is a good cap hit.  I would be happy if BB signs for 6 mill x 4 years, like Timo Meier, just pay it straight out instead of the 10 mill back end deal.  I would be even more impressed if they can get a max term deal say 8 mill x 8 years.

Lots of its. If he were on a better team, if he played a full season, etc. Fact is he didnt and has never stayed healthy or scored 30 goals. If he gets 80 points next year I'm happy to pay him like an 80pt player what I'm not ok with is paying a 55pt player like a 70 point player which is what most are suggesting we do. I'm only interested in paying him for what he's done not what he might do. I'm ok with 6m x4 without the cap fudgery as you propose But not 7 as most seem to be fine with. I'm also fine with a 1 year deal to prove he should be paid more than Horvat. Because so far he hasn't proven that. If the canucks hadn't done him a solid and burned that first year off his ELC we wouldnt be having this discussion so maybe he should return the solid and sign cheep on a show me. I'm not sold with his wrist and back that he can stay healthy, play 82games and then a playoffs. 

[Viper007]

16 hours ago, hammertime said:

Lots of its. If he were on a better team, if he played a full season, etc. Fact is he didnt and has never stayed healthy or scored 30 goals. If he gets 80 points next year I'm happy to pay him like an 80pt player what I'm not ok with is paying a 55pt player like a 70 point player which is what most are suggesting we do. I'm only interested in paying him for what he's done not what he might do. I'm ok with 6m x4 without the cap fudgery as you propose But not 7 as most seem to be fine with. I'm also fine with a 1 year deal to prove he should be paid more than Horvat. Because so far he hasn't proven that. If the canucks hadn't done him a solid and burned that first year off his ELC we wouldnt be having this discussion so maybe he should return the solid and sign cheep on a show me. I'm not sold with his wrist and back that he can stay healthy, play 82games and then a playoffs. 

This isn't how contracts work now.  RFAs are getting paid now. 

I suggested awhile back that everybody should have a set contract and then add bonuses based on production.  The NHLPA will NEVER let that happen.  But it sure as hell will get rid of agents since they won't be needed lol.

Management has to do these contracts based on future production.  It's just the way things work, or else you will get players who will hold out a la NYLANDER, or offer sheeted (Brock is excluded). 

I'm sure every team in the NHL would sign him for more than what you're suggesting. 

You should think logically about contracts instead of what you want, because that's not how the NHL works anymore. 

No NHL team is gonna base his contract on what he's done now.  It'll all be based on what they think he will produce in the future.

[tan]

On 7/13/2019 at 8:35 PM, KanNuck said:

Why would we trade for Lucic ever lol

would you take Lucic with 2 first rounders as sweetner?

[grandmaster]

Listened to the guys on am 650 Sportsnet radio earlier and they say this will take a while. Everyone waiting for other RFA comparable players to sign first. This could take all summer!