FINDING THE NUMBER

Lowetide
July 21 2013 09:52AM

Making a case for Sam Gagner at $5M a year isn't hard to do, but for the Oilers it's more difficult to find a way to include him in their future at that number. Well beyond $5M? Almost impossible.

GAGNER HAS REAL VALUE TO EDMONTON

The case for Gagner making 5 large has been made ably at ON in recent days:

  • Robin Brownlee: "I don't think it's a stretch to believe that Gagner is a reasonable buy at $1 million less a season than Hall and Eberle just signed for. That means $5 million a season.Ka-ching. Pay the man."
  • Jonathan Willis: "My view is that I’d be comfortable signing Gagner at five million per season over five years, but that I’d be calling Grabovski’s agent just in case."

I'd also draw your attention to Tyler Dellow's summary of the situation (here) and his conclusion "deferring this issue by letting the arbitrator deal with it doesn’t seem likely to me to produce a better result. Make a longer term bet on him now seems like a reasonably smart bet to make to me."

BRIDGING THE GAP

The Oilers have five 'impact' players who could reasonably be regarded as having superior futures to Gagner: they are Taylor Hall, Ryan Nugent-Hopkins, Nail Yakupov, Jordan Eberle and Justin Schultz. Hall and Eberle are signed long term for $6M per year, and that's probably the organizational 'outer marker' for contracts.

Assuming that the club signs Nuge and J Scultz long term for $5M+ (or near) in the next 12 months, and have Gagner come in around $5M as well, the Oilers will be looking at about $27-29M for their five best players when the Yakupov contract comes up for review. This assumes the Nuge is willing to sign for less than $6M, and that my friends is a large assumption.

The cap will go up next year, and if it hits $70M plus then the pressures will be eased; however, signing Sam Gagner long term with a no trade mean Craig MacTavish could box himself in if:

  • he signs Gagner to a multi-year deal with a no trade clause for the free agent years
  • the cap goes up, but does not sky rocket
  • Gagner performs below his established level

These are legit concerns, and things MacT must measure as he readies to sign Sam Gagner.

WHAT DOES IT ALL MEAN?

I think the Oilers call in forensics on this, pore over the numbers, and deliver a long term contract shy of $5.25M per year. Sam Gagner has been consistent and is entering his prime. Buying an uptick in performance is a good bet.

We wait.

C2a6955161684b5e3189319acfa5ebe4
Lowetide has been one of the Oilogosphere's shining lights for over a century. You can check him out here at OilersNation and at lowetide.ca. He is also the host of Lowdown with Lowetide weekday mornings 10-noon on Team 1260.
Avatar
#51 They're $hittie
July 21 2013, 11:28AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

@Mr common sense

Whats laughable is your blog name, you don't seem to have any.

I did not say Gagner was a better passer, I said he was a more accurate passer. Nuge's vision makes him the better passer doesnt mean he is as accurate.

If you werent blind you would have seen that the night after the 8 point game he put up another 3 points in consecutive goals for the oilers, so I dont know what type of player you are refering to becoming after the game.

The oilers goalies are on record saying Gagner has the most accurate shot.

Ask Yakupov who the best passer on the team is.

Eberle has had one really good season, and the rest have been on par with Gagners seasons, in which he played an easier position and with better offensive players. Why is he worth 6M dollars. Are you paying him based on what he did in the WJC as a 19 year old.

Avatar
#52 Mark-LW
July 21 2013, 11:29AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
3
props
BaldOldMan wrote:

I'm having a hard time as a fan having a team pay a player 5million/yr for an avg. points/yr of 45-55, a faceoff % less than 50. We all complained with Hemsky > 5million and he produced > 60 points/yr. RNH has a low faceoff % maybe because of his shoulder (might have an impact on his strength). I could see him > 50% this year with a new shoulder. Is there anything wrong with Gagner's shoulder? The bench mark was set with Hall and Eberle with their 6million contracts. If you think he can produce at say 80% of the level of the top 2 then you should pay him 80%. Using 70 points as a mark based on Eberle's year, Gagner would have to produce at a level > 55 points, which I don't believe he has done, and 80% of 6 million is 4.8, not 5. We need to think about our team without using our heart. I think Gagner is a great teammate and he has awesome leadership, but not at 5million. I'm sorry to saw I'd rather see him traded now for a better return then if he heads to UFA next summer. I want great team regardless of the players. We have all become attached to him because of his history, but using our heart to pay > 5million just isn't a good business decision.

You are expressing concern about Gagner's career point average and then you use Eberle's single season outer marker as a benchmark?

Also, Gagner had a pro-rated 65 point season. Using your method of comparing it to Eberle's season of 76 points that is 86% of his production.

86% of Eberle's contract is 5.13 million. And Eberles contract is buying RFA years NOT UFA years. That is a huge huge huge huge item. You can't just ignore it.

So by using your logic, you should actually be arguing FOR paying him MORE than 5 million a year.

...

Avatar
#53 EHH Team
July 21 2013, 11:31AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
4
props
Spydyr wrote:

Once again Sam is not a second line center never mind a first line center. He is a second line winger playing center , poorly.

What I said is he is a second line PLAYER looking for first line money.

Give it up. You're getting totally destroyed.

Avatar
#54 Craig1981
July 21 2013, 11:33AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
3
props

@Spydyr

I didn't say you were wrong, I was saying what you said had no merit.

A contract Bergeron signed in 2010 has ZERO merit on what Gagner is worth in 2013.

Avatar
#55 Racki
July 21 2013, 11:33AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

I think arbitration will bring a number that the Oilers are more willing to spend, but unfortunately it will come with a term that will suck for the Oilers, as we all know. So Gagner's bargaining power outside of arbitration is pretty high. The Oilers are going to have to cave more than they'd really like to in order to get this done.

Math says the happy middle ground is $4.5M per year, but the Oilers are going to have to spend more to get Gagner to stay long term. $5M for 5 years sounds right to me.

I have to say though that temptation would be to just grab Grabovski for a cheaper rate, but while the offense is around the same ballpark (higher some years, lower by a lot last year), the attitude definitely doesn't seem to be the same either. But the Oil might have to make a sacrifice in order to build a team that they can afford to keep together.

How crappy will it be to basically lose Gagner for nothing though?

And I agree with above that Gagner isn't really a 2nd line center (imho)... 2nd line winger (could even be top line winger on some teams) is a better description. Just is the Oilers' best option for 2nd line C.

Avatar
#56 justDOit
July 21 2013, 11:33AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props
EHH Team wrote:

Give it up. You're getting totally destroyed.

Thank you!

Avatar
#57 a lg dubl dubl
July 21 2013, 11:34AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
2
props

Matt Duchene looks like a decent comparable to Gagner, and he just signed for 6 per, 5mil isn't really that bad people.

Avatar
#58 Gret99zky
July 21 2013, 11:35AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

It's easy.

Sign Gagner longterm for 5M+.

Trade Eberle.

If MacT wants Gags at that price hit he's got to let one of the other kids go.

Avatar
#59 Mr common sense
July 21 2013, 11:39AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
They're $hittie wrote:

Whats laughable is your blog name, you don't seem to have any.

I did not say Gagner was a better passer, I said he was a more accurate passer. Nuge's vision makes him the better passer doesnt mean he is as accurate.

If you werent blind you would have seen that the night after the 8 point game he put up another 3 points in consecutive goals for the oilers, so I dont know what type of player you are refering to becoming after the game.

The oilers goalies are on record saying Gagner has the most accurate shot.

Ask Yakupov who the best passer on the team is.

Eberle has had one really good season, and the rest have been on par with Gagners seasons, in which he played an easier position and with better offensive players. Why is he worth 6M dollars. Are you paying him based on what he did in the WJC as a 19 year old.

Doesn't surprise me Sam that overpaid guys like you (seems like you don't have elite imagination either, nice try with the name) don't like common sense from the regular Joe like me, we're fine with that.

You are NOT elite, the fact that you keep rebutting with comparisons against your 29th place teammates to highlight your point works in our favour for tomorrow. You are like your dad, nice guy, average player, forgotten within minutes once retired. Not elite.

Avatar
#60 Mark-LW
July 21 2013, 11:41AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
2
props

"Assuming that the club signs Nuge and J Scultz long term for $5M+ (or near) in the next 12 months, and have Gagner come in around $5M as well, the Oilers will be looking at about $27-29M for their five best players when the Yakupov contract comes up for review. This assumes the Nuge is willing to sign for less than $6M, and that my friends is a large assumption."

Let's assume in three years, contracts look like this:

Hall: 6
Eberle: 6
Gagner 5.5
RNH: 7
YAK: 8
Schultz: 5.5

That is 38 million for your six most important players at the moment.

That is 26% of your active roster using 47.5% of your projected cap (I'm assuming 80 million because that's what I keep hearing from media reports)

Is that number out of whack with how you should spend on elite talent? The pie obviously isn't divided equally among the roster. The best players are going to get the biggest slices.

Is it fair to assume you can fill out the roster with two other well paid defensemen and all the other parts with 52.5% of your budget?

I'd say yes.

EDIT:

Chicago used 42.5% of their budget this past season on their top 6 contracts. So I think the numbers I posted would be doable. Mind you, I'm just pulling those numbers out of my ass...

Avatar
#61 They're $hittie
July 21 2013, 11:41AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Mr common sense

nice that you have nothing to back up your arguments other than calling my him

Avatar
#62 Craig1981
July 21 2013, 11:44AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
3
props
a lg dubl dubl wrote:

Matt Duchene looks like a decent comparable to Gagner, and he just signed for 6 per, 5mil isn't really that bad people.

You are comparing a somewhat similar player, with a similar age, with a recently signed contract! You're going against the grain here

Avatar
#63 Mr common sense
July 21 2013, 11:47AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Craig1981 wrote:

You are comparing a somewhat similar player, with a similar age, with a recently signed contract! You're going against the grain here

Matt Duchesne= Sam Gagner!!!!??? What the hell is wrong with people??! Have you people seen Duchesne skate!!!!??

Avatar
#64 WhattaMike
July 21 2013, 11:48AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Sammy is a player who will be paid about $5 mil per yr and as RB attested to prior in agreement with someone, the $5 mil per yr type contract will be of correct value with the cap going up every yr.

Per year...based on being the new team cap/financial salarly standard this yr and next..., it will be Hall at $6 mil, Ebs at $6 mil, then likely RNH at $6 mil and probably Yak too bringing the team to about $24 mil here in total so far, then it will be Gagner at $5 mil (if there is a deal of sense) and then J. Schultz as well.. his being likely up to probably $4.5 mil per yr.

By then the cap should be over $70 mil per yr (and going higher yrs after) and these contracts total (suggestively) only at $33.5 for the next five years. That leaves another $36.5 mil per yr for the other 17 players to divvy up.

I am very okay with Gags getting his $5 mil per yr but again without the NTC or NMC.

Avatar
#65 Old Retired Guy (A.K.A. Die-Nasty)
July 21 2013, 11:51AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Romulus' Apotheosis wrote:

Fans often conflate these issues. It's a shame really.

Besides the whole narrative about players = bad character because they make too much money ignores the fact that players don't operate in a free market.

Hockey is one of the more regulated markets in existence. All the tools (ELC, RFA, Cap, etc.) are designed to limit the earning power of the players on the free market.

Fans often direct their frustration at players for "getting paid" when they hit UFA status and yet conveniently ignore the years those same players put in under market conditions radically unfavorable to them. Even under UFA status there are tools that artificially limit the earning power of players.

It is understandable that some form of resentment holds against those making enormous amounts of money, but that general affect is completely without context to evaluate the market in which value is assigned.

I get your point and its accurate......but I think their is large group of fans whose frustration is not resentment at the large amounts of money that athletes make....but rather when they are overpaid relative to the market like Horcoff was....or more accurately, when they are paid big numbers based on one good years performance. When they go into the crapper in following years, there is no way of recouping the money or to trade the contract. However when the reverse is true, and a player is signed to what we call a value contract, some of these players pout and demand new deals or try to force trades etc. I think it's this inequity that causes the angst.

Fans would like things to be reasonable and fair, not just cheap. They prefer it when a guy liked PJ Subban is not payed in advance for his potential....but have little or nothing against his making a windfall when he wins the Norris.

I think that the angst over Gagner comes from a similar source. 1) the fear that he is young and still yet unproven to large degree....which means their is the potential for a boat anchor contract....(which is amplified in this market by the contracts of Horcoff, Hemsky and Smyth).....AND.....2)..the concern that Gagner is not a clutch performer, poor defence, can't win face offs, easily pushed around, etc...makes us feel like he might be the invisible man when it comes to playoff hockey....(this too is amplified in our market by the fact that we have a small team)

So....if you're going base on age, offensive stats, and desperation ( we are weak at the center position) then you want him signed at 5.25. If on the other hand your one of those who puts more weight on all round game, physicality of the playoffs, face offs, etc....you see him as a problem...and not part of the cup winning solution, but given the circumstances..you'd take him at 4.25 to 4.5...where at least he's still tradable....

Avatar
#66 Mark-LW
July 21 2013, 11:54AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
WhattaMike wrote:

Sammy is a player who will be paid about $5 mil per yr and as RB attested to prior in agreement with someone, the $5 mil per yr type contract will be of correct value with the cap going up every yr.

Per year...based on being the new team cap/financial salarly standard this yr and next..., it will be Hall at $6 mil, Ebs at $6 mil, then likely RNH at $6 mil and probably Yak too bringing the team to about $24 mil here in total so far, then it will be Gagner at $5 mil (if there is a deal of sense) and then J. Schultz as well.. his being likely up to probably $4.5 mil per yr.

By then the cap should be over $70 mil per yr (and going higher yrs after) and these contracts total (suggestively) only at $33.5 for the next five years. That leaves another $36.5 mil per yr for the other 17 players to divvy up.

I am very okay with Gags getting his $5 mil per yr but again without the NTC or NMC.

People are suggesting that the cap will be at 70 by next year. I think you are underestimating what Yak could make. By the 2015-16 season (when Yak's new contract will take effect) That cap could be up to 80 million. That's 12.5% higher than the cap that Hall negotiated his contract under.

I'm not a believer as much as some people that Hall's contract made a 'line in the sand' for everyone. The cap will go up, the market will continue and change. And a contract signed three or four years earlier will no longer be a suitable comparison.

Avatar
#67 WhattaMike
July 21 2013, 12:00PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Old Retired Guy (A.K.A. Die-Nasty)...

very well said and I agree.

@Mark-LW...

I agree with you too and i was only throwing suggestive money out there but you are right that Yak could command a bigger contract than Hall.

I think that if Gags signs at $5 mil the Oilers will be good there. With RNH, Yak and J. Schultz deals coming up the cap will be just right for their deals too...whatever the ceiling would be with capspace by then.

But IMO, it that issue of NTC and NMC that bothers me most, not the contract. Thats likely why Horcoff had the wrong type deal because of this. Too much player control versus the team with these NTC or NMC issues.

Avatar
#68 Craig1981
July 21 2013, 12:00PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Mr common sense wrote:

Matt Duchesne= Sam Gagner!!!!??? What the hell is wrong with people??! Have you people seen Duchesne skate!!!!??

I said somewhat similar. Gagner has averaged .62ppg vs .73ppg and last year had .79ppg vs .91ppg.

-both center -same size -within 1 year of been a UFA of each other -signed a 5 year contract in 2013 -scoring output was within .1ppg of each other

As I said, these similarities give his contract has merit to compare, not that we need to pay them the same.

Avatar
#69 Mark-LW
July 21 2013, 12:02PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@WhattaMike

I agree

Avatar
#70 Spydyr
July 21 2013, 12:08PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
StHenriOilBomb wrote:

many lunacies of this post have already been highlighted, but I am curious:

Why did you chose the Eastern Conference champs instead of the "Champs", as you put it? Is it because the champs have 4 forwards and 2 dmen making over 5mil, some on back-diving contracts?

It's nice picking cherries, eh?

My mistake on the champs. As for cherry picking I'm at work (don't tell my boss) with not much time to research I just looked up a top team.

Avatar
#71 Spydyr
July 21 2013, 12:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

IMO Sam will sign in the range Robin said 5 million for 5 years. That is because Sam is in the enviable position of being the youngest UFA ever next season.

Again IMO that is too much for Sam. He is not my answer as the second line center moving forward.

Therefore I would sign him then trade him later in the season or at the trade deadline.

I also stand corrected on the first line money bit. You have enlightened me on what first line players are getting moving forward.

Avatar
#72 Old Retired Guy (A.K.A. Die-Nasty)
July 21 2013, 12:17PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Sincethewhadays wrote:

Just spit balling here. What if the solution MacT is contimplating is Arcabello in th 2c spot. If Gags gets the 1 year arbitrator dicision and Arcabello gets a decent look.... It would give us the extra C, plus a value contract for next season when we move Gags. That's assuming Aecabellos got an NHL game.

Arcabello does not have an NHL game.....

Avatar
#73 Craig1981
July 21 2013, 12:19PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
2
props
Spydyr wrote:

My mistake on the champs. As for cherry picking I'm at work (don't tell my boss) with not much time to research I just looked up a top team.

You need to "research" who won the cup last month?!?! All your agruments are now invalid

Avatar
#74 Old Retired Guy (A.K.A. Die-Nasty)
July 21 2013, 12:23PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props
Spydyr wrote:

IMO Sam will sign in the range Robin said 5 million for 5 years. That is because Sam is in the enviable position of being the youngest UFA ever next season.

Again IMO that is too much for Sam. He is not my answer as the second line center moving forward.

Therefore I would sign him then trade him later in the season or at the trade deadline.

I also stand corrected on the first line money bit. You have enlightened me on what first line players are getting moving forward.

Exactly why this negotiation is going all the way to the deadline.......the dreaded NTC......

Both camps are obviously aware of all the dynamics at play here......

SAMs camp knows that there is an above average chance that he will get moved at some point if he signs the mid or long term deal without the NTC....

The NTC is the main reason (not the money) that this may be one of the few cases that actually does go to arbitration

Avatar
#75 Taylor Gang
July 21 2013, 12:24PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Mark-LW wrote:

"Assuming that the club signs Nuge and J Scultz long term for $5M+ (or near) in the next 12 months, and have Gagner come in around $5M as well, the Oilers will be looking at about $27-29M for their five best players when the Yakupov contract comes up for review. This assumes the Nuge is willing to sign for less than $6M, and that my friends is a large assumption."

Let's assume in three years, contracts look like this:

Hall: 6
Eberle: 6
Gagner 5.5
RNH: 7
YAK: 8
Schultz: 5.5

That is 38 million for your six most important players at the moment.

That is 26% of your active roster using 47.5% of your projected cap (I'm assuming 80 million because that's what I keep hearing from media reports)

Is that number out of whack with how you should spend on elite talent? The pie obviously isn't divided equally among the roster. The best players are going to get the biggest slices.

Is it fair to assume you can fill out the roster with two other well paid defensemen and all the other parts with 52.5% of your budget?

I'd say yes.

EDIT:

Chicago used 42.5% of their budget this past season on their top 6 contracts. So I think the numbers I posted would be doable. Mind you, I'm just pulling those numbers out of my ass...

I doubt anyone will be making over 6

Avatar
#76 Spydyr
July 21 2013, 12:24PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props
Craig1981 wrote:

You need to "research" who won the cup last month?!?! All your agruments are now invalid

Yes. I made a mistake. I forgot to type eastern trying to juggle many things. It is nice you are perfect and never make a mistake. Some of us do.It also must be nice to be so powerful you can say another person's argument are invalid because they forgot to type the word eastern.

It must be hard being so perfect.

Avatar
#77 bazmagoo
July 21 2013, 12:29PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

I could stomach Sam at 5 million for 5 years as long as there is not a NMC/NTC included.

Avatar
#78 Craig1981
July 21 2013, 12:31PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Spydyr

I must admitt after I read you admitted you were wrong about the 1rst line thing I did feel bad about my post. My bad. My mistake But I do ask you this if you traded him, how will replace him with someone that costs less? We have very little talent in our prospects at center

Avatar
#79 PeOiler
July 21 2013, 12:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props
Spydyr wrote:

Yes. I made a mistake. I forgot to type eastern trying to juggle many things. It is nice you are perfect and never make a mistake. Some of us do.It also must be nice to be so powerful you can say another person's argument are invalid because they forgot to type the word eastern.

It must be hard being so perfect.

Shouldn't you be working?

Avatar
#80 Spydyr
July 21 2013, 12:33PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
PeOiler wrote:

Shouldn't you be working?

Yes, but it is Sunday a tad slow.

Avatar
#81 Young Oil
July 21 2013, 12:34PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

Just putting in my two cents, but people seem to be putting too much focus on points. That's not what the team needs when they already have Hall, Eberle, RNH and Yakupov. They need a center with a good two way game. So is Gagner worth $5M+ TO THE OILERS? No, not in my opinion. Is he part of the long term plans for the team? No, probably not. Will he be overpaid by the Oilers and possibly be untradeable in the future? We'll see.

The Oilers need players to keep goals out of their own net more than they need players to score them. They need a 2nd line center who is not prone to large scoring slumps when offense is his main contribution.

I would much prefer trading Gagner as a part of an overpay for a great two way center, like Dubinski. Give them an offer they can't refuse.

Just make sure we don't lose him for nothing, or prevent us from keeping Yakupov, RNH, and Schultz. Then I'll be happy.

Avatar
#82 Spydyr
July 21 2013, 12:42PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Craig1981 wrote:

I must admitt after I read you admitted you were wrong about the 1rst line thing I did feel bad about my post. My bad. My mistake But I do ask you this if you traded him, how will replace him with someone that costs less? We have very little talent in our prospects at center

IMO it is not about costing less. Just putting the cost against the cap somewhere else.

Sam is a good offensive player he just does not fit into the Oilers right now .There are just too many younger, better offensive players then him here at the moment.

I agree the team needs way more depth at center. They have Nuge as the undisputed number one. After that there is really no long term depth.

Hopefully Mac-T starts loading up centers like he just did with the defense. Right now IMO the team needs a two way , gritty , tough to play against a complete player for number two center.he can bring less offense then Sam.The top two line wingers will pick up the offense.The team just needs to get harder to play against and some grit in the top two lines.

Avatar
#83 2004Z06
July 21 2013, 12:47PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Should have kept Cogliano. Ha ha. It's not the money guys, it's the NTC. He knows he is the odd man out for this team to contend.

Avatar
#84 a lg dubl dubl
July 21 2013, 12:54PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Craig1981 wrote:

You are comparing a somewhat similar player, with a similar age, with a recently signed contract! You're going against the grain here

Im sorry lol ;)

Avatar
#85 a lg dubl dubl
July 21 2013, 01:02PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Mark-LW wrote:

"Assuming that the club signs Nuge and J Scultz long term for $5M+ (or near) in the next 12 months, and have Gagner come in around $5M as well, the Oilers will be looking at about $27-29M for their five best players when the Yakupov contract comes up for review. This assumes the Nuge is willing to sign for less than $6M, and that my friends is a large assumption."

Let's assume in three years, contracts look like this:

Hall: 6
Eberle: 6
Gagner 5.5
RNH: 7
YAK: 8
Schultz: 5.5

That is 38 million for your six most important players at the moment.

That is 26% of your active roster using 47.5% of your projected cap (I'm assuming 80 million because that's what I keep hearing from media reports)

Is that number out of whack with how you should spend on elite talent? The pie obviously isn't divided equally among the roster. The best players are going to get the biggest slices.

Is it fair to assume you can fill out the roster with two other well paid defensemen and all the other parts with 52.5% of your budget?

I'd say yes.

EDIT:

Chicago used 42.5% of their budget this past season on their top 6 contracts. So I think the numbers I posted would be doable. Mind you, I'm just pulling those numbers out of my ass...

and don't forget DD, if he has a "Rask" like year he could want upwards of 7mil too.

I want him to have a Rask type season that'll get the team into the playoffs but I think Boston screwed the rest of the NHL with that deal

Avatar
#86 a lg dubl dubl
July 21 2013, 01:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Spydyr wrote:

IMO it is not about costing less. Just putting the cost against the cap somewhere else.

Sam is a good offensive player he just does not fit into the Oilers right now .There are just too many younger, better offensive players then him here at the moment.

I agree the team needs way more depth at center. They have Nuge as the undisputed number one. After that there is really no long term depth.

Hopefully Mac-T starts loading up centers like he just did with the defense. Right now IMO the team needs a two way , gritty , tough to play against a complete player for number two center.he can bring less offense then Sam.The top two line wingers will pick up the offense.The team just needs to get harder to play against and some grit in the top two lines.

so what your sayin is trade Gagner and put Gordon at 2nd line center?

Avatar
#87 madjam
July 21 2013, 01:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Here is normal setup for the process . Management usually has two arbitrators it likes , and union and players usually only one . Each side chooses ones they feel are more condusive to each side , Advantage management right off the bat . Gagner being nbr.1 will probably get a management choice . Everything will be taken into account - good and bad . Union always asks for more than what they know they can get , it's just part of the process . Management makes it's final offer and arbitrator knows what it is generally . Wiggle room from Management offer at this stage is minimal and arbitrator has to take that into account . Arbitrator will make a short term decision that he hopes will lead them to a resolution by mutual common ground at a later date . In other words get back to fruitfull negotiation during that compulsory arbitration ruling and period . In a nutshell , it is only a temporary decision not a long term one , and thus should not be very long .

Avatar
#88 Mark-LW
July 21 2013, 01:09PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

@Taylor Gang

Why do you doubt that?

What if Yak starts putting up Hall-like numbers by the end of his contract (which is entirely reasonable)? Why would he accept 6 million when the cap will likely be much than when Hall signed his contract.

Avatar
#89 Spydyr
July 21 2013, 01:12PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
a lg dubl dubl wrote:

so what your sayin is trade Gagner and put Gordon at 2nd line center?

Hells no. Between Sam, Hemsky, Shultz the elder and perhaps a defensive prospect a good GM should be able to pick up a second line center such as I suggested.

I'm not saying trade all of them for said center, just that they have players that can be moved for him. Some teams may be up against the cap later this summer.Perhaps a draft pick and a prospect or two may fetch him

Avatar
#90 a lg dubl dubl
July 21 2013, 01:36PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props
Spydyr wrote:

Hells no. Between Sam, Hemsky, Shultz the elder and perhaps a defensive prospect a good GM should be able to pick up a second line center such as I suggested.

I'm not saying trade all of them for said center, just that they have players that can be moved for him. Some teams may be up against the cap later this summer.Perhaps a draft pick and a prospect or two may fetch him

Do you think LA would trade Richards or Carter, or Philly with Giroux or San Jose with Thorton or Pavelski for any of those players the Oilers have that are willing to trade?

2nd line centers that are 6'0+ and 200lbls+ is a lot harder to obtain via trade without any of the kids involved and right now that IMO is asinine

Im not tryin to shoot you down or start a interweb war with ya its just my opinion :)

Avatar
#91 Spydyr
July 21 2013, 01:42PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
a lg dubl dubl wrote:

Do you think LA would trade Richards or Carter, or Philly with Giroux or San Jose with Thorton or Pavelski for any of those players the Oilers have that are willing to trade?

2nd line centers that are 6'0+ and 200lbls+ is a lot harder to obtain via trade without any of the kids involved and right now that IMO is asinine

Im not tryin to shoot you down or start a interweb war with ya its just my opinion :)

The players you named are some of the top centers in the NHL. Set your sights a bit lower.

So your saying Sam is good enough to be second line center here but not one other team in the NHL will trade their second line center straight up for him. Kind of makes my argument doesn't it?

Avatar
#92 Dale
July 21 2013, 02:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
a lg dubl dubl wrote:

Matt Duchene looks like a decent comparable to Gagner, and he just signed for 6 per, 5mil isn't really that bad people.

The Oilers can't keep eveyone making 5 million plus. Someone has to go to make the third and fourth lines better.

Avatar
#93 Quicksilver ballet
July 21 2013, 02:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

See this going either way. Sam signs a 5 yr 22.5 million dollar deal in the morning, and we're all left scratching our heads wondering why we got so worked up about it. Or, the other way, Sam saying bring it all on Oiler fans by pushing for that 5.25+ deal.

If I was making that decision, i'd be offering him that 22.5/5yr option at 9 this evening, or call in sick tomorrow (walk away). Good thing it's Sam Gagner we're discussing here, and not one of the all important fab 5.

Can somebody wake me when this is over [yawn]

Avatar
#94 Craig1981
July 21 2013, 02:47PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Quicksilver ballet

My guess if its a deal 5 year. $27/5yr

Avatar
#95 DieHard
July 21 2013, 03:15PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Jujhar Khaira and Bogdan Yakimov are the reasons the Oilers cannot let Gagner have a no trade clause. These are our centers after 2 more seasons.

Avatar
#96 Quicksilver ballet
July 21 2013, 03:20PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Craig1981 wrote:

My guess if its a deal 5 year. $27/5yr

We know he'll likely be getting close to that over the next 5 yrs. Do you think he earns that wearing the blue orange and white?

Screams of the Horcoff Hemsky deals all over again to me. Maybe an Arb 10 over 2 yr decision would allow them to keep their options open.

Avatar
#97 Mark-LW
July 21 2013, 03:38PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
2
props
DieHard wrote:

Jujhar Khaira and Bogdan Yakimov are the reasons the Oilers cannot let Gagner have a no trade clause. These are our centers after 2 more seasons.

Ya. We will go through development pains with Gagner, and right when he's in his prime we will replace him with two twenty year old prospects.

Sounds like a smart plan.

Avatar
#98 a lg dubl dubl
July 21 2013, 03:58PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Spydyr wrote:

The players you named are some of the top centers in the NHL. Set your sights a bit lower.

So your saying Sam is good enough to be second line center here but not one other team in the NHL will trade their second line center straight up for him. Kind of makes my argument doesn't it?

Nay nay I do think hes good enough to be a second line center on 29 other teams, all Im saying is if your going to trade Sam your going to have to get someone on par with him or better to replace him on the 2nd line center position otherwise the team is just spinning its tires (Islanders, Panthers, Bluejackets)

You wanna win, go big or go home right

If Im trading Gagner to say for example the Flyers for Giroux Id offer sam and my 1st rounder and that's all. To get a 3rd/4th line guy for sam drops us down and leaves a bigger hole on the team

Avatar
#99 a lg dubl dubl
July 21 2013, 04:00PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Dale

why not Pittsburgh seems to do all right

Avatar
#100 David S
July 21 2013, 04:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
They're $hittie wrote:

accuracy? Gagner wins or finishes second every year at the oilers skill competition. Has only lost to Tom Gilbert

Finesse? Highlight ability? Gagners Shoot outs clearly have finesse. 8 point night!

PP Specialist? Lead the oilers in PP/60 by a wide margin

PK specialist? Lead the oilers in corsi rel and pk points last year. Was only on the ice for 3 goals against. Maybe not a specialist but one of the oilers best.

Hocky IQ? You have nothing to measure this but I think the majority of the hockey community disagrees with you.

Passing? Are you on crack, he is the best passer on the oilers. While Nuge's vision may make you believe nuge is better gagner is the more accurate passer.

He is an elite passer, he has elite finesse, and he is good to great at everything else I listed.

Put me in a room for arbitration with you. I will convince them to cut your hands off so you are not able to type something so stupid again.

^ THIS.

Comments are closed for this article.