Article: Humanity and Capitalism Are At Odds Over Gaudreau's Contract

[Tony Abbott]

View full article

[Protec]

I think the contract is pretty okay in most ways. GMBG has been loyal to vets and fairly offered opportunities to prospects. I see the Guadreau deal as a six of one, half-dozen of the other. 3 years/3M after this season would have had a better warm & fuzzy feeling for the #89 story but ~the same cost over 5 years gives the Wild a reliable, affordable player which had to be done for the current cap. Plus, it gives the Wild group more consistency to build a team. 

I like everything about the deal. Greenway was better cause you could see him being traded. I have much more faith in Frederick.

[Will D. Ness]

I like the contract even from a money perspective.  The value is now when we need it most and if he declines year 3 or 4 then it isn't a significant burden.  

Also, I don't think it is fair to argue that he will decline like those other dudes.  Those were epic declines.

 

[Pewterschmidt]

Great article. Great points.  I agree that 5 yr term seems too long.  Price seems like value though. I suspect BG/de  like having a glue guy specialist (vanilla 5v5 player) that plays a position that’s hard fill and the bet is that Fred is still a capable bottom 6 C at age 35.  If he goes full Danny Heatly/Thomas Vanek the deal blows.  But BG is betting Fred will still bring his “I’m just happy to be here, help out wherever I can” attitude for next 5 years.  A portion of the $2M AAV is buying team culture, which is fuzzy math but legitimate 

[Wild4Life]

Comparing Freddy G to Heatley or Pomms or Vanek is apples to oranges on so many levels.  If you add a few more million AAV, then sure.  But it's a solid value for a super under-rated player who has the right attitude and swiss army knife capability that is rare in the NHL.

The guy earned this contract, is very very happy with it, and if it doesn't work out, then the annual cap increase alone would cover it 2-3 years from now..

Why crap all over it like this?   Straight up disrespectful to a guy who has absolutely low-key shined as one of our best players this season.

[mnfaninnc]

Looking over Gaudreau's deal, it won't be hard to buy it out after 3 years.  But, he also is very tradeable.  His contract is front loaded so that the last 3 years actually pay him just under $1.8m. And with that pay, that will be the pay of a competant 4th line C or 13th forward that's a vet.  

I think the contract is excellently constructed, and it pays for his next 2 years which should be similar to the past 2.  Based upon his production, I still think the 1st 2 years are under compensated.  Players generally are paid what they've accomplished in the past, and this contract represents value compared to production.  

Tony makes a good argument about the underlying measurements of Gaudreau, he's not a fancy stats darling.  However, there are few as good at puck retrieval as Gaudreau.  For some reason, Gaudreau makes the most of his assets which add up to far more than each piece.  And, his 61.5% shootout percentage coming in the 3 hole is worth at least 6 points in the standings this year. 

These guys are the ones you don't appreciate until they're gone.  They constantly get looked over on paper.  He fits into the Matt Cullen, Kyle Brodziak, Eric Haula column of players who are underappreciated.  Each one of those players for our franchise were missed.  You look around and wonder "who did that and why isn't it getting done now" and realize that guy is missing. Cullen aged out, that one is understandable.  Brodziak got a better deal, and Haula was a sacrifice.  

I'm glad we finally valued a guy like that, and Shooter did pay attention to franchise history this time! And, Evason figured out a perfect role for the player.

[Tony Abbott]

2 hours ago, Wild4Life said:

Comparing Freddy G to Heatley or Pomms or Vanek is apples to oranges on so many levels. 

I don't think I was really comparing them. I was just pointing them out as examples of guys who had hard declines, while noting that Gaudreau doesn't have nearly as many NHL miles as they do. Those guys all had about 750-800 NHL games before the miles added up on them. Maybe that helps Gaudreau keep his value as he ages, but maybe it doesn't.

2 hours ago, Wild4Life said:

Why crap all over it like this?   Straight up disrespectful to a guy who has absolutely low-key shined as one of our best players this season.

I think I tried to give him his props, which he deserves, while also explaining why giving him five years isn't a great idea. This is a case where two things can be true at once. 

[FredJohnson]

"But is this contract conducive to optimizing Minnesota's chances of winning long-term? It sucks that we have to look at that. But we do, and the answer is: probably not?"

Will the cap be held flat forever? The Salary Cap has to expand more so the popular teams can sign their studs. Then this contract (and the Parise-Suter ded cap) won't look nearly as bad. Thanks for the article and the thought process.

Page REC.

[Protec]

 

 

Quote

I was just pointing them out as examples of guys who had hard declines, while noting that Gaudreau doesn't have nearly as many NHL miles as they do. Those guys all had about 750-800 NHL games before the miles added up on them. Maybe that helps Gaudreau keep his value as he ages, but maybe it doesn't.

I think I tried to give him his props, which he deserves, while also explaining why giving him five years isn't a great idea. This is a case where two things can be true at once. 

^^^

I think it's fair to say that a middle six guy who doesn't especially stand out doesn't normally get a long-term contract. For 2M, you're getting a known value on a guy who isn't fragile or prone to a rapid decline allowing the team to plug in youth behind reliable, inexpensive guys. In some ways #89 reminds me of Matt Cullen who played pretty well til he was 40. Hartman was a great contract, Ek is on a nice one, and #97 has a deal that will continue to look good. The certainty with Gaudreau and what he brings makes good sense for the Wild. Fred is likely happy to stay put and deliver in the role he's earned. Like Goligoski, I don't mind the cagey old veterans getting paid while they're in somewhat of a player/coach/role-model position as they near retirement.

Unlike Greenway, I don't see this deal going sour on either end. I liked the Greenway contract because it was tradable and turned out well for MN. This deal for #89 is pretty good and safe for the organization and the player. I like it. I'd like to see GMBG keep the team together as much as possible. I like Dewar. I feel bad to say Shaw & Rossi are the most uncertain based on their injuries and faith-based long-term projections. Duhaime is kinda the same, seems to be hurt too much for me.

This deal assures two good centers under contract while they look to upgrade and fill in the other slots. I'd like to see Hartman stick around on a similar deal to Fred if possible. Personally, I think there's some value to keeping the same group together as much as possible. GMBG appears to be trying to do that so far. Dumba and Gus are the players with Duhaime, Shaw, and Steel that deserve offers.(Shaw being blown-knee again is tough.) Still, with vets like Johanssson or Nyquist equally playing for their next contract makes it easy for Guerin to explore options filling in around the core group. I believe this off-season is a perfect time for Guerin to shuffle the deck and trade some players. This could allow him to resign the most important guys, layout the schedule for re-signing roster players, and plugging in young players.

With the UFAs like Kilngberg, Nyqvist, etc. expiring combined with a trade should leave some money and roster openings for Walker, Beckman, or others to fill in. Perhaps Sundqvuisst would sign for 1M and Steel comes back for 1M? That wouldn't be too bad and if Dumba takes a hometown deal. The Wild might have enough to sign Gus for a contract long enough to see Wallstedt backup for a year or two.

[bean5302]

I mean... it can kind of be summed up with

Quote

What we see here is a player who is about league-average defensively and is very below average on the offensive side of the puck. Looking back over the last three years isn't cherry-picking to make Gaudreau look worse, either. If we isolate just this season, he's in the 13th percentile in offensive impact, and just the 38th percentile defensively. 

Under normal circumstances, teams shouldn't seek to lock this kind of player up long-term

There's no good reason to pay somebody for a job they cannot perform, but the NHL isn't working in a capitalist system, either. The NHL is working in a quasi-socialist system where every team is artificially constricted in the amount they have to spend. We don't really know what teams would be willing to pay for any player because it's not a free market economy.

All that aside, within the system the NHL is working, there's a good reason to keep a few players like Gaudreau on relatively inexpensive contracts; the same as you'd see in other sports like baseball. You need a few players you can count on to hold their own who don't break the bank. Gaudreau provides security and a safety net in case prospects don't work out and even if he declines a bit, he'll still provide some depth value. The Wild are not going to be replacing him with better talent through free agency.