Jump to content
Hockey Wilderness
  • Humanity and Capitalism Are At Odds Over Gaudreau's Contract


    Image courtesy of Matt Blewett-USA Today Sports
    Tony Abbott

    The heart wants to love Freddy Gaudreau's new five-year deal, but the realities of the salary cap suggest it could be a mistake.

    You can say whatever you like about Freddy Gaudreau's five-year, $10.5 million contract with the Minnesota Wild. In some ways, it doesn't matter. In a world of competitive, contentious, and cutthroat negotiations of the sports world's it's a business mentality, Gaudreau's story is a rare feel-good moment.

    In case you need a refresher on Gaudreau's career arc, here it is:

    Gaudreau walks on to try out for Shawinigan's QMJHL team after going undrafted in the CHL Draft. He makes the team as a bottom-six player in the QMJHL. Two years later, he's a captain, a point-per-game player with a big playoff run, and gets a strong reputation as evidenced by the "Q" naming him the league's Most Sportsmanlike Player

    And he continues to get that familiar feeling of being undrafted, this time in the NHL Entry Draft.

    Who cares? He catches on with the Nashville Predators organization and works his way up AHL lineup, just like in juniors. He gets a cup of coffee in 2017 and somehow manages to score his first three goals in the Stanley Cup Finals.

    Despite this, his career starts to stall out. He's splitting time between Nashville and the AHL Milwaukee Admirals. Finally, he jumps to the Pittsburgh Penguins, hoping to catch on at age-27. Instead, he's shuttled between the taxi squad during the COVID season, despite playing well in his NHL games.

    At 28, he joins his former Milwaukee Admirals coach Dean Evason in Minnesota, and he again works his way up the lineup. Despite his track record as a tweener, Evason plants his flag saying Gaudreau can play. By the end of the year, he's centering their second-best scoring line and racked up 44 points. The next season, he follows it up with 19 goals and 38 points.

    Now we're here, as the Wild rewarded him for all his hard work with long-term job and financial security. It's impossible to say that he didn't deserve it. By all accounts, he's a great teammate, a hard worker, and an inspiration to any mid-20s AHLer who hasn't gotten their opportunity yet.

    This is how sports should be. Players deserve every penny they can negotiate from their teams, and honestly, even more. It's why the salary cap sucks. It sucks the humanity out of the game and turns players — actual human beings — into game pieces. Playthings for the oligarchs of North America and their bean counters. 

    That's the world I'd love to live in. Unfortunately for the Wild, that's not a realm where they reside. Is Gaudreau a fantastic story? Absolutely. A solid player who proved against long odds he can play in the best league in the world? Sure. Is it the human thing to do to reward a guy like Gaudreau instead of letting him take his chances on the open market? You bet.

    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?

    There's a reason they say sports are a business — it's because they are. The salary cap squeezes player salaries and makes every dollar someone gets a dollar someone else can't make. It tricks us into thinking a player who scores 82 points in two years while only getting $2.4 million for it is a good thing, then has fans hold their nose when they get some of the money they deserved.

    This sucks! You want to (and should!) be happy for Gaudreau. But in a salary cap league, winning is tied to successfully managing the money. Gaudreau deserved more money these past two years; he was underpaid. That doesn't mean giving it to him is going to help the team long-term, though.

    Let's get into why. Why sign any player long-term, anyway? The most logical reason to do so is when teams can't find what that player provides easily. If a player is rare and valuable, you've got to lock that down for as long as you can. 

    Minnesota doesn't have a lot of long-term contracts on their team, though partly this is attributable to the ghosts of Zach Parise and Ryan Suter soaking up $13 million or so of dead cap space. Until last night, the only players whose contracts lasting three years into the future or longer were Kirill Kaprizov, Matt Boldy, Joel Eriksson Ek, Jared Spurgeon, and Jonas Brodin.

    All of those players are extremely hard to replace. Arguably, they're all franchise cornerstone-type players. No one else on the team has more than two years remaining, and they were the only players Bill Guerin had ever signed to a longer than a three-year term.

    Until Gaudreau. We have to ask what prompted Guerin to do that. Is he hard to replace?

    This season he's emerged as a sort of special teams whiz. Evason trusts him heavily on the penalty kill, and Gaudreau's rewarded his coach with four shorthanded goals. Gaudreau is almost always out there to defend a late, close lead, leading to some empty-netters. And of course, he's been a revelation in the shootout.

    Combine that with intangible factors like being a good teammate and working hard, and it's easy to see why his coach and GM are enamored with what he brings. 

    But on the ice, at least the things we can measure, it seems like Gaudreau doesn't bring a rare or unique set of attributes to the table. Let's take a quick-and-dirty look at his playing card from Evolving Hockey.

    image.png

    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. Maybe Gaudreau could've priced himself out of Minnesota's ability to pay on the free agent market. That's OK, though, because you can find the next Gaudreau.

    A great example of this would be... the Wild signing Gaudreau in the first place. Minnesota didn't get him after a two-year run of NHL success. They found a guy who'd bounced around and hadn't proven he can be an NHL player. But they identified what he did well, and put him in a position to succeed.

    Minnesota's fairly good at this. Ryan Hartman stands as an example; maybe the best one. Sam Steel came in on an $800k deal and scored 28 points in 65 games. No one thought much of Filip Gustavsson before this season. But now he's incredible, and the Wild got him straight-up for a bad contract.

    Paying Gaudreau for five years kind of ignores what made Gaudreau such a good value to begin with. 

    Then you fold in the fact that the first season of this new contract will be Gaudreau's age-30 season. Now, his status as a late bloomer and NHL/AHL tweener, and COVID taking away a good chunk of games means he doesn't have a ton of miles on him. Between the AHL and NHL, he has 505 professional games under his belt. Maybe that helps him avoid a sharp decline like those we've seen from past veterans in Jason Pominville, Dany Heatley, and Parise.

    Still, Father Time is undefeated, as they say, and betting on a player maintaining their value from age 30 to 34 is pretty optimistic. Can it be done? Sure, the Wild have mid-30s players that look ageless. But is it a solid bet that Gaudreau will merit staving off the wave of talent that's coming for Minnesota for five years? Again, probably not.

    Especially considering that those vets we mentioned were extremely valuable players at their peaks. Gaudreau doesn't have that much wiggle room if his game starts to drop off. This season, Gaudreau gave Minnesota about 1.2 points in the standings over a replacement-level player, according to Evolving Hockey. 

    That's probably worth the $2.1 million freight now, but again, any decline is going to eat away at that fair price. That's not a bet many teams are willing to make on a depth player.

    Next season, only 24 active players will be on five-year contracts they signed at age-30 or later. These are almost exclusively star-level players who have a track record such that teams will make that deal with the devil to get and/or keep. You can probably argue there are a few mid-tier guys like Ondrej Palat or Bryan Rust, but those look like overpays.

    Only one player matches Gaudreau's role as a bottom-six type: Casey Cizikas. He's in the second year of a six-year, $15 million deal that looked bad on Day 1, and not much better now. Even with his best production since 2018-19, Cizikas only scored 21 points for the New York Islanders. He turns 32 next year. Good luck with that.

    This extension also furthers a trend we've seen from Guerin's front office: making moves they probably didn't have to make to lock players in at the height of their value. In fairness, doing this with some players, Hartman being a prime example, was savvy. But other moves have already bitten Minnesota.

    Last season, Guerin inked Jon Merrill to a three-year deal at a low price, just $1.2-million AAV. He did so in December after a great stretch of play from the bottom-pair defenseman. One year later, Merrill is rotating in and out with players like Alex Goligoski and fans are already clamoring for Brock Faber to squeeze him out of the lineup. This is just in the first year of Merrill's extension. Two to go.

    Speaking of Goligoski, Minnesota also extended him last year getting him under contract through age-38. Goligoski has played recently, but spent most of the season as a healthy scratch and was in trade rumors as someone whose salary Guerin might like to clear next season. Expect to hear more of those this summer, as his $2-million AAV looks like a small but dense weight on their flexibility.

    Despite being younger than either Merrill or Goligoski,, Jordan Greenway is already one such cap casualty. At around this time last year, he signed an extension that looked team-friendly, lasting three years with a $3 million AAV. One year later, Greenway is out the door and the default reaction from the fan base was, good thing they got rid of that awful contract. Again, this was a "team-friendly" deal that went sour after one year, with a 25-year-old player.

    These were all low-money deals like Gaudreau's, and they lasted two or three years. What happens if Gaudreau isn't looking good in two years? There'll be a whole three years left to go on that deal — and Gaudreau's 15-team no-trade clause might make that deceptively hard to move.

    You could see why Guerin was willing to make those deals, though, because the Wild wanted contract certainty for the height of the Parise-Suter buyout penalties. Maybe it wasn't the best reason to invest in those particular players, but it theoretically solved a problem. You're not going to need to overpay for a third-line winger, or a sixth-or-seventh defenseman if you have one locked in.

    Gaudreau gives Guerin cost certainty for the next two years. But what problem does he solve after that? Minnesota's system is stocked with prospects. Not all of them are going to make it, but they're also pretty likely to churn out more Brandon Duhaimes, Connor Dewars, and Mason Shaws. And as Gaudreau, Steel, and Hartman have shown, those spots aren't expensive to fill competently (or better) from the bargain bin.

    The money doesn't look like a concern now, and maybe Gaudreau's $2 million won't hinder Minnesota as the cap rises and the buyouts (mostly) come off the books. However, the issue is that salaries are going to rise with the cap. Someone like Kaprizov has the potential to get paid to the tune of $13-15 million.

    Minnesota also hopes that top prospects like Marco Rossi, Jesper Wallstedt, Brock Faber, Marat Khusnutdinov, and more will too, should they become productive NHLers in the next five years. Any free agents they bring in once Parise and Suter's money clears are also going to be more expensive.

    Teams aren't going to magically all have breathing room once the salary cap goes up. Salaries are cats and the cap ceiling is any object they can climb into. They'll conform to fill the precise volume available. Look at the ones that had significantly more money to play with than Minnesota this year. Plenty of teams had to move assets in order to clear money. $2 million of flexibility is pretty valuable now, and that's not likely to change in five years.

    Again, this stinks that the realities of a salary cap world threaten to taint as cool of a journey as you get to see in hockey. In a better world, we're all celebrating that a nice guy who clawed his way from an unknown junior player to a $10.5-million contract without a dreaded BUT! undermining it. Sports would be better for it.

    BUT! that's not the world we or the Wild occupy, and there's a chance that forces far beyond what Gaudreau can control, or has anything to do with, might curdle what should be an otherwise incredible story.

    Think you could write a story like this? Hockey Wilderness wants you to develop your voice, find an audience, and we'll pay you to do it. Just fill out this form.


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    Featured Comments

    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.

    • Like 4
    • Thanks 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    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.

     

    • Like 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    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 freddy krueger terror GIF

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    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.

    • Like 3
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    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.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    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. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    "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.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     

    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.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    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.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...