Mike Green picked a good time to have his breakthrough season, didn't he? He didn't miss a game all season, had a League-leading 18 goals from the blueline, a 20-goal/65-point pace after Thanksgiving, and a plus-eleven rating after January, all of which lead to a seventh-place finish in Norris Trophy voting at the tender age of 22, which will, in turn, lead to big bucks this summer for one of the most attractive Restricted Free Agent targets.But you knew that.
Then you read Larry Brooks yesterday, who wrote that "Green, a dynamic difference maker, is being low-balled by the Caps," and your stomach dropped. Now, Brooks certainly isn't the most credible character in the world of hockey journalism, but rather than dismissing this out of hand, let's take a second to think about it.
Assuming that no one in the Caps organization is running around bragging to folks about how insulting their offers to the young blueliner have been - a pretty safe assumption, I should think - where would Brooks be getting his information? Perhaps from the same place writers always get their information on player contract negotiations - from the player's agent.
For example, Adrian Dater just the other day wrote in The Denver Post that a deal between the Avalanche and Jose Theodore was (and presumably still is) "imminent." Dater's source? Not the Colorado front office, of course, but Theodore's agent Don Meehan.
So Don Meehan is chatty. Know what else he is? Mike Green's agent (and Matt Cooke's, Steve Eminger's and Eric Fehr's). Know what else he is? [Cue Dramatic Hamster] Alex Ovechkin's former agent who Ovechkin famously fired after five years of representation, less than 14 months before Ovechkin signed his 13-year/$124m mega-deal. Given that a sports agent's cut is typically around three or four percent of his client's salary, that's potentially upwards of $3.7 million (perhaps much more) over the span of Ovechkin's deal that's not going into Don Meehan's bank account.
Whether or not Meehan has a legitimate ax to grind with the Caps, one could pretty easily see why he'd want to reach into Ted Leonsis's pocket and take as much money as he possibly can as some form of payback.
Which brings us back to Green. If Meehan is telling Larry Brooks that the Caps are low-balling Mike Green, it could mean one of two things: it could mean that the Caps are offering a deal that's way below Meehan's assessment of market value or it could mean that the Caps are offering a deal that's way below what Meehan is willing to accept for reasons detailed above. If it's the former, perhaps there's hope that the two sides can reach some middle ground (though I personally wrestle with what legitimate market value for a 22-year-old with Green's upside is, and I imagine I'm not alone). If it's the latter, however, and there's nothing that fits within the Caps salary structure that they could offer and have Meehan accept, there's little point in continuing negotiations at this point.
Maybe I'm being a bit conspiracy-minded, but this thing certainly seems to be headed for the RFA negotiating and signing period without a deal being done, at which point another team would do the dirty work of putting together a deal, Green would sign it, and the Caps would match as they have said they would (which may, actually, be the best and cleanest way to get this done... and if you think it would sour the relationship between the team and the player, I can assure you it would not).
One thing is for sure: agents can indeed be a frightening prospect. At some point, perhaps the player himself is going to have to step in.
79 comments:
is it July 1 that RFA offer sheets can be presented?
Per Mirtle (third link in the post), "If players don't accept a qualifying offer (which must be made by June 25 for teams to retain RFA rights) and aren't going to arbitration, teams can begin negotiating offer sheets with them on June 26. They can be signed on July 1."
1) So what would be 'market value" for Green? You'd have to think that the bench mark for a 3 year defensemen would start with Phaneuf and then go down from there.
2) Dion got a 5 year 6.5/year deal. If Mikes asking for that, its gonna be a long summer! If you were an opposing GM would you take a chance on offering him the $4.68 million to $5.85 million, that would cost two first-round picks, a second and a third?
3) Green had an excellent year, but it was ONE season! We realize that contracts these days are based upon projected success, not past exploits, but it would seem to be difficult to make such a huge investment, especially in a salary capped league.
$6M is the cutoff for a four-firsts RFA signing. I think it's clear that the Caps will match anything under that, and so it will take something over $6M/ to sign him. The real question is: For whom is it worth that? I'd suggest no one. But if I had to take a flier on a team that might offer $7M, I'd say Buffalo.
Buffalo would be a good fit on paper, but I just don't see them playing that way (unless, of course, it was with Edmonton).
There's every chance in the world that a team would offer Green $6m per year, and if I'm the Caps, I match that.
1) So is Green worth 4 first round picks? If you project him to be a true star offensive defenesemen, capable of winning the scoring title among blue liners, getting 60-70+ points annually, then yes he is.
2) If you think he's a bit of a defensive liability, who may get 40-50 points, then the answer is probably no. Its the answer to these questions where a GM earns his salary.
I would rather have Mike Green than four first round picks.
Fauxes already has me confused saying that the benchmark for a three-year D deal is Phaneuf's five-year deal.
FWIW: I don't know that I think BUF will make an offer, but I think that an offer would certainly make the team look good to its fan base: They lost Brian Campbell because they weren't willing to pay him $8M a year. 52 is a better player than Campbell, so they would be able to present him as a $1M cheaper and better option.
" . . . and the Caps would match as they have said they would (which may, actually, be the best and cleanest way to get this done... and if you think it would sour the relationship between the team and the player, I can assure you it would not)."
I agree that it would be the "cleanest" way to get the deal done, but why do you believe that it would not sour the relationship between player and organization? If your conspiracy theory is correct, then Greener is actually heeding the advice that this anti-Caps agent is whispering in his ear. Right? Hmmm.
Why not take him to arbitration? Get a one or two year deal and then resign him after that. The other thing that I fine interesting is the played does have to sign the offer-sheet. Basically saying I want to go where the money is. If he wanted to say with the Caps why not just say I have this offer, match it and we both look good or I will sign it and force you to match it and we both look like asses.
I do agree with that.
One still wonders, however, if Lowe really changed the culture re: RFAs or if it was an isolated incident (or two) of insanity/stupidity.
(What I agreed with is the last thign Tyler wrote)
@ Beaner - It's more than just a hunch that Green wants to stay, but he also wants to get paid and, to be honest, may be listening to his agent a bit too much.
@ anon - Green is not arbitration eligible.
Hopefully this doesn't turn into a soap opera contract season.
I think that the Lowe factor is only half the reason that people think this might be an active RFA season. It's also a weak UFA year. Ergo...
P.S.: EDM had 88 points and missed the playoffs.
From a Hershey standpoint, it'd be silly for them to let him go because the blueline prospects of note right now are Lepisto and Alzner, and there's really no guarantee that either of them are NHL ready at this point. With the sketchiness of the other defensemen in training right now, I'd think they would want to hold on to someone that's proven himself as useful for as long as possible.
Some context worth noting here: The cap looks likely to be a little north of $56M in 2008-09, and I read reports over the weekend that both sides are planning for a $60M cap in 09-10. (Causes: Weak USD, strong Canadian ticket sales, new Canadian TV deals.)
When I met and talked to Green for a while at a bar, I really got the sense that he wanted to get paid. He mentioned more than once that he had the same agent as Phaneuf and was definitely interested in that type of money (who wouldn't be).
So I guess I've been assuming to myself he's going to take things into July just to see what any team might be willing to offer. I got the sense that Green likes Washington and enjoys playing here, but he wants $5-6 million a year to do so.
And let's not begrudge these guys wanting to get paid. They've worked and sacrificed their whole lives to get to this point. They have a small, 10-year window to make their real coin. If they can do it, good for them.
If I'm the Caps, I match up to $6m without blinking.
(And by "without blinking" I mean waiting until the very last second to do so, if only to keep the picks of the bastards who sign him tied up for a full week.)
JP, you say you'd rather have Green then the first round picks and , in general, I agree. But what if those picks came from a team that could be in next season's John Tavares lottery? Would that change your mind? That's one consideration not many have mentioned; few teams, if any, that have a chance of being in that lottery are going to risk a chance at Tavares for Green. Given that factor, you could be cutting in half the number of teams that would consider making a play for Mike.
borr, I don't think it's wise to think like that. The Caps essentially have to match any offer because they don't have any puck-rushing offensive defensemen that can play in the NHL. Not many teams do.
Imagine the Caps PP without Green. That'd be a huge step backwards. For a team that made the strides the Caps did last season, I think it'd be foolish to let a key player go just to get a possible chance at a top pick. A total step in the wrong direction.
Case in point: most thought Anaheim would surely have a Top 5-10 pick from Edmonton but that ended up being 12. It's too risky to hedge bets on another team's performance.
Sometimes I hate the salary cap. At $56 million, that means that if Green signs for $6 million, you have roughly half the cap tied up in five players (Ovechkin, Green, Semin, Nylander, and Huet -- assuming $5.5 million or so). And you've got other guys on the team who are going to want to get paid as well.
I'd like to see him stay, but I wonder at what point do you let him walk or pull an NBA-style sign-and-trade deal. (Meaning letting him sign somewhere and then trading a seventh round pick to that team for two firsts and a couple players.)
@ b.orr: Tavares is nice. But even if the team that signs Green finishes dead last, they have less than a 50% chance of winning the lottery. Everyone thought Edmonton would be horrible this year and that Anaheim would be getting a great pick as compensation for Penner, but they're ending up with the 12th pick (and others, of course, and it was still a no-brainer to let him walk). Point being, there's no guarantee of who is and isn't lottery-bound in today's NHL, so it's hard for that to be a major factor for the Caps in the match/walk decision.
But I totally agree that for an awful team, they may pass on surrendering a potential lottery pick in the hopes of getting JT.
Damn - Hooks beat me to it.
As far as the "conspiracy theorist" look at this...Don Meehan is typically not the kind of agent who does his negotiating in the press (like what Rich Winter did with Bondra and the Caps). He's the NHL's superagent, however, who tends to represent most of the top stars, so Green will get paid, wherever he winds up. The good news is that Meehan isn't the type of agent who manages to burn bridges with franchises in order to do it.
There's a huge ex-factor here going unmentioned, and that is Huet. Assuming what we hear is true, and that the Caps are intent on signing Huet, he's getting $5 mill-$6 million.
That puts us at $44 million right there, with Green, Laich, Mo, Eminger, Gordon, Fehr, and potentially Fedorov to sign. If you give Green $6 million, suddenly you're left with $5 million for the rest (assuming a $55 million cap). Fehr and Gordon can be had for $1.5 total probably
But that leaves $3.5 for the rest. If Huet and Green are more in the $5 million per year range, that's $5.5 million to work with; doable but still difficult. Laich, Mo, Eminger, Fedorov? Something's gotta give.
Trust me, Hooks, I want to keep Green for the exact reasons you stated. But the point I was trying to make was that a lot of teams won't go after him because they don't want to risk giving up the #1choice that could end up being John Tavares. And to me Edmonton falls into that category. That's a legacy no GM wants, even one as wacky as Kevin Lowe.
And let me add that Tampa is the perfect example of why you don't give up your #1 choice. No one predicted they would land in the cellar this season and many thought they'd actually make the playoffs. Can you imagine where Feaster would be right now if he had traded away his top choice last year or lost it signing an RFA?
@ B.orr: Then again, had they traded it away and gotten an impact player, they might not have finished last. Just sayin'. But your point is well taken.
@ breed16: Don't forget that the team probably will have Pothier off the books next year. The team has a little room to work with, but definitely will have to be wise in their spending (i.e. if Fedorov doesn't come in around $2m, he probably can't be re-signed, Laich needs to be reasonable/realistic, etc.).
I am not really worried about any "drama" which could play out between now and August.
What worries me, is Green not getting a new contract from the Caps AND not getting and RFA offer sheet. So he'll be playing in the final year of a deal, on a team he couldn't get a deal done with before. My sense from other instances in the past, is that is never a good thing and often results in that player leaving. I hate to sound so fatalistic, but in some ways I think if we can't get a Green deal done before RFA exposure, Mike Green may be the next Scott Stevens.
i think Laich will be reasonable. not because he is a good guy (although he def seems to be) but because not too many people outside of DC hockey seem to know him or his progress. he'll probably get the best deal and treatment HERE in DC.
You could be right, JP. Then again, his skates could fall on his wrist and severe a tendon. :-) I'm wondering, if Feds doesn't resign, does that open up room for Cooke?
Is there word the Caps are willing to spend to the salary cap this summer? Business has been good and things are on the upswing but I'd imagine they'd be operating at a loss by spending ~$55 million on players salaries this year.
Ted hasn't been concerned by losing money and knows to build a team you gotta pay the guys like Ovechkin, Semin, Green, etc. but has there been indication that they're prepared to add so much salary so quickly?
@ Hooks: Explicitly? Maybe not. But I think it's pretty clear that the team will make decisions more based on the League's cap and team salary structure than on some internal cap. If a player's salary fits in the team's structure and the League's cap, he'll be a Cap.
It's never been about making money for Leonsis - it's about winning, and they'll do what makes the most sense towards that end.
Just one thing to throw in the ring about the Caps "low-balling" Green: Anytime someone decides a contract hasn't been negotiated by the time it "should" the team is allegedly low-balling: it happened with Ovechkin this past season, it happens every year with top NFL prospects and it's happening with Green. I wouldn't put too much stock in that aspect of things.
Really I think it's a win-win for the Caps - if Green signs an extension on the Caps terms, great. If he takes a reasonable offer sheet (I dunno, 5 years at 4.5 per or something) the Caps will match. If he gets a ridiculous offer like 6 years at 6.5 million per, the Capitals can take the hoard or draft picks. That's probably the worst case scenario and, honestly, I wouldn't be too broken up about the team acquiring that many good picks for the guy.
"I would rather have Mike Green than four first round picks."
Me too, unless it's Mike Green at $6 million per season. Anything over $4 is too much. I think 3 years for 10 is fair, then we'll know what we're dealing with.
Word of warning to Mr. Green: If you get the mega bucks and tank, you'll be turned on like you never imagined. Whoop. Whooop!
I'd rather have Green at $6m per season than four first round picks.
Mike Green at $6 mil per has to score 80 points or finish in the top 3 for the Norris Trophy or that $6 mil is going to cripple the team. :-p
@ JR: I disagree. I think Green is worth every penny of $6m as early as next season.
Oh, and for what it's worth, you're not going to get four first round picks for Green unless he signs for somewhat more than $6.5m per. If he signs at $6m, the compensation is two firsts, a second and a third.
There is no way I'd rather have that compensation package than Green at $6m. None.
well put, dmg.
we would lose one of the better nicknamed Caps, though: "Game Over Green"
and always like seeing the Gang Green crew in the stands.
JP, the CBA (Sec 10.4) says that the compensation is as follows:
$3.0 million to $4.0 million = One 1st Round, One 2nd Round, and One 3rd Round pick.
$4.0 million to $5.0 million = Two 1st Round, One 2nd Round, and One 3rd Round draft pick.
$5 million = Four 1st Round draft picks
Have those been adjusted upwards because of higher revenues? If so, do you have a link that shows what the ranges and compensation now stand at, because I'd like to have that for myself.
@ dmg: Yes, those numbers are indexed and the estimated compensation for signing one of this summer's RFAs can be found here.
Found an answer to my own question, the CBA also says the ranges will be adjusted at the rate of the average player salary.
Anyhow, does anyone happen to have a chart of where the ranges are at the moment?
And I got the answer I was looking for as I was writing my last response. Thanks, JP!
BTW - WTF with this CBA? A player is AWOL for two seasons, has a 'very good' but not great season and now gets $6 mil? This is exactly the BS that put the NHL in the tank to begin with.
It looks like if anyone can figure out the Detroit model -- finding gems late in the draft, keeping everyone "fairly" but not "over" paid, and limited dead cap space -- then they'll regularly succeed in this league. Otherwise the choices are a few high priced players surrounded by middling talent (see Tampa Bay), or a number of moderately talented players but no stars (Buffalo). Hopefully GMGM will get it all figured out before the team has to be blown up and it all starts over (probably 3-4 years away, at most).
Looks like Pittsburgh may already be feeling the pain:
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/sports/penguins/s_572854.html
Sorry, got cut off a bit:
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/sports/
penguins/s_572854.html
BTW - WTF with this CBA? A player is AWOL for two seasons, has a 'very good' but not great season and now gets $6 mil? This is exactly the BS that put the NHL in the tank to begin with.
I'd have to disagree here.
(1) Green had an excellent season; heck he led all NHL defensemen in goals. It's not as if it were a huge fluke either - he's a great skater. Part of what makes him valuable is that he's 22. To have the kind of season he did at 22 shows a heck of a lot of potential and he's looking to cash in on that as well as his actual performance.
(2) What got the NHL into dire financial straits was several things including (a) the "haves" of the league vastly outbidding the "have-nots" and driving up salaries, putting smaller team into financial trouble and damaging parity (b) the expectation that the NHL would continue to grow at the rate it did in its heyday from the late 80s to mid/late 90s (c) the fact that revenues were diminished as the on ice product decreased with the increased use of trapping and clutch-and-grab tactics all of which led to (d) a situation where the NHL players were getting something like 53% of total revenues.
(3) The real issue wasn't total salaries, it was salaries related to revenues; the biggest concern for the owners wasn't "the average player's salary was 'X' and now it's 'Y', the concern was how much of total revenues were going to player payroll
(4) Thus the issue was cost certainty, meaning the owners wanted payroll expenses to be tied to league revenues. This is what happened, as the cap now changes based on total revenues (as do individual players limits) and escrow accounts are being used until the final figures are in. The league is growing at a very good rate right now and that is why salaries are going up.
In short, the NHL got in trouble because too much of its income was going to player payroll, a situation that is helped now by the fact that player's salaries are, in many ways, tied to overall league income.
+1
McPhee: "We'll match."
Well, we'll have to see what happens in a few weeks, eh?
summer sucks.
If I am a rival GM, and i find out from Meehan that the Caps have offered Mike Green X, why wouldn't I offer X+500K per season or X+750K. The Caps will match it, and I basically just increased the Caps payroll preventing them being able to afford other players.
Maybe its a little too much conspiracy theory, but its the first thing that popped into my head.
@ Sombrero: Because that's dirty pool. I don't think anyone - even Kevin Lowe - makes a play for a player unless they hope to get that player.
@JP
I hear ya, but at the same time McPhee isn't exactly scaring anybody from making their best offer.
Best case scenario, they get green and lose some picks. Worst case scenario they don't get Green and cost the Caps some $$$.
McPhee's comments probably won't change the behavior or other GM's, but it might put some of the Mass Hysteria prone Caps Fans at ease for a few hours or so...
McPhee's comments are the exact same comments (more or less) that Darcy Regier made last year before Lowe made the offer to Vanek.
Lowe thought Regier was bluffing. He was not. All that ended up happening was that the market shifted upwards, making it harder for everyone - including Lowe - to sign players.
Hopefully Lowe (and others, if they're out there) learned the lesson.
And don't underestimate the value GMs place on their relationships. A move like Lowe's has reprecussions.
I think what JP's hitting at, which I agree with, is that it would be a bad move as an opposing GM to assume McPhee is being totally truthful and that the Capitals will absolutely match and therefor make a bad offer.
The worst case scenario under that situation isn't that they don't get Green. Worst case scenario is you're out 4 first round draft picks, 7 million dollars in cap space per year and a good 1-2 million out in cap space over what the player's worth just because you tried to make the Capitals commit a little more money. Seems like the potential risk/reward on that is less than ideal.
And like DMG said, anyone who makes an offer they wouldn't be comfortable getting stuck with is a complete idiot.
One question about Green and as faux mentioned...it was ONE season. It was ONE season under Bruce. Is Green going to be able to keep up his game with another boss?
What an "un-McPhee"-like statement by George. He never shows his cards like that, but I suppose he just wants to avoid the hassle and expense of Green getting a offer. Green's agent's work just got a lot harder. He now has to actually negotiate with McPhee.
I don't see any GM's offering more than they would be comfortable with just to try and screw the Caps.
It seems likely to me that GMGM's comments will increase offer sheet amounts rather than scare them away.
Let me clarify. If a team is deadset on signing Green, they're likely to increase their offer to something the Caps won't want to match.
I didn't want that comment to imply i expected a greater total of offer sheets.
DMG, et. al. - maybe I should have been more succinct, but mainly I think it's about paying guys too much, too soon and paying on potential instead of proven results. Yes, in the salcap era this is controlled, but why be the team that eats it when the market corrects itself? I'm sorry, did you see Mike Green on the 1st/2nd team all stars? If you give him mad money what happens when other guys prove to be more valuable? It's not just the 6 million you would be giving him, but rather the money you have to give everyone else relative to Mike Green. So yes, thank you for the history lesson. My point being that offering Mike Green $6 million at this point in time would be of the same foolishness that sent teams like the Caps into debt pre-lockout. That won't happen now, they'll just be in salary cap prison.
@ JR: You points are all good, but unfortunately (in a sense - though not in the "we made the playoffs in part because of it" sense) Green had his breakthrough season before he could be locked up long-term.
Did we see Green on the 1st/2nd team all stars? No. Not this year. But we saw things that lead us to believe he's destined to be a fixture there for years to come.
It's a gamble, to be sure, but so was picking Backstrom over Kessel, Ovechkin over Malkin and so on down the line.
Is letting him walk and watching him turn into the next Scott Niedermayer better or worse than locking him up and seeing him flop?
jr, I don't think that makes sense...If the Caps sign Green for $6 million, that's a huge commitment that will basically prevent them from going out and signing any marquee UFA's for years to come. (Not that they were looking to be in that market anyways).
The point being with revenues are tied to player salaries, teams can make a mistake in paying a specific player too much, but they're not going to be able to financially cripple themselves too badly (as a whole) since they have cost certainty.
If over-paying Green (or any other specific player) doesn't work, it won't hurt the Caps pocketbook as much as it will hurt their on ice performance.
Well I tell you guys this much. If McPhee is truly going to match anything, then he would be a heck of a lot better off giving Green whatever he wants prior to the RFA period.
Hooks Orpick - I just said that, yo.
@ JR: Which brings us back to this post - I'm not sure there's anything that Green would sign before the RFA period opens up. I also think that in a way GMGM is letting the market work and calling Green's bluff, saying, "We don't think there's a mega-deal out there for you, but you go and try to find it and we'll match it if it exists."
Why pay the guy $6M now if no one else will?
Well I guess Ted and Co. have had a big change of heart since they decided that they weren't going to let other teams dictate the terms of their contracts (e.g. Ovechkin). I'll trust the Caps for once and hope that they don't end up like the Penguins are going to. Heh...hehheheheheh.
I love the way Mikey plays. His energy, skating, and scoring prowess. That being said, $6M for him is a little hard to swallow. I understand paying for potential and he has a great upside, but that figure is just a little too high. I think a a backloaded 4/$18, 3/$15 deal is more than fair. It also allows him to improve and then really go for the big bucks in a couple of years, right in his prime.
Noting the change in DP compensation though, @ $6.5M for the 4 1st rounders, I don't think the Caps really have a choice if another team offers him 4/$25M, you're not getting the best picks if you let him go, and he's a very important cog in the wheel.
I am glad GMGM is sending that signal (even if it is a bit out of character for him). Green is an ABSOLUTE must sign for the Caps; he is the cornerstone on D we are building around. So if it's 4.5 or 5.4M it doesn't matter: we have to match. And can anyone really make the case that some team out there is going to go north of Phaneuf $$$ for Mike Green? Not bloody likely...
I remember the day I found out Scott Stevens walked; I think we got 6 first rounders, and Brendan Witt ended up being the only one who even panned out (and I use that phrase liberally). Imagine: Stevens for Witt!
F agents. For starting the lowball rumor, I hope GMGM teabags Meehan with a real lowball before compelling him to negotiate in good faith.
My (updated) prediction: 5/26M
correction: 5 first rounders. Even worse
I agree that he's a must-sign, bigonetimer.
For the record, the Caps got five first rounders for Stevens and used them to draft Trevor Halverson (1991), Sergei Gonchar (1992), Brendan Witt (1993) and Miika Elomo (1995) (they traded the 1994 pick to Toronto for Eric Fichaud).
As it turns out, the Caps got a crap-load of mileage out of that deal... but I'd still have rather have kept Stevens.
jp-thanks; I didn't realize Gonchar was in that mix. Still, like you, I would much rather have had Stevens for 20 years, if for no other reason that he struck abject fear into the hearts of NHL forwards when they left their own zone.
I'm not ready to put 52 in the SS category yet, but unless we lose Green to a perennial (4-5 years in a row) lottery franchise, it's a really crippling move for the Caps. They simply cannot afford to further weaken their weakest area right now.
...assuming of course we put something more than B Johnson and a piece of sheetrock in the net...
"I hope GMGM teabags Meehan with a real lowball... "
No pun intended?
breed--I meant it as literally as you imagined...
Never turn down the chance to repent...sinner.
Post a Comment