Cole "Goal" Caufield

[CaptWelly]

1 hour ago, BigTed3 said:

I'm not disagreeing that Caufield won't score 40 at some point, but as I said, he's a winger, not a center, and he doesn't have a very complete game. Those are factors. Maybe the best thing to do would be to look at other wingers who have signed comparable deals to the Suzuki deal recently:

- Andrei Svechnikov might be the best example. He signed for 8 years at 7.75M AAV this past season. But he did this with a bit more track record than Caufield and is IMO a superior player based on overall skill and a more complete game. If you asked me to trade Caufield for Svech, I would do it in a heartbeat and so would just about every GM if I had to guess. So I don't see Caufield making the same money as Svechnikov.

- Brady Tkachuk just signed for 7 years at 8.2M AAV last season. But again, a bit more track record than Caufield and he's the captain in Ottawa. I think his value is generally higher than Caufield's across the league.

- Clayton Keller is signed to 8 years at 7.15M AAV and might be a more reasonable comparable. Again, he had a bit more track record when signing than Caufield would if he signed an extension now, and his contract is valued under Suzuki's.

- Nik Ehlers is in the middle of a 7-year deal with an AAV of 6M and he had had seasons of 25 and 29 goals and 60+ points before starting that deal.

- Joel Farabee's last two season have had comparable stats to what Caufield put up this year and while he may be a little bit less prolific as a scorer, he's a decent scorer in his own right and again has a more complete game. He signed to start a 6-year deal at a 5M AAV next year.

I'm just not seeing a way Caufield gets a comparable deal to Suzuki or Svechnikov. I don't see him as being in the same class of player. To me, Keller, Ehlers, and Farabee are probably better comparables in terms of value, which puts him somewhere in the 6M AAV range on a long-term deal.

I noticed you left out Patrick Kane , small pure goal scorer doesn't kill penalties not known for defense also a winger?

[BigTed3]

19 hours ago, CaptWelly said:

I noticed you left out Patrick Kane , small pure goal scorer doesn't kill penalties not known for defense also a winger?

If you're referring to the 8 year, 10.5M AAV contract Kane is currently on, then consider that

1. Kane was a 1st overall draft choice with a higher pedigree and value across the NHL.

2. When Kane started his big contract, he had already been in the league for 8 years and had proven his value over a long period of time. In his first 8 seasons, he had put up 557 points in 576 games (0.97 points per game).

3. At that point, Kane had also been probably the best player in leading Chicago to 3 Stanley Cup championships in 6 years.

4. This current deal ate up mainly UFA years, not RFA ones, and those are generally more expensive to buy.

So yeah, if Caufield is a PPG player over the next 8 years and leads us to three championships, by all means throw the current Kane contract in the mix of comparables. A better timepoint as a comparison would be Kane signing his 5-year 6.3M AAV deal before the 2010-11 season. But even at that point, Kane had put up 230 points in 244 games over 3 seasons and won a Cup. So even adjusting the salary for time period, Caufield would have to have one monster year this year to be anywhere near to a comparable for Kane at that time. If Kane were worth 6.3M at that point, then Caufield in 2010 might have been worth 4-4.5M after one 23-goal season. Adjusting for cap era, that would clock him in somewhere in the 5.2-6M range on a deal now, which is pretty much in line with the lower end of what I had posted.

[habsisme]

3 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

If you're referring to the 8 year, 10.5M AAV contract Kane is currently on, then consider that

1. Kane was a 1st overall draft choice with a higher pedigree and value across the NHL.

2. When Kane started his big contract, he had already been in the league for 8 years and had proven his value over a long period of time. In his first 8 seasons, he had put up 557 points in 576 games (0.97 points per game).

3. At that point, Kane had also been probably the best player in leading Chicago to 3 Stanley Cup championships in 6 years.

4. This current deal ate up mainly UFA years, not RFA ones, and those are generally more expensive to buy.

So yeah, if Caufield is a PPG player over the next 8 years and leads us to three championships, by all means throw the current Kane contract in the mix of comparables. A better timepoint as a comparison would be Kane signing his 5-year 6.3M AAV deal before the 2010-11 season. But even at that point, Kane had put up 230 points in 244 games over 3 seasons and won a Cup. So even adjusting the salary for time period, Caufield would have to have one monster year this year to be anywhere near to a comparable for Kane at that time. If Kane were worth 6.3M at that point, then Caufield in 2010 might have been worth 4-4.5M after one 23-goal season. Adjusting for cap era, that would clock him in somewhere in the 5.2-6M range on a deal now, which is pretty much in line with the lower end of what I had posted.

Caufield has definitely not done as much as the other comparables but I don't look at it as a 23 goal season, I look at it as 20 odd goals in less than 40 games. Everything you're saying is exactly how Hughes should present his offer. But if Caufield is willing to do say 6x6 (more in line with the comparable you brought up), I'm willing to pay the extra 1.8 million to buy those extra two years because I believe that at the end of their contracts Suzuki and Caufield will be comanding 10 million + in today's dollars. 

For example, the prudent thing to do might be to simply playout the season so he can show more of what he's capable of but imo I'm sold on this kid being the real deal. I think he's going to be a multiple 40 goal scorer. I don't want to end up paying him Marner money because I truly believe he's that good of a player. 

Caufield and Suzuki (and hopefully Wright) at reasonable cap hits for the next 8+ years will win us a cup, I really believe that. 

[Regis22]

10 minutes ago, habsisme said:

Caufield and Suzuki (and hopefully Wright) at reasonable cap hits for the next 8+ years will win us a cup, I really believe that. 

Id be happy if they get us the playoffs 1st  .....lol

[habsisme]

9 minutes ago, Regis22 said:

Id be happy if they get us the playoffs 1st  .....lol

yeah I get it, I'm jumping the gun a little on Caufield, but I'm thinking in terms of windows. When Suzuki and or Caufield is on their 3rd contract, it gets harder to win. Cause at that point you'll have to pay a premium cause they can go anywhere and most of those years will be 30+. Kane and Toews won their cups on their second contracts, once they got their money it becames difficult to build a winning team around them. It's about to get much more difficult for Colorado too. I want that 3rd deal to be as far away as possible. 

[BigTed3]

3 hours ago, habsisme said:

Caufield has definitely not done as much as the other comparables but I don't look at it as a 23 goal season, I look at it as 20 odd goals in less than 40 games. Everything you're saying is exactly how Hughes should present his offer. But if Caufield is willing to do say 6x6 (more in line with the comparable you brought up), I'm willing to pay the extra 1.8 million to buy those extra two years because I believe that at the end of their contracts Suzuki and Caufield will be comanding 10 million + in today's dollars. 

For example, the prudent thing to do might be to simply playout the season so he can show more of what he's capable of but imo I'm sold on this kid being the real deal. I think he's going to be a multiple 40 goal scorer. I don't want to end up paying him Marner money because I truly believe he's that good of a player. 

Caufield and Suzuki (and hopefully Wright) at reasonable cap hits for the next 8+ years will win us a cup, I really believe that. 

Again, I'm totally on board with the strategy of identifying your core players and signing them to longterm deals when they're young so that you get some amount of cost control compared to what you would have to pay if they were established. But if you're going to pay 7.8M up front to Caufield, you may as well just bridge him. As I said, based on his current body of work, he's get maybe 3.5-4M a season for the next two years. If he's a 30-35 goal scorer over those two years, then maybe he gets 7.5M a year after that. If he's a 40-50 goal scorer both years, then yes, maybe he's worth 8.5-9M a year. I have a hard time seeing him significantly outplay Suzuki and thus have a hard time seeing him significantly out-earn Suzuki. Hughes has that internal comparable to limit what he pays Caufield and he has a bunch of those comparables I posted that will limit Caufield unless he really breaks that 40-goal mark consistently. If he posts 40 in one year but 32 in another year, I just don't see him being paid 9M a season.

Bottom line for me is that if we're going to go 8 years with Caufield, the first two years should come in around 4M and the last 6 years probably come in at 7-8M a season. So that's maybe 48-56M, which for the entire deal, would leave me at an AAV of 6-7M. If CC prefers to take the 3.5-4M bridge deal for 2 years and then really does earn an 8.5-9M deal then so be it. But the purpose of the longterm deal early is to pay the guy more than he's worth now (3.5-4M) in exchange for paying less than what he could be worth in the future (7-8M, maybe 9M if he's really really good). If we're paying him close to 8M a year anyways, it's not a good deal for us.

[maas_art]

On 5/14/2022 at 5:55 PM, BigTed3 said:

I would not give him the same deal we gave Suzuki. IMO, the center is more valuable. Suzuki's game is more complete. Caufield is a goal-scorer, but he doesn't play the PK, he doesn't bring much defensive presence, he doesn't bring any physical element. He's a pure goal scorer and has a great shot, but he is nowhere as valuable to us as Suzuki is. He's proven he can play at the NHL level, so I have no problem giving him a 7-8 year deal either, but for me, it's more in line with a 5.5-6.5M a season deal if he wants to go longterm now. I think he'd only get 2.5-3M via arbitration if he were to sign a short-term deal for now, so it should bring down the AAV on a longterm deal.

I agree with your thinking and numbers.  If Caufleld wants an 8 year deal at this point, im happy to give him $6m per or so but why would he do that? The kid has confidence & im sure he's more than happy to wait a year & then maybe even take a bridge deal to max out his value in a couple of seasons. 

But hey, if he wants to sign long term for $6 or even $6.5, sign me up. 

[BigTed3]

13 hours ago, maas_art said:

I agree with your thinking and numbers.  If Caufleld wants an 8 year deal at this point, im happy to give him $6m per or so but why would he do that? The kid has confidence & im sure he's more than happy to wait a year & then maybe even take a bridge deal to max out his value in a couple of seasons. 

But hey, if he wants to sign long term for $6 or even $6.5, sign me up. 

Sure. My point, I guess, is that as the team, you're not paying a guy long-term on best-case scenario fulfillment of potential. The purpose of paying a guy early is to get a possible deal over the long haul. In exchange, the player gets long-term security without having actually proven all that much. Look at Kotkaniemi. Look at Farabee. I can't sit here today and tell you whether Caufield will end up being better or worse than those two guys over the next 8 years. They took the money up front and maybe it'll cost them or maybe they'll end up getting paid when they don't end up being that great down the line. That's for CC to decide. I'm happy to lock him up to 5.5-6.5M AAV now. He wants more, he needs to earn it first. I'm not in a rush to pay a 5'7" goal scorer with a fairly one-dimensional game superstar money until he shows he can do it.

[CaptWelly]

14 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Sure. My point, I guess, is that as the team, you're not paying a guy long-term on best-case scenario fulfillment of potential. The purpose of paying a guy early is to get a possible deal over the long haul. In exchange, the player gets long-term security without having actually proven all that much. Look at Kotkaniemi. Look at Farabee. I can't sit here today and tell you whether Caufield will end up being better or worse than those two guys over the next 8 years. They took the money up front and maybe it'll cost them or maybe they'll end up getting paid when they don't end up being that great down the line. That's for CC to decide. I'm happy to lock him up to 5.5-6.5M AAV now. He wants more, he needs to earn it first. I'm not in a rush to pay a 5'7" goal scorer with a fairly one-dimensional game superstar money until he shows he can do it.

I would say even just after this season that it's pretty much a sure thing he's worth more than Kotkaniemi 

[ramcharger440]

11 hours ago, CaptWelly said:

I would say even just after this season that it's pretty much a sure thing he's worth more than Kotkaniemi 

Yep with ease!

[maas_art]

On 5/14/2022 at 6:58 PM, BigTed3 said:

- Andrei Svechnikov might be the best example. He signed for 8 years at 7.75M AAV this past season. But he did this with a bit more track record than Caufield and is IMO a superior player based on overall skill and a more complete game. If you asked me to trade Caufield for Svech, I would do it in a heartbeat and so would just about every GM if I had to guess. So I don't see Caufield making the same money as Svechnikov.

Im not disagreeing with what you're saying here, but id be interested to circle back to this in a couple of years, understanding that hindsight is 20/20 because I have this gut feeling Caufield is going to absolutely explode, goal-wise starting next year. That doesnt mean id sign him long term now based on potential but i have this feeling we're going to see something special very soon. 

[BigTed3]

2 hours ago, maas_art said:

Im not disagreeing with what you're saying here, but id be interested to circle back to this in a couple of years, understanding that hindsight is 20/20 because I have this gut feeling Caufield is going to absolutely explode, goal-wise starting next year. That doesnt mean id sign him long term now based on potential but i have this feeling we're going to see something special very soon. 

I don't disagree with you about Caufield. He has the potential to score 30-40 goals as early as next year, especially with how little there is behind him and how he's likely to get lots of opportunity from MSL. But now let's look at Svechnikov. When he signed his 7.75M x 8 year extension, he had played 3 seasons with a total of 205 games. He had 59 goals and 81 assists for 140 points (0.68 PPG for his career. He also had 20 points in 26 playoff games and had phenomenal possession stats, both in terms of absolute numbers and relative to the rest of his team. So in short, this guy was a player who was dominant on the ice, had some physical element to his game too, and was scoring at a reasonable pace.

Cole Caufield thus far has 27 goals and 48 points to his name in 77 career games (0.62 points per game). He has 12 points in 20 career playoff games. Caufield's possession numbers are fairly mediocre and as I mentioned, he doesn't provide much of another element to his game other than scoring goals, so it's doubly vital for him to produce to have worth.

So TODAY, where we stand now, you have a smaller player with a less complete game, weaker analytics, and less points per game than Svechnikov in the regular season and less production in the playoffs too. So while we would all like to believe Caufield will just blow up and score 40, he hasn't done it yet. If you look at his worth right now, it's less than Svechnkov's by a decent margin. His production is also lower than Clayton Keller's (0.66 PPG) at the time Keller signed his extension for 7.1M. I'm by no means saying Caufield won't earn himself an extension worth 7.1-7.75M a year if he plays well this season. But to me, if he goes out and scores 35 goals this year, the contract he's earning himself is in that range. It's not higher than Suzuki's dollar amount to me. It's not higher than Svechnikov's. So if I'm paying him that amount after having a great season, I'm not really interested in just offering that to him now. What if he goes out and struggles next season and scores 20 goals? What contract is he getting after that? I've always said it's a smart plan to identify your core and lock them up long-term before they break out. But the purpose in doing that is to be able to underpay them slightly relative to their potential. We did this with Gallagher and Pacioretty. Carolina's doing it with Kotkaniemi. You gamble that your player will give you return over time, and the player gets the long-term assurance of income. But to me, if we're signing CC to an extension this summer, I don't want to be paying him 7-7.5M now. I want to be paying him 6 or maybe 6.5M. Otherwise there's no real purpose for us to give him that long-term assurance if we're just giving him what we otherwise would in a year.

[habsisme]

1 hour ago, BigTed3 said:

I don't disagree with you about Caufield. He has the potential to score 30-40 goals as early as next year, especially with how little there is behind him and how he's likely to get lots of opportunity from MSL. But now let's look at Svechnikov. When he signed his 7.75M x 8 year extension, he had played 3 seasons with a total of 205 games. He had 59 goals and 81 assists for 140 points (0.68 PPG for his career. He also had 20 points in 26 playoff games and had phenomenal possession stats, both in terms of absolute numbers and relative to the rest of his team. So in short, this guy was a player who was dominant on the ice, had some physical element to his game too, and was scoring at a reasonable pace.

Cole Caufield thus far has 27 goals and 48 points to his name in 77 career games (0.62 points per game). He has 12 points in 20 career playoff games. Caufield's possession numbers are fairly mediocre and as I mentioned, he doesn't provide much of another element to his game other than scoring goals, so it's doubly vital for him to produce to have worth.

So TODAY, where we stand now, you have a smaller player with a less complete game, weaker analytics, and less points per game than Svechnikov in the regular season and less production in the playoffs too. So while we would all like to believe Caufield will just blow up and score 40, he hasn't done it yet. If you look at his worth right now, it's less than Svechnkov's by a decent margin. His production is also lower than Clayton Keller's (0.66 PPG) at the time Keller signed his extension for 7.1M. I'm by no means saying Caufield won't earn himself an extension worth 7.1-7.75M a year if he plays well this season. But to me, if he goes out and scores 35 goals this year, the contract he's earning himself is in that range. It's not higher than Suzuki's dollar amount to me. It's not higher than Svechnikov's. So if I'm paying him that amount after having a great season, I'm not really interested in just offering that to him now. What if he goes out and struggles next season and scores 20 goals? What contract is he getting after that? I've always said it's a smart plan to identify your core and lock them up long-term before they break out. But the purpose in doing that is to be able to underpay them slightly relative to their potential. We did this with Gallagher and Pacioretty. Carolina's doing it with Kotkaniemi. You gamble that your player will give you return over time, and the player gets the long-term assurance of income. But to me, if we're signing CC to an extension this summer, I don't want to be paying him 7-7.5M now. I want to be paying him 6 or maybe 6.5M. Otherwise there's no real purpose for us to give him that long-term assurance if we're just giving him what we otherwise would in a year.

yeah the more I think about it, the more I agree with you (even though I was the one that orinally brought it up). But I think the argument is, paying him 7.5 million for the extra years is he might be worth 15 million in year 7 and 8 and I don't care about overpaying a little the next couple of years. But you're right, I think he's an elite goal scorer but he doesn't really have another element to his game, and he doesn't have much of a resume. 6-6.5 makes more sense right now. I just really believe in his goal scoring ability

[CaptWelly]

9 hours ago, habsisme said:

yeah the more I think about it, the more I agree with you (even though I was the one that orinally brought it up). But I think the argument is, paying him 7.5 million for the extra years is he might be worth 15 million in year 7 and 8 and I don't care about overpaying a little the next couple of years. But you're right, I think he's an elite goal scorer but he doesn't really have another element to his game, and he doesn't have much of a resume. 6-6.5 makes more sense right now. I just really believe in his goal scoring ability

If you actually watch CC away from the puck and his back checking and positioning, he actually is good defensively. Does he make the big checks no. He does a lot of little things. I think his game is going to continue to develop. I think there will be similarities to how Datsyk's game was. Great hands smaller guy but strong on the puck very quick. 

[maas_art]

4 hours ago, CaptWelly said:

If you actually watch CC away from the puck and his back checking and positioning, he actually is good defensively. Does he make the big checks no. He does a lot of little things. I think his game is going to continue to develop. I think there will be similarities to how Datsyk's game was. Great hands smaller guy but strong on the puck very quick. 

i agree. in the playoffs last year I was shocked at how good he was away from the puck. He is positionally, very strong. I could see him finding a different gear & I think he will continue to improve. I still wouldnt pay him $7.5+m now, but id throw an 8 year deal at $6m per at him & see if he accepted. 

[ramcharger440]

3 hours ago, maas_art said:

i agree. in the playoffs last year I was shocked at how good he was away from the puck. He is positionally, very strong. I could see him finding a different gear & I think he will continue to improve. I still wouldnt pay him $7.5+m now, but id throw an 8 year deal at $6m per at him & see if he accepted. 

100% I don't get this idea that he is only a goal scorer with one dimension to his game? is he small yeah but other than that he is an amazing passer he backchecks with the best of them he is a little weak along the boards but he can strip the puck quite well. not sure what else people want from a guy we count on to score goals? 

[BigTed3]

No one's saying he has to do that much more than score goals if he's able to pot 35-40 goals a year. My point is just that if he does that, he's likely worth about 7-7.5M a season, and if he hasn't yet done that, he's worth less. Here's a reasonable comparable for Caufield: Phil Kessel. In 2009, Kessel was a 21 year-old RFA. He had been in the league for 3 years and had put up goal totals of 11, 19, and 36. He had clearly broken out as a goal scorer, but he also wasn't a magician in other areas of the game. What did that garner Kessel as a contract? A 5-year deal for 5.4M. Now extrapolate that to today's salary cap and it's in the range of 7.5M a year. So that's what Kessel got AFTER having his breakout 36-goal season. How about Bobby Ryan? In 2010, he was 23 and coming off his first two full seasons, where he scored 31 and 35 goals. he got a 5-year deal from Anaheim for 5.1M AAV. In today's NHL that would be a hair over 7M a season. In 2013, Jeff Skinner was an RFA coming off 3 seasons of 31, 20, and 13 (in 42 games) goals. What contract did he get? 6 years at 5.725M AAV, which would be around 7.3M in today's NHL. Also in 2013, 23 year-old Jordan Eberle had completed seasons of 18, 34, and 16 (in 48 games) goals. He signed a 6 year-deal for 6M AAV, roughly worth 7.7M in today's cap. That same year, 24 year-old Max Pacioretty signed a 6-year deal for 4.5M AAV coming off seasons of 14 (in 37 games), 33, and 15 (in 44 games) goals. That would be roughly equivalent to 5.75M in today's NHL. In 2010, 25-year old Loui Eriksson signed for 6 years at 4.25M after seasons of 14, 36, and 29 goals. That would be valued under 7M today. In 2019, Kyle Connor signed for 7 years at 7.1M at age 22 after seasons of 31 and 34 goals, and Connor may be one of the more recent good comparables for Caufield. Will also be interesting to see what Jason Robertson gets this off-season as an RFA coming off 17 and 41 goals.

All this to say that when you look at a list of guys who are primarily known for scoring goals, these guys are getting paid 5.75 to 7.5M a season on their next medium to long-term contracts and they are getting those deals AFTER having posted seasons of 30-40 goals. So my point remains: if Caufield pots 35 next year, this is the range of AAV he's looking at and I see no way the Habs give him more money than their 1C Suzuki, who is a more complete player and scores just about the same as Caufield. And if CC wants to sign an extension as soon as he's eligible but without having posted a 35-goal season, then he's taking less. He's taking Kotkaniemi-like money or a bit better (5.5-6.5M). That's just the reality. I think we all believe he'll be a 30+ and maybe 40+ scorer, but history tells us that his chances of getting 9M a season are virtually nil. The precedent suggests it's more in the 7M range. My original post was replying to a suggestion he should get 8-9M on a long-term deal and the data I've presented tells us that's unlikely and would be bad value for the Habs.

[CaptWelly]

On 5/18/2022 at 8:27 PM, BigTed3 said:

No one's saying he has to do that much more than score goals if he's able to pot 35-40 goals a year. My point is just that if he does that, he's likely worth about 7-7.5M a season, and if he hasn't yet done that, he's worth less. Here's a reasonable comparable for Caufield: Phil Kessel. In 2009, Kessel was a 21 year-old RFA. He had been in the league for 3 years and had put up goal totals of 11, 19, and 36. He had clearly broken out as a goal scorer, but he also wasn't a magician in other areas of the game. What did that garner Kessel as a contract? A 5-year deal for 5.4M. Now extrapolate that to today's salary cap and it's in the range of 7.5M a year. So that's what Kessel got AFTER having his breakout 36-goal season. How about Bobby Ryan? In 2010, he was 23 and coming off his first two full seasons, where he scored 31 and 35 goals. he got a 5-year deal from Anaheim for 5.1M AAV. In today's NHL that would be a hair over 7M a season. In 2013, Jeff Skinner was an RFA coming off 3 seasons of 31, 20, and 13 (in 42 games) goals. What contract did he get? 6 years at 5.725M AAV, which would be around 7.3M in today's NHL. Also in 2013, 23 year-old Jordan Eberle had completed seasons of 18, 34, and 16 (in 48 games) goals. He signed a 6 year-deal for 6M AAV, roughly worth 7.7M in today's cap. That same year, 24 year-old Max Pacioretty signed a 6-year deal for 4.5M AAV coming off seasons of 14 (in 37 games), 33, and 15 (in 44 games) goals. That would be roughly equivalent to 5.75M in today's NHL. In 2010, 25-year old Loui Eriksson signed for 6 years at 4.25M after seasons of 14, 36, and 29 goals. That would be valued under 7M today. In 2019, Kyle Connor signed for 7 years at 7.1M at age 22 after seasons of 31 and 34 goals, and Connor may be one of the more recent good comparables for Caufield. Will also be interesting to see what Jason Robertson gets this off-season as an RFA coming off 17 and 41 goals.

All this to say that when you look at a list of guys who are primarily known for scoring goals, these guys are getting paid 5.75 to 7.5M a season on their next medium to long-term contracts and they are getting those deals AFTER having posted seasons of 30-40 goals. So my point remains: if Caufield pots 35 next year, this is the range of AAV he's looking at and I see no way the Habs give him more money than their 1C Suzuki, who is a more complete player and scores just about the same as Caufield. And if CC wants to sign an extension as soon as he's eligible but without having posted a 35-goal season, then he's taking less. He's taking Kotkaniemi-like money or a bit better (5.5-6.5M). That's just the reality. I think we all believe he'll be a 30+ and maybe 40+ scorer, but history tells us that his chances of getting 9M a season are virtually nil. The precedent suggests it's more in the 7M range. My original post was replying to a suggestion he should get 8-9M on a long-term deal and the data I've presented tells us that's unlikely and would be bad value for the Habs.

Kessel Ryan and most of the others mentioned are goal scorers yes. None of them have the dynamics CC does. As he gets stronger and more confidence he can skate and deek with the puck in small places. I see CC as developing more into a Patrick Kane than a Kessel or the other examples. He's not a center but size and strength on puck he reminds me a lot of a young Datsyk. I really like Suzuki but he was definitely paid for potential he had not had any stellar years before to earn an 8 year contract by comparison. How many 30-35 goal years has Suzuki had yet? Also comparing CC to JK isn't close. What has JK done yet? Did CC pout when sent down or quit trying hard or even complain when playing on the 4th line? So do we low ball him because he's not a center or defenseman and have Carolina send another offer? His history in every league he has played in shows him being a star. He's smaller but has dominated in other leagues but somehow it's different for him to dominate as a winger in other leagues as other star players have. Then usually they will get the big contracts because of potential. 

[BigTed3]

9 hours ago, CaptWelly said:

Kessel Ryan and most of the others mentioned are goal scorers yes. None of them have the dynamics CC does. As he gets stronger and more confidence he can skate and deek with the puck in small places. I see CC as developing more into a Patrick Kane than a Kessel or the other examples. He's not a center but size and strength on puck he reminds me a lot of a young Datsyk. I really like Suzuki but he was definitely paid for potential he had not had any stellar years before to earn an 8 year contract by comparison. How many 30-35 goal years has Suzuki had yet? Also comparing CC to JK isn't close. What has JK done yet? Did CC pout when sent down or quit trying hard or even complain when playing on the 4th line? So do we low ball him because he's not a center or defenseman and have Carolina send another offer? His history in every league he has played in shows him being a star. He's smaller but has dominated in other leagues but somehow it's different for him to dominate as a winger in other leagues as other star players have. Then usually they will get the big contracts because of potential. 

1. There's nothing wrong with being Kessel, Ryan, Skinner, Pacioretty, or Connor... those are all elite scorers in the NHL. I'm not comparing Caufield to those guys as a knock by any means, I'm just stating as a fact that when you have guys who score 30-40 goals, those are the contracts it earned them in today's dollars. And I've posted contracts that others like Farabee or Kotkaniemi have earned without having yet put up big numbers. The guys who had already put up 30+ goal seasons in their first 2-3 years were getting 5-7 year deals worth 5.75-7.5M a season. The guys who had not were getting 5-5.5M. It has nothing to do with projecting what Caufield will or will not become. You think he's going to become Kane or Datsyuk? I'm not saying you're wrong and I'm not saying you're right. I'm just saying that at this stage of his career, where he doesn't even have one 30 goal season under his belt, he's not getting paid like he's Patrick Kane. And comparable contracts across the league tell us he hasn't earned a 7.5M deal yet either. Again, I'll refer back to the original post that said we should give Caufield the same deal as Suzuki or slightly more, and the contracts I've posted here suggest that won't happen. If he plays the next two seasons like he's Patrick Kane, then absolutely, we can discuss whether he's worth 9-10M. But if he wants to sign an extension this summer, he's not getting Suzuki's 7.8M. That's what the numbers tell us.

2. Comparing CC to JK is simply saying that neither player has earned the contract of an elite player yet. JK could have signed a bridge deal and waited 2 years to try and prove he was a 30-goal or 70-point center. If he had done that, maybe he gets 7-8M a year. He chose to take the long-term guaranteed money, which is fine for him. That was his choice. Likewise, if Caufield wants a long-term deal now without having shown he's a 35-40 goal scorer, he can't expect to be paid like he's already done it. That's not low-balling him, that's just paying him market value for what he's done thus far in his career. Low-balling someone would be like what Marc Bergevin did to PK Subban after the guy won the Norris, when Geoff Molson has to step in and tell Bergevin he was wrong and to sign the deal.

3. I don't think Kotkaniemi handled his demotion any differently than Caufield. Both guys expressed they were disappointed. Kotkaniemi did an interview shortly after his demotion to the AHL where he said he was frustrated by his lack of playing time but that he saw the AHL as a positive to get his game back on track and get ice time. Joel Bouchard said he had shown up with a positive attitude and was putting in the work. Caufield, likewise, had expressed disappointment with the demotion and said he also saw the AHL stint as a positive because he was Houle gave him more freedom to use his instincts and play freely than he was getting under Ducharme. In fact, most media members and Habs players had said Kotkaniemi always had a positive attitude and a smile on his face. It was only after the trade that everyone realized Kotkaniemi wasn't happy with being benched in favor of the likes of Eric Staal and the contract offer he was given. Nothing to do with being a center or winger. If the Habs had recalled Caufield and played Paul Byron and Mike Pezzetta on the 4th line while Caufield sat in the pressbox, I'm sure he would have been upset too. If the Habs offered Caufield 2.5M a year on his next contract and refused to pay more, I'm sure he'd be upset too. Just lucky for us and CC that Bergevin and Ducharme were given the boot first.

[CaptWelly]

1 hour ago, BigTed3 said:

1. There's nothing wrong with being Kessel, Ryan, Skinner, Pacioretty, or Connor... those are all elite scorers in the NHL. I'm not comparing Caufield to those guys as a knock by any means, I'm just stating as a fact that when you have guys who score 30-40 goals, those are the contracts it earned them in today's dollars. And I've posted contracts that others like Farabee or Kotkaniemi have earned without having yet put up big numbers. The guys who had already put up 30+ goal seasons in their first 2-3 years were getting 5-7 year deals worth 5.75-7.5M a season. The guys who had not were getting 5-5.5M. It has nothing to do with projecting what Caufield will or will not become. You think he's going to become Kane or Datsyuk? I'm not saying you're wrong and I'm not saying you're right. I'm just saying that at this stage of his career, where he doesn't even have one 30 goal season under his belt, he's not getting paid like he's Patrick Kane. And comparable contracts across the league tell us he hasn't earned a 7.5M deal yet either. Again, I'll refer back to the original post that said we should give Caufield the same deal as Suzuki or slightly more, and the contracts I've posted here suggest that won't happen. If he plays the next two seasons like he's Patrick Kane, then absolutely, we can discuss whether he's worth 9-10M. But if he wants to sign an extension this summer, he's not getting Suzuki's 7.8M. That's what the numbers tell us.

2. Comparing CC to JK is simply saying that neither player has earned the contract of an elite player yet. JK could have signed a bridge deal and waited 2 years to try and prove he was a 30-goal or 70-point center. If he had done that, maybe he gets 7-8M a year. He chose to take the long-term guaranteed money, which is fine for him. That was his choice. Likewise, if Caufield wants a long-term deal now without having shown he's a 35-40 goal scorer, he can't expect to be paid like he's already done it. That's not low-balling him, that's just paying him market value for what he's done thus far in his career. Low-balling someone would be like what Marc Bergevin did to PK Subban after the guy won the Norris, when Geoff Molson has to step in and tell Bergevin he was wrong and to sign the deal.

3. I don't think Kotkaniemi handled his demotion any differently than Caufield. Both guys expressed they were disappointed. Kotkaniemi did an interview shortly after his demotion to the AHL where he said he was frustrated by his lack of playing time but that he saw the AHL as a positive to get his game back on track and get ice time. Joel Bouchard said he had shown up with a positive attitude and was putting in the work. Caufield, likewise, had expressed disappointment with the demotion and said he also saw the AHL stint as a positive because he was Houle gave him more freedom to use his instincts and play freely than he was getting under Ducharme. In fact, most media members and Habs players had said Kotkaniemi always had a positive attitude and a smile on his face. It was only after the trade that everyone realized Kotkaniemi wasn't happy with being benched in favor of the likes of Eric Staal and the contract offer he was given. Nothing to do with being a center or winger. If the Habs had recalled Caufield and played Paul Byron and Mike Pezzetta on the 4th line while Caufield sat in the pressbox, I'm sure he would have been upset too. If the Habs offered Caufield 2.5M a year on his next contract and refused to pay more, I'm sure he'd be upset too. Just lucky for us and CC that Bergevin and Ducharme were given the boot first.

Wasn't JK still on his first contract? And no one other than Carolina was offering him 6 milliion for Byron numbers at best. Bergermin hadn't offered him only 2.5 million yet. He may have offered him a bridge deal yes, but JK hadn't earned anything more than a bridge deal and he wasn't showing he was going to be worth more yet. Alos JK didn't earn his time on ice over Stahl , Stahl was playing well and JK wasn't and being a high pick doesn't earn you anything it's performance. JK may end up with a great career but what had been shown in the same time frame especially if you're looking for a dynamic player (which everyone talks about a game breaker ) it sure looks like CC has the edge over JK as to be that player.

[BigTed3]

15 minutes ago, CaptWelly said:

Wasn't JK still on his first contract? And no one other than Carolina was offering him 6 milliion for Byron numbers at best. Bergermin hadn't offered him only 2.5 million yet. He may have offered him a bridge deal yes, but JK hadn't earned anything more than a bridge deal and he wasn't showing he was going to be worth more yet. Alos JK didn't earn his time on ice over Stahl , Stahl was playing well and JK wasn't and being a high pick doesn't earn you anything it's performance. JK may end up with a great career but what had been shown in the same time frame especially if you're looking for a dynamic player (which everyone talks about a game breaker ) it sure looks like CC has the edge over JK as to be that player.

I wouldn't have offered Kotkaniemi 6M if I were Bergevin and I doubt that was what JK was asking for. Don't know the numbers but do know that he said he was not impressed by the Habs offer. I suspect if JK took 4.8M on a long-term deal now, he likely would have taken a but under this last year. So Bergevin's offer was probably well under the 4M mark. Again, I don't think anyone thought JK was worth 6M a season last year, it was only a one-year offer Carolina made in order to force the Habs into not matching. It was always likely the follow-up contract would have a lower AAV and that's exactly what happened.

That said, I would have matched the JK offer, because I would rather have retained him as a prospect (especially with the opportunity we could have given him to try the 2C role) than taken the 1st and 3rd rounders, knowing Carolina had a great team and was likely headed towards giving us a late 1st. I mean you can look at players who are a year behind Kotkaniemi in the draft, so 2019... Kaapo Kakko, Dylan Cozens, Kirby Dach. All guys who are now where Kotkaniemi was last year, with similar PPG totals through their first 3 years of being a pro. If you knew you could acquire one of those players for Calgary's 1st rounder and a late 3rd, would you pull the trigger on that deal? I would. That late 1st probably has a 25% chance of ever being a regular NHLer and maybe a 10% chance of becoming a better player than those other prospects. The 3rd rounder has maybe a 10% chance of becoming a regular NHLer. So the odds are on the side of taking the guy who's already made the NHL and is still young enough to develop more.

As for Staal, he did have a decent stretch where he played well in the playoffs with Perry and Armia. But in the regular season, he was crap. The numbers show this. He had an expected goals for of 44%, worst on the team, whereas Kotkaniemi checked in at 52%. So while I could understand liking playoff Staal, regular season Staal was brutal and yet got tons of chances to play despite literally being the worst-performing player on the team.

Lastly, at present, I would agree with you about CC being in a better spot than JK. I'd take CC first and I wouldn't trade CC to Carolina to get JK back. Still doesn't mean I'm offering CC 7.5-9M on a long-term deal now.

[claremont]

10 hours ago, CaptWelly said:

Wasn't JK still on his first contract? And no one other than Carolina was offering him 6 milliion for Byron numbers at best. Bergermin hadn't offered him only 2.5 million yet. He may have offered him a bridge deal yes, but JK hadn't earned anything more than a bridge deal and he wasn't showing he was going to be worth more yet. Alos JK didn't earn his time on ice over Stahl , Stahl was playing well and JK wasn't and being a high pick doesn't earn you anything it's performance. JK may end up with a great career but what had been shown in the same time frame especially if you're looking for a dynamic player (which everyone talks about a game breaker ) it sure looks like CC has the edge over JK as to be that player.

 

9 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

I wouldn't have offered Kotkaniemi 6M if I were Bergevin and I doubt that was what JK was asking for. Don't know the numbers but do know that he said he was not impressed by the Habs offer. I suspect if JK took 4.8M on a long-term deal now, he likely would have taken a but under this last year. So Bergevin's offer was probably well under the 4M mark. Again, I don't think anyone thought JK was worth 6M a season last year, it was only a one-year offer Carolina made in order to force the Habs into not matching. It was always likely the follow-up contract would have a lower AAV and that's exactly what happened.

That said, I would have matched the JK offer, because I would rather have retained him as a prospect (especially with the opportunity we could have given him to try the 2C role) than taken the 1st and 3rd rounders, knowing Carolina had a great team and was likely headed towards giving us a late 1st. I mean you can look at players who are a year behind Kotkaniemi in the draft, so 2019... Kaapo Kakko, Dylan Cozens, Kirby Dach. All guys who are now where Kotkaniemi was last year, with similar PPG totals through their first 3 years of being a pro. If you knew you could acquire one of those players for Calgary's 1st rounder and a late 3rd, would you pull the trigger on that deal? I would. That late 1st probably has a 25% chance of ever being a regular NHLer and maybe a 10% chance of becoming a better player than those other prospects. The 3rd rounder has maybe a 10% chance of becoming a regular NHLer. So the odds are on the side of taking the guy who's already made the NHL and is still young enough to develop more.

As for Staal, he did have a decent stretch where he played well in the playoffs with Perry and Armia. But in the regular season, he was crap. The numbers show this. He had an expected goals for of 44%, worst on the team, whereas Kotkaniemi checked in at 52%. So while I could understand liking playoff Staal, regular season Staal was brutal and yet got tons of chances to play despite literally being the worst-performing player on the team.

Lastly, at present, I would agree with you about CC being in a better spot than JK. I'd take CC first and I wouldn't trade CC to Carolina to get JK back. Still doesn't mean I'm offering CC 7.5-9M on a long-term deal now.

William Nylander is another comparable - signed an almost 6 year $7M per year deal after putting up 2 20 goal 61 point seasons. If you project out Caufield's Ducharme-riddled start, and the post-Ducharme scoring stats for this past year, and couple that with a solid 2022-23 start coming up, that certainly is a benchmark for locking up Caufield at similar values / term especially when Drouin and Byron come off the books at the end of 2022-23 so we would not be compromising the cap. Agree with BigTed - you shouldn't lock him up just yet but maybe 60 games into next season is appropriate. The other favourable aspect in Caufield's favour is you see a lot of chemistry / synergy with Suzuki. 

As to KK, It's an easy in hindsight call to say I would not have matched Carolina's offer so I commend BigTed for the courage on saying he would have matched at the time, and future development may reveal that to be the right decision vs right now's non-progression / low ice time with the Canes. The problem is that I suspect Habs also wanted to lock up Suzuki and the KK cap hit may have impeded that. One thing we did not see with KK was the fit / chemistry with other linemates like you see with Caufield so that's a bit of sentiment for not matching. 

[BigTed3]

1 hour ago, claremont said:

 

William Nylander is another comparable - signed an almost 6 year $7M per year deal after putting up 2 20 goal 61 point seasons. If you project out Caufield's Ducharme-riddled start, and the post-Ducharme scoring stats for this past year, and couple that with a solid 2022-23 start coming up, that certainly is a benchmark for locking up Caufield at similar values / term especially when Drouin and Byron come off the books at the end of 2022-23 so we would not be compromising the cap. Agree with BigTed - you shouldn't lock him up just yet but maybe 60 games into next season is appropriate. The other favourable aspect in Caufield's favour is you see a lot of chemistry / synergy with Suzuki. 

As to KK, It's an easy in hindsight call to say I would not have matched Carolina's offer so I commend BigTed for the courage on saying he would have matched at the time, and future development may reveal that to be the right decision vs right now's non-progression / low ice time with the Canes. The problem is that I suspect Habs also wanted to lock up Suzuki and the KK cap hit may have impeded that. One thing we did not see with KK was the fit / chemistry with other linemates like you see with Caufield so that's a bit of sentiment for not matching. 

First, just briefly on JK... I would have signed the 6M 1 year deal then and I still would have done it now. There was zero long-term commitment, so even though I didn't like the cap hit, there were only two possible outcomes: he got the 2C job with us and earned the 6M on a longer-term deal (ie say he had played like Suzuki last year. In that case, you're getting your money's worth) OR he didn't earn that money (as what happened in Carolina) and signed a longer-term deal for less money. I still think he hasn't had a real shot. I still think if he gets that that the Canes will get good value on the deal they signed him to. His advanced stats are very strong, so if he gets the opportunity in the next year or so, I think 4.8M will still be a good long-term signing for Carolina.

For Nylander, couple of major differences compared to Caufield at the time Nylander signed:

1. Nylander had been playing a decent amount of center before Tavares was acquired, so again, like with Suzuki, center > winger as value.

2. Nylander had played two full seasons, as you mentioned, so he had proven he could put up strong numbers twice, not just as a one-off good season.

3. Nylander hadn't scored 30 goals, but he had put up 60+ points twice as you said, for a total of 135 pts in 185 games (0.73 PPG). Caufield has 49 pts in 77 games (0.64 PPG).

So Caufield has a bit less track record, a lower PPG total, and isn't a center as Nylander more or less was at the time of his deal. All that to say, he's not quite in the same ballpark as Nylander for me, and if we want to compare the two deals, it still leaves me with Caufield in the 6M range. So your comparable to me further supports that Caufield isn't getting the 7.8+M deal suggested in the original post.

[habsisme]

I wouldnt have matched kk. His contract is only good because of the circumstances. I'm glad we dont have him for 8 years at almist 5 million dollars

[Regis22]

Glad we didn’t lock up Alex G long term after his 2 nd year    😂🤣