US$63-million for each Sedin over 12 years?

mr.x · #1 Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 1:08 AM**

Quote:

$63 million for each Sedin a mind-boggling number that makes perfect sense
It shows team’s best forwards getting creative to solve impasse with team

By Iain MacIntyre, Vancouver Sun columnist
June 18, 2009 4:01 PM

Are Daniel and Henrik Sedin really asking for 12-year contracts worth $63 million US?

Let’s hope so because, at the very least, it indicates the Canucks’ best forwards are getting creative to try and solve the contractual impasse that threatens to doom them in Vancouver.

The $63-million demand — as first reported Thursday in Sweden — makes sense mathematically. Neither player agent J.P. Barry nor Canuck general manager Mike Gillis will discuss figures publicly, but the deal’s 12-year average of $5.25 million is about what Vancouver is believed to have had on the negotiating table for months.

Backed by a tonne of irrefutable statistical data placing the Sedins among the National Hockey League’s highest and most consistent scorers since the 2004-05 lockout, Barry figures his clients are worth closer to $7 million annually.

The Canucks moved in recent months on contract length, abandoning demands for short-term deals and entering into talks on five-year agreements. But the team still hasn’t crossed the $6-million threshold in annual salary for the twins, which is why it’s likely Barry countered with the 12-year proposal that grants the Canucks the average they seek, lessening the impact on the team’s salary cap.

“We’ve provided some alternatives that address their issues,” Barry told The Vancouver Sun. “We are exchanging ideas. But we haven’t made the kind of progress we need to get a deal done.”

Lifetime contracts are relatively new to the NHL. Spawned by the salary cup, deals of 10 or 12 years allow teams to lower the annual pay average — the salary-cap “hit,” which is the paramount number.

In January, the Detroit Red Wings signed Henrik Zetterberg, who at 28 is the same age as the Sedins and has comparable offensive numbers since the lockout, to a 12-year, $73-million contract with an average cap hit of $6.1 million.

Zetterberg will actually make an average of $7.5 million for the next nine years. His salary in Year 10 drops to $3.35 million, and the final two years are at $1 million. Nobody expects Zetterberg to hang around for that kind of pocket change at age 40, but including them in the contract allowed Detroit general manager Ken Holland to massage the salary cap.

Another Red Wing, Johan Franzen, signed in April an 11-year extension that pays $36 million over the next seven years before petering out. The cap hit is just $3.96 million.

Similarly, Vince Lecavalier has an 11-year deal that averages $7.7 million, although the Tampa Bay Lightning centre will bank $10 million for each of the next seven years.

No one is saying what the breakdown is in the Sedins’ proposal. Even with a $5.25-million average hit, the Canucks won’t want to pay $7 or $8 million for the next seven or eight years.

“I think the philosophical stuff has been interesting,” Gillis said this week. “But we have to try to come to a reasonable conclusion. We have X-amount of dollars to spend [under a salary cap], and we’re prepared to spend all of it. It becomes an allocation. We have to be careful how we allocate the money.”

Gillis and Barry have disparate interpretations of the financial landscape. Amid the global economic crisis, Gillis envisions a day of reckoning coming for NHL teams and any that commits huge salaries over extended terms will be in peril.

Barry acknowledges financial challenges facing teams, but notes there is no evidence of wage rollback for elite players nor a slackening in demand for them.

Indeed, since the U.S. banking meltdown last fall, the Carolina Hurricanes gave Eric Staal a seven-year contract worth $8.25 million annually, Los Angeles King Anze Kopitar negotiated $6.8-million a season for seven years, and the Colorado Avalanche awarded a five-year deal worth $6.6 million annually to Paul Stastny. And none of them had unrestricted free agency as an option. The Sedins can leave the Canucks on July 1.

As Barry said in March: “The UFA marketplace, especially for elite offensive talent, has always been governed much more by specific supply-and-demand factors among the 30 competing franchises than it is by the general prognosis of North American GDP.”

At this point, with almost no compromise from either side since contract talks began last summer, there seems little chance the Sedins and Canucks will end their standoff.

The second and third players chosen in the 1999 draft, Daniel and Henrik have spent their entire eight-season careers in Vancouver.

Somehow, Gillis remains hopeful there will be a ninth season for them.

“I think they’re very good players who are very good people and fit with the type of image and type of team we want to have,” he said. “So I’m hopeful because I believe they want to stay here and we want to keep them, and usually that’s common enough ground to figure it out somehow.”

Still, Gillis said the Canucks have a Plan B.

Just in case.

http://www.vancouversun.com/Business...130/story.html

Canadian Mind · #2 Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 1:25 AM**

12 years? Will they be good for that much longer? Don't want to be paying for lumps 5-10 years down the road.

raggedy13 · #3 Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 2:14 AM**

As long as we can win a Stanley Cup before they're past their due date who cares?

Canadian Mind · #4 Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 2:25 AM**

I'd hate to win the cup then not have a chance again for 8 years because of a baggage train.

At the same time, I don't want to lose em while they are still in their prime.

42 million for 8 years?

Cypherus · #5 Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 3:09 AM**

Was watching on the news and word on the street is that Gillis isn't going for the 12 year contract extension, which would make the Sedins 40 years old when it expires. Instead, Gillis is apparently looking at a 3 year contract worth 18 million for both.

mrjauk · #6 Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 7:32 AM**

I think the term will be five years--maximum--with each player getting about 6 million/year, averaged over the length of the contract.

I think that would be fair to both the team and the players, who want to remain in Vancouver, and who would have to be signed as a tandem. There are not a lot of teams with that kind of cap space.

In addition, they could bring Dany Heatley over from Ottawa in exchange for Cory Schneider (assuming they lock up Luongo long-term) and a defenceman and draft pick.

Vancity · #7 Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 7:35 AM**

I wouldn't mind signing the twins for 12 years (63 million). The cap hit would be 5.25 million for all those 12 years - that's what worries me. If the first 6-7 years, the cap hit is at 5.25, and then the next 5-6 years it declines (2.5-3 mil) - then I would agree to that. If they want 12 years for length, then a NMC (No Movement Clause) would be out of the question.

I hope they sign the Sedins. They are (contrary to what Vancouverites think about them) solid players.

Distill3d · #8 Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 9:32 AM**

The Canucks have a little bit of flexibility when it comes to the cap, but 10.5 million for two players? That's half the cap room they have to work with at the moment. I mean, thats not a gamble any GM would be willing to take. Signing the Sedins may mean that the Canucks lose Luongo. And, as much as I'd like to see Lou go to a real contender, he is the face of hockey in Vancouver.

I mean, I'll take the heat for this if I have to, but maybe its time to break Henrietta and Daniella up. Sign the better player, and ship the other one somewhere else.

phesto · #9 Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 4:40 PM**

^It’s generally accepted throughout the league that the Sedins come as a package. While they would likely still be considered above average players on their own – their premium value lies in the synergy they create from always playing with each other. Although I’ve personally become tired of “the cycle” – it is what these guys do better than almost anyone in the league. So while splitting them up would increase their marketability from a cap perspective, their individual market value would be diminished considerably.

I would agree with $18M over 3 years. You could call it overpaying, but they will likely be at their prime, and if we can’t contend during these years with them, there is no point in keeping them beyond that.

Gillis could mitigate the risks inherent in a 12-year contract, but I still don't like the idea.

Canadian Mind · #10 Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 5:16 PM**

Who is the better player? One wouldn't be effective without the other because their whole playing style is based on there being two guys who've known exactly where the other is since birth.

wrenegade · #11 Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 6:26 PM**

I don't like the idea of 12 years. Too many things can happen to a player in that time. Look at Rick DiPietro, 15 year deal and he gets a serious injury. May never be the player he looked like he'd be. Obviously the Sedins are more proven, but I still think 12 years is nuts. I'd take a 5-7 year deal at a slightly higher cap hit.

Distill3d · #12 Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 7:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by phesto

^It’s generally accepted throughout the league that the Sedins come as a package. While they would likely still be considered above average players on their own – their premium value lies in the synergy they create from always playing with each other. Although I’ve personally become tired of “the cycle” – it is what these guys do better than almost anyone in the league. So while splitting them up would increase their marketability from a cap perspective, their individual market value would be diminished considerably.

I would agree with $18M over 3 years. You could call it overpaying, but they will likely be at their prime, and if we can’t contend during these years with them, there is no point in keeping them beyond that.

Gillis could mitigate the risks inherent in a 12-year contract, but I still don't like the idea.

I do agree their playing style is based on playing with each other for life, but its time to let them see what they can do on their own. If it means their value goes down, so be it. Personally, I don't think the Canucks can afford them both right now. Keep Daniel, he's the play maker.

LeftCoaster · #13 Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 7:34 PM**

umm... Henrik is the playmaker.

Blake · #14 Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 7:43 PM**

Guys, the 12 year term is the only way to reduce the cap hit. The 12 year deal is not because we want to lock them up at a high salary until they're 40.

When they sign (not if), the contract will be heavily front loaded, probably paying them around 8, or up to 10 mill the first few seasons, and then the salary will reduce every year, probably close to one mill or less in the last few seasons. If the Sedins decide to retire at anytime prior to the expiration of the contract, they would have already received their payday.

It's a loophole in the current CBA that has been recently exploited and you'll probably see it eliminated within a couple of years.

On the open market, these guys are 7 million dollar players, if we can lock them up for a cap hit of 5.2 each, which is looking very likely, that would be outstanding.

Distill3d · #15 Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 11:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

umm... Henrik is the playmaker.

Henrik: 109 G, 351 A.

Daniel: 179 G, 283 A.

Personally, I'd take the guy that can put the puck in the net more and call him the play maker.

Distill3d · #16 Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 11:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blake

On the open market, these guys are 7 million dollar players, if we can lock them up for a cap hit of 5.2 each, which is looking very likely, that would be outstanding.

Daymond Langkow, Kristian Huselius and Alex Tanguay put up comparable numbers to both players, and they made between 4.75 and 5.5 Million last season. So, I'm not sure what KHL team is going to pay either of the two 7 million, but they certainly won't make that in the NHL. Daniel may make more money because he scores more often, but he'd still make maybe 5.5 - 6 million on the open market.

phesto · #17 Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 11:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blake

On the open market, these guys are 7 million dollar players, if we can lock them up for a cap hit of 5.2 each, which is looking very likely, that would be outstanding.

They're worth $6M tops, and even at that rate no-one can afford to take them on without clearing cap room.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Distill3d

Henrik: 109 G, 351 A.

Daniel: 179 G, 283 A.

Personally, I'd take the guy that can put the puck in the net more and call him the play maker.

The argument about which brother is better is flawed because one is a centre and one is a wing - hence the higher goal total for Daniel. If you look at points, their career stats are virtually identical.

My point was take one of the brothers away, and they are only above-average at their respective positions.

I wouldn't pay Daniel Sedin $7M unless Henrik was feeding him passes out of the corner...

Yume-sama · #18 Posted **Jun 20, 2009, 1:56 AM**

It doesn't matter who is better

They have flat out said they won't be separated. They've played together all of their life, and they say that is not going to change now.

Vancity · #19 Posted **Jun 22, 2009, 9:37 PM**

What's happened to the Sedins? Anyone hear any news with regards to their contract negotiations? Seems like nothing is being reported. Hope that Gillis signs them soon. If we lose them to free agency, they will be difficult to report. We might as well trade Luongo for some young stars, and draft picks, and begin a rebuilding process. Put in Grabner, Hodgson, Schneider, etc! My preference is that the Sedins stay here in Vancouver.

any news, anyone?