MIN Re-Sign Kirill Kaprizov To 5-Year/$45M Extension; $9M AAV

[Phil]

 

[siddious]

I was hoping he would remain in the NHL. One of the most fun players to watch last season and quite honestly I think Minnesota deserves a break. 

[Cash or Czech]

Helluva paycheck after one NHL season. Minnesota has been desperate for this kind of talent for ages. He’s exciting every night, and gives folks a reason to watch the Wild. Can’t really complain since he could’ve gotten as much or more in Russia most likely.

Edited September 21, 2021 by Xander

[Phil]

Yeah, I mean, I get it. 55 games. But what's the alternative — telling all those fans with Kaprizov jerseys "he's not worth it" while he lights it up in the KHL?

It's a risk, but it's one I'd take every time.

[Phil]

Quote

But after waiting 5 ½ years for Kaprizov to arrive in the NHL after drafting him in the fifth round in 2015, and then seeing him deliver as the team’s leading scorer in an abbreviated season, the Wild had no choice but to pony up from the outset.

There were no comparables throughout the process other than avoiding an Artemi Panarin situation from 2016, when the Chicago Blackhawks signed the star in the making to a two-year, $12 million bridge deal, then were forced to trade him to the Columbus Blue Jackets. Panarin, also represented by Kaprizov’s agent, Paul Theofanous, ultimately received a seven-year, $81.5 million free-agent contract from the New York Rangers.

As for Kaprizov, this was a unique situation of a star 24-year-old needing to be re-signed after one 56-game season played against only seven division opponents.

The original hope was to sign Kaprizov to a seven- or eight-year contract in the $8.5-9 million range. But Kaprizov was seeking a shorter-term deal in order to keep his options open heading into what could have been unrestricted free agency in the 2024 offseason.

https://theathletic.com/2798654/2021/09/21/kirill-kaprizov-contract-finally-done-wild-ink-star-to-five-year-45-million-deal/

[Pete]

Probably one of the dumbest contracts in the NHL at the time it was signed.

 

Yes, the alternative is to let him go play in the KHL where the paycheck isn't guaranteed and you might not make it to your next game alive.

 

Any player using the KHL as leverage should be let go to the KHL.

[Valriera]

Yeah I can’t agree that this is smart money if Minnesota is trying to win, but honestly it’s a different market. These guys need a player who is going to get fans excited about the team again, and Kirill is very clearly that type of guy. I would pay this every time for that reason, but not here.

[Phil]

10 hours ago, Pete said:

Probably one of the dumbest contracts in the NHL at the time it was signed.

 

Yes, the alternative is to let him go play in the KHL where the paycheck isn't guaranteed and you might not make it to your next game alive.

 

Any player using the KHL as leverage should be let go to the KHL.

Problem is, this is easy to say when it's not your neck on the line. I know it's not directly analagous but Buffalo is a cautionary tale here in terms of going to war with your star player in public. Pro-tip: the GM never wins. Not when it's a legitimate star. Lindros, Pronger, MSL, Bure, Roy, Jagr, Eichel, etc.

There's a reason every NHL talking head is effectively signaling the same story here about how the Wild "had" to do this. It's not because they're all shills carrying water for the team. It's because they had to.

[Pete]

20 minutes ago, Phil said:

Problem is, this is easy to say when it's not your neck on the line. I know it's not directly analagous but Buffalo is a cautionary tale here in terms of going to war with your star player in public. Pro-tip: the GM never wins. Not when it's a legitimate star. Lindros, Pronger, MSL, Bure, Roy, Jagr, Eichel, etc.

There's a reason every NHL talking head is effectively signaling the same story here about how the Wild "had" to do this. It's not because they're all shills carrying water for the team. It's because they had to.

Who's every talking head? Russo? He is a schill LOL.

[LindG1000]

11 hours ago, Pete said:

Probably one of the dumbest contracts in the NHL at the time it was signed.

 

Yes, the alternative is to let him go play in the KHL where the paycheck isn't guaranteed and you might not make it to your next game alive.

 

Any player using the KHL as leverage should be let go to the KHL.

I think there's a risk here in the 5 years - agreed - but I don't really see how Minnesota justifies the "no". They could have gone more-for-shorter, but the idea here is to keep Kaprizov through the Parise/Suter buyout period where they think guys like him, Greenway, and Eriksson Ek can keep them competitive - perhaps even very much so - while Rossi, Boldy, Addison, and a few others are on the cheap.

It's a decent enough gamble. If Kaprizov ends up going bust, most if not all of the plan Guerin laid out is probably kaput anyway. May as well pay the guy and see if you're right.

[Phil]

14 minutes ago, Pete said:

Who's every talking head? Russo? He is a schill LOL.

Friedman, and most of the Sportsnet talking heads I've read tweets from since it was announced.

Quote

No issues with the Kaprizov deal here. When you’ve got a cornerstone player, you sign them for as long as you can. The Wild offered him eight years, but he wasn’t willing to do it. They pushed for five, held firm and got it done. This is a financial bet you’re confident to make.

4. At times, the Kaprizov negotiations were tense, but that’s a feature, not a bug. It happens. I’m not one who freaks out when players are unsigned before training camp. Teams and coaches don’t like that — perfectly understandable — but players take good care of themselves and work hard to be ready for the start of the season. The true pressure point is regular-season games, still three weeks away. When you worry is hearing players want out.

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/32-thoughts-state-rfa-market-training-camps-open/

[josh]

I mean, you can't let this guy walk.

[Rizz GAWD Lav No Cap FrFr]

This deal is a good example of why the hard cap is trash. You shouldn't ever be shy to sign your young stars, nor should teams be punished for it.  If this guy doesn't workout, the only people who are going to end up being punished are Minny fans, and if they didn't sign him and he went back to Russia and was incredible, same deal.  Any time your fans are in a lose/lose situation, you know as a league there is a problem.  

I know it's not happening any time soon, but the winds of change for the NHL salary cap are definitely starting to blow. There are enough people talking about it that eventually, the ownership group that controls this league is going to have to do something.  Especially now that there are models showing a soft cap would've made the league more money post-lockout. 

[Pete]

38 minutes ago, G1000 said:

I think there's a risk here in the 5 years - agreed - but I don't really see how Minnesota justifies the "no". They could have gone more-for-shorter, but the idea here is to keep Kaprizov through the Parise/Suter buyout period where they think guys like him, Greenway, and Eriksson Ek can keep them competitive - perhaps even very much so - while Rossi, Boldy, Addison, and a few others are on the cheap.

It's a decent enough gamble. If Kaprizov ends up going bust, most if not all of the plan Guerin laid out is probably kaput anyway. May as well pay the guy and see if you're right.

 

37 minutes ago, Phil said:

Friedman, and most of the Sportsnet talking heads I've read tweets from since it was announced.

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/32-thoughts-state-rfa-market-training-camps-open/

These are hypothesis based on 55 games played against 1/4 of the league. That's not even a small sample size, it's barely a sample at all...And he's getting $500k less per year than Kucherov. I mean...think about that.

[Rizz GAWD Lav No Cap FrFr]

1 minute ago, Pete said:

 

These are hypothesis based on 55 games played against 1/4 of the league. That's not even a small sample size, it's barely a sample at all...And he's getting $500k less per year than Kucherov. I mean...think about that.

Makes me think Kucherov is underpaid. 

[Pete]

1 minute ago, Art Panarini said:

Makes me think Kucherov is underpaid. 

Doesn't matter what you think, market is set.

[Phil]

8 minutes ago, Pete said:

 

These are hypothesis based on 55 games played against 1/4 of the league. That's not even a small sample size, it's barely a sample at all...And he's getting $500k less per year than Kucherov. I mean...think about that.

I get that, but the scenarios aren't directly analogous because Kucherov didn't wait five an a half years to come to the NHL.

My point here is that the Wild were up against it here. They had two choices: pay him, or refuse to, and if they chose the latter, it's costing the GM, minimum, his job.

[Rizz GAWD Lav No Cap FrFr]

Just now, Pete said:

Doesn't matter what you think, market is set.

You can't use Kuch as a market setter because he's very much the opposite.  He's underpaid relative to his production. In the last full season this league had, he lead it in points and potted 41 goals, which was good for 6th in the league at that time, tied with McDavid and McKinnon.  He's McKinnon light in terms of team friendly deals and should be making something closer to Panarin-McDavid.  

[Rizz GAWD Lav No Cap FrFr]

But again, I think this is arguing the wrong thing. I get it, we are talking in the moment, but realistically we should be focusing on why this system doesn't work, because it absolutely doesn't long term. 

[Pete]

1 minute ago, Phil said:

I get that, but the scenarios aren't directly analogous because Kucherov didn't wait five an a half years to come to the NHL.

My point here is that the Wild were up against it here. They had two choices: pay him, or refuse to, and if they chose the latter, it's costing the GM, minimum, his job.

I don't really believe that. It's an easy message to a fan base that just saw 2 guys who weren't worth their paycheck being bought out at the same time..."We don't feel we have enough data that we should pay him $9M a year based on his 55 game stint, and we're not locking ourselves into another bad deal that we have to buy ourselves out of down the road."

[Phil]

16 minutes ago, Pete said:

I don't really believe that. It's an easy message to a fan base that just saw 2 guys who weren't worth their paycheck being bought out at the same time..."We don't feel we have enough data that we should pay him $9M a year based on his 55 game stint, and we're not locking ourselves into another bad deal that we have to buy ourselves out of down the road."

I guess, but the media are going to be no help on that front. He's a likable person and just won the Calder. Trying to paint him as a villain over money is an uphill battle.

[josh]

OMG those buyout cap hits for Parise and Suter

 

$4,743,588

$12,743,588

$14,743,588

$14,743,588

[Albatrosss]

5 hours ago, josh said:

OMG those buyout cap hits for Parise and Suter

 

$4,743,588

$12,743,588

$14,743,588

$14,743,588

jeezuz!

[SaveByRichter35]

On 9/22/2021 at 9:42 AM, Art Panarini said:

This deal is a good example of why the hard cap is trash. You shouldn't ever be shy to sign your young stars, nor should teams be punished for it.  If this guy doesn't workout, the only people who are going to end up being punished are Minny fans, and if they didn't sign him and he went back to Russia and was incredible, same deal.  Any time your fans are in a lose/lose situation, you know as a league there is a problem.  

I know it's not happening any time soon, but the winds of change for the NHL salary cap are definitely starting to blow. There are enough people talking about it that eventually, the ownership group that controls this league is going to have to do something.  Especially now that there are models showing a soft cap would've made the league more money post-lockout. 

Soft cap with luxury tax.  Do it.

[Albatrosss]

Rangers still wont win shit