AT THE END OF THE DAY

Craig MacTavish held court today, with the new Justin Schultz contract the main item on the agenda. I was heartened by some of the verbal, flummoxed by other portions, and came away with one thing certain: my ‘balance’ photo will have to wait a year.

ONE AT A TIME PLEASE

Here are my takes on some MacT comments from this morning.

  • On the Schultz contract: “I think for our franchise it was a good compromise.”

I was always interested in knowing the starting point. If it was the entry-level deal, then $2.5M is a more than reasonable number—generous—but they clearly used the entire entry-level number, including bonuses. My suspicion was always the latter, and on that basis it looks to me as though Edmonton gave him the same number as a year ago, and wanted another year of evidence in order to decide on the future.

There is a LOT of anger in the Oilogosphere over this deal, I’m not certain why. Using Subban’s deal as a comparable ignores the fact that Schultz was in fact a free agent on the first deal. I think Edmonton could have gouged Schultz on this deal, but, as has been the case with the heart of the cluster, Edmonton is rewarding the future. Call it the ‘are you sure you want to pull a Pocklington’ and hate it if you wish, but that’s the plan. I bet you a 2-4 that Schultz is signed long term before Yakupov or Petry, who in my opinion are closer to being out the door today than they were before the summer got underway.

Is Justin Schultz worth this deal? No. Could the Oilers have drilled him good? Yes. Is it wise that they didn’t? You tell me.

  • On the future of Schultz: “I think he’s going to be a great player and a great Oiler.”

I think they love him as the Paul Coffey in the new cluster. This quote is top dead center if that’s the case.

  • On his defensive ability: “I disagree with the perception on the defensive side of things. I’ve always believed he’s very good defensively.”

Beyond an academy award nomination, there’s not much to say here. He could have said “I’m not going to discuss the shortcomings of our player on a day when we’re all feeling good, wait until Ramsay gets here and we’ll see” or he could have said “no comment” and moved on. What he said is not defensible. He would not win the Oscar for this comment.

  • On his potential:  “Justin Schultz has Norris trophy potential.”

Because he would win it for this one. In a classic case of media conference ‘call and response’ MacT chose (imo) to arc over the followup question with something beyond farce. This might have been taken from The Producers or High Anxiety, absolutely no need for a laugh track.

  • On Craig Ramsay: “He’s going to give Justin a very experienced perspective.”

This is probably code for ‘defensive makeover’ but I am encouraged that the Oilers believe in Ramsay this much before he arrives. I wonder if poor old Ramsay, a man who has had stomach issues (serious ones) for a long time, will be able to endure what is going to be a busy year of miracle work.

  • On the analytics society panning Schultz universally: “I disagree with the analytics on our group.”

Either MacT believes Staples more than Staples, or he’s simply not going to engage in the public flogging of his newly signed shiny diamond. We’ll see.

  • On analytics: “Possession and points in the standings are directly correlated”

Music! Now, please ignore the previous statement. This is encouraging, but I’m very interested in how MacTavish, a smarter man than me, arranges these two quotes in his brain. Because, unless I’m mistaken, they are on a collision course with each other. Conflicted, not entirely at cross purposes, but I’d love an explanation.

  • On making a move: “there’s not a deal there right now”
LEFT WING CENTER RIGHT WING
TAYLOR HALL RYAN NUGENT-HOPKINS NAIL YAKUPOV
DAVID PERRON LEON DRAISAITL JORDAN EBERLE
BENOIT POULIOT BOYD GORDON TEDDY PURCELL
MATT HENDRICKS MARK ARCOBELLO TYLER PITLICK*
LUKE GAZDIC (IR) ANTON LANDER IIRO PAKARINEN*
     
     
LEFT DEFENSE RIGHT DEFENSE
MARTIN MARINCIN JEFF PETRY
NIKITA NIKITIN MARK FAYNE
ANDREW FERENCE JUSTIN SCHULTZ
KEITH AULIE  
DARNELL NURSE (NHL OR JR)  
  GOAL  
  BEN SCRIVENS  
  VIKTOR FASTH  

 

 

written by

The author didn‘t add any Information to his profile yet.
Related Posts

58 Responses to "AT THE END OF THE DAY"

  1. Symbology says:

    LT, don’t you feel that putting Mark Arcobello on a line with Hendricks and Pitlick/Gazdic is simply setting him up for failure? Are 3 Scoring Lines and a Boyd Gordon-led “Hell Minutes” line a fanciful dream, or something that has a legitimate chance of actually happening?

  2. Lowetide says:

    Symbology:
    LT, don’t you feel that putting Mark Arcobello on a line with Hendricks and Pitlick/Gazdic is simply setting him up for failure? Are 3 Scoring Lines and a Boyd Gordon-led “Hell Minutes” line a fanciful dream, or something that has a legitimate chance of actually happening?

    Unicorns.

  3. speeds says:

    “There is a LOT of anger in the Oilogosphere over this deal, I’m not certain why.”

    (1) They paid him too much
    (2) If they are paying him that much, not enough term.
    (3) They didn’t use their leverage. They claim they are doing this to build goodwill, I am less sure that throwing money at players won’t be long forgotten by the next contract.
    (4) They are paying Schultz more than Petry. If they took a more measured angle on Schultz, let’s say 1 mil less for argument’s sake, they could (likely) have applied that money to a longer term deal with the (currently) better player in Petry.
    (5) This ties into (4), but they do not appear to be particularly great at evaluating D given the state of the D over the past few seasons, 4 years for Ference, etc. We’ll wait to see on Nikitin (a deal I don’t particularly like) and Fayne (a deal I do).

    (6) Most importantly, MacT’s glowing talk about Schultz leads some to be fearful that there will be an even worse contract next summer, unless MacT is speaking glowingly about Schultz in hopes he will play his value up prior to a trade.

  4. Lowetide says:

    speeds:
    “There is a LOT of anger in the Oilogosphere over this deal, I’m not certain why.”

    (1) They paid him too much
    (2) If they are paying him that much, not enough term.
    (3) They didn’t use their leverage.They claim they are doing this to build goodwill, I am less sure that throwing money at players won’t be long forgotten by the next contract.
    (4) They are paying Schultz more than Petry.If they took a more measured angle on Schultz, let’s say 1 mil less for argument’s sake, they could (likely) have applied that money to a longer term deal with the (currently) better player in Petry.
    (5) This ties into (4), but they do not appear to be particularly great at evaluating D given the state of the D over the past few seasons, 4 years for Ference, etc.We’ll wait to see on Nikitin (a deal I don’t particularly like) and Fayne (a deal I do).

    (6) Most importantly, MacT’s glowing talk about Schultz leads some to be fearful that there will be an even worse contract next summer, unless MacT is speaking glowingly about Schultz in hopes he will play his value up prior to a trade.

    1. Agree
    2. Don’t agree. I don’t want a long term deal for an MA Bergeron.
    3. Agree completely. They could have drilled him, but did not. I’m not certain that’s a bad thing.
    4. I agree they’re not sold on Petry, but they have $4M left. The two deals aren’t in any way attached from what I can see.
    5. Agree. I’m also concerned they seem to value Klefbom more than Marincin.
    6. Sure.

    Still, the words I saw on twitter suggested to me many believe we’re back to Tambellini era decisions. I’m not sure MacT is going to be a good GM, but the verbal is getting a little wild out there on this one. Let’s remember it’s a one year deal in a season when the team is nowhere near the cap.

  5. russ99 says:

    1. You don’t expect someone who you see to be part of the core to take a pay cut. Whatever they promised Schultz to sign here is why the terms are steeper than they should be today.

    2. This repeats the same thing that happened with Gagner last year. Can’t tell if MacT doesn’t have much leverage in these cases or if he’s a poor negotiator.
    At least Schultz isn’t staring down UFA next offseason, but if MacT continues down this road (as he has with Petry) he could soon be.

    3. The whole Norris and saw-him-good comments seem a bit like me to a statement like “I’m still in charge” with Eakins taking a disproportionate amount of credit for the Dellow hire.

  6. TheOtherJohn says:

    Agree with Speeds. Bad contract . Much worse is the verbiage on Schultz and his sky is the limit potential. He is bad in his own end & certainly did not seemed to be too bothered by it last year. Last guy with a similar attitude to defense used to be our 2 C and he could not be bothered to put effort into learning that part of his position. Course Schultz is 24 and has lots of time to learn how not to be so bad in his own end

    Clearly MacT wanted to let everyone know that his opinions on value trumps everyone else. And bleep analytics if it disagrees.

    Delighted to have confirmed there’s no deal out there. It kinda kills the “MacT has a fallback deal in his pocket if the 2C thing turns into a fiasco” comments. Also cements whatever way MacT is driving the Oiler bus we know he is clearly not following the Dallas model — trade for a 1C and 2C over the course of 12 months

  7. VanOil says:

    speeds: they do not appear to be particularly great at evaluating D

    I am agnostic towards this particular deal but this point is very valid.

    In fact The Edmonton Oilers; not particularly great at evaluating D since 2006 is worthy of bumper sticker.

  8. Marcus Oilerius says:

    russ99: You don’t expect someone who you see to be part of the core to take a pay cut

    The idiocy is in proclaiming a done-nothing player like Schultz as part of your core.

    Plus I get the feeling there’s more than a little bit of romantic retardation still thinking that Hall = moose, Nuge = gretz, and Schultz = coffey in the management group.

  9. Bag of Pucks says:

    Marcus Oilerius: The idiocy is in proclaiming a done-nothing player like Schultz as part of your core.

    Plus I get the feeling there’s more than a little bit of romantic retardation still thinking that Hall = moose, Nuge = gretz, and Schultz = coffey in the management group.

    Romantic retardation. That may be the single best descriptor of this organization that I’ve ever read. Bravo.

    With MacT and Lowe, you see a lot of the “ex player” in them coming out in these negotiations, particularly with players they see as ‘favourite sons.’

    Slats would occasionally push it too hard. Coffey is the textbook example. But he had the tough negotiation act down cold. Whereas Lowe and MacT could learn from that, they seem bound and determined to be a kinder, gentler, player friendly mgmt regime.

    Not sure that works in a salary cap world. They better hope their ‘chosen ones’ are the right choices.

  10. jp says:

    Lowetide: Unicorns.

    So, do you think that:
    1) the 3 scoring lines will never materialize, or
    2) Gordon will ultimately be #2 or #3 in TOI, and thus should be considered the 3C?

    I completely agree with the latter, but still think we’ll see frequent unicorns.

    Gordon and Hendricks took on the toughs (ZS-wise at least) last year. Why shouldn’t they do it again?

    Arcobello is far and away the better offensive player (imo). Unless he fails to produce with good wingers why would you give him Hendricks?

    I guess “because Oilers” may be a fair counter point, but Gordon-Hendricks together and Leon/Arco with skilled wingers seems to me by far the most sensible way to use the current forwards.

  11. Gordies Elbow says:

    To speak to “done-nothing”:
    – 12th in points for defenseman in 2012-2013, tied for 8th in goals.
    – 38th in points for 2013-2014, tied for 14th in goals.
    – Led team in minutes played in 2013-2014.

    While the Corgi’s don’t like him, nor should they, with the fact that most NHL defensemen aren’t #1 defenders 122 games into their career, JS has performed better than should be reasonably expected.

    On a team that featured the Dubbie/Labby show as the goaltending tandem till Nov 11th, where they had been outscored 74-47, and had a grand total of 10 points over 19 games. JS was -10 in that time period, playing on average 22:01 a night. His stats would likely have been worse had he not been injured on October 29th against Toronto. The team went one win (OT against Florida) and were outscored 21-12 while he was away, leading up to the signing of Bryzgalof.

    With the Swarm in full effect, I think that the combination of goaltending and coaching was more suspect than the play of a rookie defender playing as a #1.

  12. Lowetide says:

    jp: So, do you think that:
    1) the 3 scoring lines will never materialize, or
    2) Gordon will ultimately be #2 or #3 in TOI, and thus should be considered the 3C?

    I completely agree with the latter, but still think we’ll see frequent unicorns.

    Gordon and Hendricks took on the toughs (ZS-wise at least) last year. Why shouldn’t they do it again?

    Arcobello is far and away the better offensive player (imo). Unless he fails to produce with good wingers why would you give him Hendricks?

    I guess “because Oilers” may be a fair counter point, but Gordon-Hendricks together and Leon/Arco with skilled wingers seems to me by far the most sensible way to use the current forwards.

    Dallas Eakins is coaching for his job from minute one. Last year, he loved Mark Arcobello so much he buried him despite evidence he was better than an injured Gagner.

    This season, the GM will gift him with Leon Draisatil. When a GM hands you his first round pick, failure is not an option. SOOO, Eakins has to juggle TWO youngsters who are not established inside the top six (YAK, LEON) and he must, must, MUST make damn good and sure he has a line he trusts aside from the 1Line.

    Gordon. An actual NHL player. The coach’s friend. Arco (imo) will get squeezed, although he doesn’t deserve it.

  13. Bag of Pucks says:

    LT, you pose the question, should management have drilled him?

    I would suggest that’s exactly what management’s function is in this system. Their objective is winning Stanley Cups, not placating Justin Schultz -,which is precisely the reason negotiations roll through the agent and not the player. MacTavish should not exist to mollify Jultz. That’s the job of Eakins, his agent, his mommy, etc.

    The phrase “it’s not personal, it’s business” definitely applies here. Every dollar MacT overpays one player impacts his ability to compensate the rest (see ya Jeff Petry).

    The key for any good manager is to know where ‘drilling’ ends and ‘grudges’ begin. Short of that, if I’m Katz and I see player’s ‘feelings’ influencing my GM’s decision process, I’m questioning their negotiation objectives and business acumen.

  14. Lowetide says:

    Bag of Pucks:
    LT, you pose the question, should management have drilled him?

    I would suggest that’s exactly what management’s function is in this system.Their objective is winning Stanley Cups, not placating Justin Schultz -,which is precisely the reason negotiations roll through the agent and not the player. MacTavish should not exist to mollify Jultz. That’s the jobof Eakins, his agent, his mommy, etc.

    The phrase “it’s not personal, it’s business” definitely applies here. Every dollar MacT overpaysone player impacts his ability to compensate the rest (see ya Jeff Petry).

    The key for any good manager is to know where ‘drilling’ ends and ‘grudges’ begin. Short of that, if I’m Katz and I see player’s ‘feelings’ influencing their decision process, I’m questioning their negotiation objectives and business acumen.

    I don’t disagree with any of what you’ve said. I’m very pleased it’s a one year deal, because imo Schultz is the guy they’re going to make a mistake on. The best possible outcome this season is a tremendous season from Petry, a struggling year (again) from Schultz and getting both signed for reasonable money.

    However, as my Dad used to say, you can’t tell a Heinz pickle nothing.

  15. anonymous says:

    I think the worst part is the oilers seem to have to overpay their own rfas to stay. How are the ever going to have value contracts that aren’t entry level?

    Agreed on Petry but I don’t see how this affects Yak at all. Except it wouldn’t surprise me if they play hardball with Yak on his next contract and Yak doesn’t play nice considering how they hand out overplays everywhere else.

    Cycle of piss poor oiler management continues.

  16. Bag of Pucks says:

    Lowetide: I don’t disagree with any of what you’ve said. I’m very pleased it’s a one year deal, because imo Schultz is the guy they’re going to make a mistake on. The best possible outcome this season is a tremendous season from Petry, a struggling year (again) from Schultz and getting both signed for reasonable money.

    However, as my Dad used to say, you can’t tell a Heinz pickle nothing.

    That’s funny. My father-in-law uses that exact same expression.

    Since we’re keen to coin our own phrases from time to time, how does this sound?

    “Nothing of this reminds me of Sam Pollock.”

  17. Lowetide says:

    Bag of Pucks: That’s funny. My father-in-law uses that exact same expression.

    Since we’re keen to coin our own phrases from time to time, how does this sound?

    “Nothing of this reminds me of Sam Pollock.”

    Well, I do like the one-year deal. I’d pay extra for that.

  18. Bag of Pucks says:

    Lowetide: I don’t disagree with any of what you’ve said. I’m very pleased it’s a one year deal, because imo Schultz is the guy they’re going to make a mistake on. The best possible outcome this season is a tremendous season from Petry, a struggling year (again) from Schultz and getting both signed for reasonable money.

    Btw, how sad is it that our best possible outcome involves our Norris Trophy Contender struggling?

    To be fair, MacT is probably onto something here. Betting on a key player struggling is as close as it gets to a sure thing in these parts.

  19. speeds says:

    Lowetide: I don’t disagree with any of what you’ve said. I’m very pleased it’s a one year deal, because imo Schultz is the guy they’re going to make a mistake on.

    Do you think they have already made mistakes on any of Gazdic, Arcobello and/or Petry this summer?

  20. Lowetide says:

    speeds: Do you think they have already made mistakes on any of Gazdic, Arcobello and/or Petry this summer?

    Petry: ” A team short on defensemen they can trust in any situation is about to flush the guy they can trust in all situations. And so it goes in the town that can’t stop losing.”
    http://lowetide.ca/blog/2014/08/re-14-15-jeff-petry-see-you-sometime.html

    Gazdic: “There’s no mystery here. The Oilers enter the season shorthanded because they are too attached to the past to see the future. The 4line will go out for an own-zone start and the results will be poor. There’s no mystery to this. None.”

    http://lowetide.ca/blog/2014/08/re-14-15-luke-gazdic-lesson-in-survival.html

    Arcobello: “It’s a sweet deal for the Oilers. I think Arcobello made the deal because he sees some daylight here, and a chance to win a career in the NHL.”

    http://lowetide.ca/blog/2014/07/re-14-15-mark-arcobello-amelia.html

  21. Gerta Rauss says:

    Lowetide: This season, the GM will gift him with Leon Draisatil. When a GM hands you his first round pick, failure is not an option. SOOO, Eakins has to juggle TWO youngsters who are not established inside the top six (YAK, LEON) and he must, must, MUST make damn good and sure he has a line he trusts aside from the 1Line.

    I’ve only posted a handful of times this summer, but the above is the point I’ve tried to make. They absolutely have to have 2 lines that can play against their opponents top lines. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

    If they plan to run Leon and Arco as 2 of their 4 centerman (and Yak in the top 9) they need to bring in another NHL forward. A center would be nice, but I’d settle for another NHL winger. With the cap space they have, there is no reason not to.

  22. speeds says:

    I don’t think either the Petry or Arcobello deals are strictly bad in terms of money, I just don’t like the term with either. I understand that you can’t make either player sign long term, but I also don’t know that preferable long term deals wouldn’t have been available if sought.

  23. Dicky94 says:

    I think the deal is a reasonable one. Now Petry and Shultz can battle all year for the long term contract. The one who fails will be shipped out of town and the return for either one would be reasonable. It also buys the team one more year to see which one of the up and coming d prospects like Nurse, Klefbom and Simpson are the real deal. When Petry only got one year I had a feeling Shultz would receive the same. In the end I think Petry wins. The return for a potential Norris trophy winner would be huge. Lol.

  24. Lowetide says:

    speeds:
    I don’t think either the Petry or Arcobello deals are strictly bad in terms of money, I just don’t like the term with either.I understand that you can’t make either player sign long term, but I also don’t know that preferable long term deals wouldn’t have been available if sought.

    Part of that might be the increased cap coming 2015, and as you mention that may be player enforced.

  25. VanOil says:

    Any one else wish they could reference the mc79hockey’s article on signing Schultz v. Petry? I wonder if that was the analytics MacT did not believe applied to his group today?

  26. flyfish1168 says:

    I don’t understand why Justin gets so much leeway and preferential treatment and others get thrown under the bus. The stats show he is in the out house versus the penthouse in the NHL yet he gets the royal treatment. It will be interesting next summer. You should never pay for potential not till its sold and delivered. The numbers don’t match and this is a recipe for disaster.

  27. dangilitis says:

    Do people really think that Schultz is considered a core player by this team? This is not a rhetorical question, i would love to gauge opinion here if that is okay with the boss.

    If we start by posing the question – what did the Oilers do with every “core player” as they approached the end of an entry level deal? Minimum of 6 million/yr for min 6 years.
    Pouliot just got a 4mil/yr deal for 5 years, and Ference and Fayne each 4 years for similar coin (Yes, UFA, I know).

    Defensemen who have “Norris” potential nowadays are more highly coveted than star forwards, in general, no?

    So, why is JS sitting with 1 year at under 4 million?
    I think either

    (a) He is not truly deemed part of the core, and MacT is pumping his tires to trade him

    Only valid if MacT is pumping his tires to trade the guy. Makes no sense from a PR perspective (will seem disingenuous later), and is incongruent with how shitty they are treating Petry for a team that already lacks proven top 4 D-men. Plus, I do believe the team that they like him and want to keep him.

    (b) MacT, who did not sign Hall or Eberle, has re-defined what a core player contract should look like

    However, he did negotiate RNH’s contract and had this to say September 2013:
    “We felt when we did the contracts with Taylor Hall and Jordan Eberle, that at that point we knew we’d be doing a very similar, if not identical, contract to what we did with those players,” Oilers general manager Craig MacTavish told reporters. “This is just a reflection of how highly we hold Ryan within our organization.”

    If he felt this way less than a year ago, and knowing that the cap should continue to rise, then wouldn’t it seem like a no brainer to do the same deal with Justin? Unless you don’t hold him that highly in your organization?

    (c) J Schultz, or his agents, think he is better than “the core” players and thus deserves a better contract

    Which should prompt MacT to employ strategy in part (a), or continue to sign JS to yearly contracts as part of strategy (d).

    I think this is unlikely based on gut feeling, but I don’t go out for brunch with Justin and agents are shady, so maybe this was part of the problem? E.g. agents suggested ridiculous numbers.

    (d) He is deemed as a “bubble” core player who they may open the bank for once he proves he has any defensive game, at which point he is considered a core player. Until then, he is an asset, he was found money, and they will continue to pump his tires until his last day as an Oiler.

    That to me is the most likely scenario. It seems that is what most have suggested, more or less.
    But if that is the case, then lets stop the “core” talk. At least for now, because they could have locked him up until a time when the LRT expansion would have finally been completed, but they didn’t.

  28. nycoil says:

    MacT needs to talk 50% less, then 50% less from there. “Norris potential?” There is ZERO upside to making a statement like that publicly. None. No one wins except the Oilers’ haters and national media who get to have a field day at the “laughingstock of the NHL” ”s expense.

  29. godot10 says:

    Lowetide: Dallas Eakins is coaching for his job from minute one. Last year, he loved Mark Arcobello so much he buried him despite evidence he was better than an injured Gagner.

    This season, the GM will gift him with Leon Draisatil. When a GM hands you his first round pick, failure is not an option. SOOO, Eakins has to juggle TWO youngsters who are not established inside the top six (YAK, LEON) and he must, must, MUST make damn good and sure he has a line he trusts aside from the 1Line.

    Krueger had no training camp, a compressed all western conference schedule, a 2nd year centre in Nugent-Hopkins, Gagner, with Horcoff and Lander injured most of the season, and with a rookie winger who needed severe protection, Nick Schultz in the top 4D, as well as a rookie Justin Schultz, and a one-legged D on the 3rd pairing. And no competent assistant coach. And he got the team to 24th, about -8 in goal differential.

    Eakins has it easy.

  30. TheOtherJohn says:

    The advantage of the Schultz deal is it was only a 1 year deal? Not sure how that is an advantage. We get to overpay him next year again? And more thereafter. Maybe pay him what what he’s worth not what you hope he becomes

    The Oilers baffling treatment of Petry, the teams love affair with Schultz and the “bet” that Draisatl & Arco do not get overwhelmed at 2C & 3C is some evidence that MacT is nowhere near as smart a GM as he gets repeatedly creditred with here. That’s without mentioning the Ference and Nikitan contracts either

  31. nycoil says:

    It’s the morning after and I am still shaking my head about MacT’s comments. The man continues to show he’s merely better than Tambellini and not in that top tier of smart management men in the game with his comments.

    I hope young Justin has been doing more than working on his golf game in Kelowna.

  32. nycoil says:

    Viewpoint A
    “Has Norris potential”
    -Logical Response based on viewpoint A: sign him to a long-term deal
    -Actual response: sign him to a one year deal

    Viewpoint B
    “Needs to round out his defensive game”
    -Logical Response based on viewpoint B: sign him to a low cap hit, “show me” bridge contract
    -Actual response: sign him to a one year, inflated cap hit deal just to have him in camp; now forced going forward to qualify him at said high cap hit going for next 3 RFA years or lose him for nothing or sign him to a multi-year deal based around this $3.675 platform.

    Viewpoint C
    “Possession and standings are directly correlated.”
    -Logical Response: Trust the possession statistics and analytics
    -Actual Response: “Don’t trust” the analytics with regards to this player.

    Viewpoint D
    “A good compromise for the franchise”
    -Logical Expectation: Settled on a deal that was more than you wanted to pay, but less than what the player wanted, or got more years from the player as a concession.
    -Actual Result: Paying him quadruple the guaranteed money on his rookie deal, and I believe Justin didn’t hit a couple of his bonus levels this past year, right, so assuring him a nice pay-raise, and saving, for perception’s sake a mere $100K vs his non-guaranteed bonuses’ cap hit on his last deal. Where exactly is said compromise?

    All this for a talented young man, who may or may not have the work ethic to become all he can be on the Oilers, but has been handed every privilege afforded to royalty since he has arrived in Edmonton. And, as we’ve seen with the manner in which he has arrived in town and the manner in which this negotiation has gone, is going to take MacT and his man-crush on him for every penny he can get and then some. MacT needs to snap out of whatever spell has been cast upon him, and quickly. They’re going to let Petry walk while paying through the nose for unproven potential.

    It really, really sucks to be an Oiler fan sometimes.

  33. Darrell says:

    LT,
    I have said it before and got lamb basted but I will say it again. It does not matter the outcome of any decision there are too many ‘know it all’ haters on your blog. We all knew Shultz would get paid eventually so MacT gave him one year to buy time just like the Petry contract. We can now watch both of them compete for more money/term next year which saved this blog from crying about term which would have been the case on the flip side.

    Enjoy competition, have a beer and relax folks as this is as good as it’s been in a long time.

    Cheers,
    Darrell

  34. Pouzar says:

    Where’s G?

    SHEESH with some of these comments.

  35. Ben says:

    Darrell:
    LT,
    I have said it before and got lamb basted but I will say it again.It does not matter the outcome of any decision there are too many ‘know it all’ haters on your blog.We all knew Shultz would get paid eventually so MacT gave him one year to buy time just like the Petry contract.We can now watch both of them compete for more money/term next year which saved this blog from crying about term which would have been the case on the flip side.

    Enjoy competition, have a beer and relax folks as this is as good as it’s been in a long time.

    Cheers,
    Darrell

    Sounds delicious!

  36. magisterrex says:

    Darrell: LT,I have said it before and got lamb basted but I will say it again. It does not matter the outcome of any decision there are too many ‘know it all’ haters on your blog. We all knew Shultz would get paid eventually so MacT gave him one year to buy time just like the Petry contract. We can now watch both of them compete for more money/term next year which saved this blog from crying about term which would have been the case on the flip side. Enjoy competition, have a beer and relax folks as this is as good as it’s been in a long time.Cheers,Darrell

    There’s some truth to this comment, LT. Lately the board seems like I’m reading Copper & Blue, not Lowetide. Not really getting the vitriol or disappointment with a one-year deal on a found money asset who is still young and learning on the job. Is he M-A Bergeron or is he Scott Neidermeyer? The results were so whacked last year that MacT needs a reset year to understand what he has here. The deal looks good from that vantage point, IMO.

  37. theres oil in virginia says:

    Ben: Sounds delicious!

    Mmm. Basted lamb. Grilled? Oven? Probably doesn’t matter. Where’s DMW to expand those two words into two pages and make some point about the Schultz and the Oilers somewhere in the middle? What a skill.

  38. Woodguy says:

    Man LT, that picture.

    I have some hope for this season, but so many people I respect don’t.

    That picture just makes me dread the upcoming season.

  39. Woodguy says:

    VanOil:
    Any one else wish they could reference the mc79hockey’s article on signing Schultz v. Petry? I wonder if that was the analytics MacT did not believe applied to his group today?

    I think that’s pretty astute.

  40. Lowetide says:

    Woodguy:
    Man LT, that picture.

    I have some hope for this season, but so many people I respect don’t.

    That picture just makes me dread the upcoming season.

    I have hope, 10th in the conference. However, it’s a fool’s game to start the season out of balance, and once again, the Edmonton Oilers are doing it willfully. Crazy.

  41. Frank The Dog says:

    Let’s talk negotiation 101. The most primitive form of negotiation is the pure win/lose model – typically the person walking onto a small used car lot with a trailer office. The highest form is the collaborative win/win.

    I would see Subban as a lost win/lose and MacT/Jultz as a win/win in progress in spite of the lower level techniques of the agency to simply rape the teams at the benefit of their clients – in response to teams financially raping the players to their own benefit.

    In this case I believe that the Oil are not in the same situation as most teams in this type of negotiation. They are moving from a weak to a stronger position. Simply because they are likely to have more choice a year from now.

    The team is likely to be better all round. Because roster and coaching staff. They will likely start looking like contenders even if they don’t quite make the playoffs. More UFA’s will start to look their way as the buzz among the players around the league about Edmonton becomes a little more positive. Less overpay will be required for those willing to come.MacT will have more options bubbling up from within the now well stocked D system.

    Most importantly, MacT has set some lofty expectations for Jultz to achieve in order to “earn” the megabucks he is asking. If he is to be worth as much as he is asking he will need to perform at that level. The flip side being that when he cannot meet those lofty expectations he will lose his leverage for his lofty paycheck.

    The other paradigm shift is this: How often do you see teams held over a barrel by “franchise” players with rare skill sets that force such a huge paycheck it prevents the team from stacking the roster with depth at all positions. Witness Chicago. The opposite of this is Bill Bellichuk of the New England Patriots. Wouldn’t even let Tom Brady hold him to ransom.

    This is the side of MacT I like to see. No more being held over a barrel by players to the detriment of the team. Every position has a price tag, if your home boy wont accept the tag then you will already have people lined up that can fill the position that will.

    I personally think Schultz is a prima donna that could ruin the team with a ransom contract, and MacT is correct to hold his ground while uttering soliloquies about what he hopes to see this year. I think MacT will be forced to pay Schultz to some degree IF he delivers as “expected”, but with the expanded cap, the more easily available pool of UFA’s and the depth of the D pipeline, MacT will hold most of the cards at that time.

  42. Woodguy says:

    Just re-listening to the presser again.

    No one is really hitting on this quote:

    “There’s a significant gap between where the player is today and what his potential is. Newport agreed with us on that”

    Money quote imo.

  43. Lowetide says:

    magisterrex: There’s some truth to this comment, LT. Lately the board seems like I’m reading Copper & Blue, not Lowetide. Not really getting the vitriol or disappointment with a one-year deal on a found money asset who is still young and learning on the job. Is he M-A Bergeron or is he Scott Neidermeyer? The results were so whacked last year that MacT needs a reset year to understand what he has here. The deal looks good from that vantage point, IMO.

    I’m not down on the Schultz deal, said it above. For me, the one year portion is key, would pay extra for it. As for the ‘copper and blue’ nature of the board currently, I don’t sway the group they find their meter all by their lonesome.

    For the record, I don’t think the Schultz contract is a terrible thing. I have asked, and no one has answered, for clarification about the ‘free agent’ portion of Schultz’s original situation as it might apply to using Subban as a comparable.

    I expressed surprise at the angry reaction to the Schultz contract, and compared it to the Tambellini days, which I think we can all agree is not reasonable.

    So, that’s my pov. I do not sway the group, never have.

  44. Woodguy says:

    Lowetide: I have hope, 10th in the conference. However, it’s a fool’s game to start the season out of balance, and once again, the Edmonton Oilers are doing it willfully. Crazy.

    I was really hoping for a 1-2 year deal for a vet C with a bit of offence.

    Oh Shawn Horcoff, where are you when we need you Kaptain!!

  45. Symbology says:

    Lowetide,

    Aww, your first reply was so much better. :)

  46. Lowetide says:

    Symbology:
    Lowetide,

    Aww, your first reply was so much better. :)

    lol. I didn’t want to offend anyone. :-)

  47. supernova says:

    speeds,

    Well I don’t love the contract, I really don’t think it is horrible.

    Did a capgeek comparable contract search. Of the 20 most similar contracts there was maybe 4 guys that I would trade Schultz straight across for.

    One of them was John Carlson who in my opinion has perhaps one of the best contracts in the league.

    Did the same search for 3.25 million

    There was even less players I would trade one for one for.

    could they have ground Schultz for say $500k less? maybe, but really why?

    It is clear that his agents wanted essentially the same as his first 2 years.

    If we had signed him when he was a free agent to 3 years and not 2 years. I am sure not a single person would have bitched about it.

    Yes it was base plus bonus but on a point getting D man on a team with no good back up option, isn’t he likely to get these bonus?

    Maybe Speeds can answer that.

  48. speeds says:

    Lowetide:
    For the record, I don’t think the Schultz contract is a terrible thing. I have asked, and no one has answered, for clarification about the ‘free agent’ portion of Schultz’s original situation as it might apply to using Subban as a comparable.

    It’s not technically relevant. It might shape expectations, which could be a problem in negotiations.

  49. speeds says:

    supernova,

    I’m not sure what the question is.

    As to 3 year vs 2 year when he initially signed, it wasn’t up for negotiation – length of ELC is fixed within the CBA, based on age.

  50. supernova says:

    speeds,

    Sorry for the lack of clarity. I understand it wasn’t available for 3 years.

    Question is

    What did Schultz actually earn the last 2 years?

  51. speeds says:

    supernova:
    speeds,

    Sorry for the lack of clarity. I understand it wasn’t available for 3 years.

    Question is

    What did Schultz actually earn the last 2 years?

    I haven’t seen his actual contract, I don’t know for sure.

    I believe I read that he hit all his bonuses in the lockout shortened season, and hit most/all of his A bonuses and did not hit his B bonuses last year. If accurate, that would have been 3.775M for 12/13 and up to 1.775 in 13/14, but that 12/13 number was pro-rated due to the lockout.

    But, again, don’t quote me on that, I haven’t seen his contract or looked to see exactly which A bonuses levels he hit (assuming they were written into his contract. I would assume he negotiated all possible bonuses into his contract, but don’t know for sure)

  52. Bruce McCurdy says:

    supernova: If we had signed him when he was a free agent to 3 years and not 2 years. I am sure not a single person would have bitched about it.

    I had exactly this thought yesterday, “what if the rules had been different & Oilers had signed Schultz for 3 years initially? Everybody would be saying, he’s reaching the prove-it segment of his deal but maximum contract was the cost of doing business of getting the guy in the first place.”

    The difference is that up ’til now Schultz has been paid — or not paid — based largely on bonuses that he achieved or didn’t. Now it’s all guaranteed money, PLUS it establishes the baseline for his future qualifying offer(s). Those are pretty big factors. There’s no longer a maximum (or a relevant minimum) to what he could have signed. Petry at an equivalent stage signed for less money total for a TWO-year deal because his negotiating power was zilch, and it turned out to be a value contract. The second contract is one area where a team can find out-performance, but the likelihood of Schultz out-performing this one is small. Worse, if he does, it will be just a single year of value which will simply inflate the next one into the heliosphere.

    Leaves me wondering at what stage of the player’s career might his actual performance (NOT: potential) be considered value-for-money.

  53. supernova says:

    speeds,

    Thanks that’s what I was looking for.

    I has read somewhere he was paid full bonus as well (pro-rated) for lockout year.

    Hit 3/4 of bonus last year which would have brought him to the $3 million range paid.

    By the way what do you do for a career?

  54. supernova says:

    Bruce McCurdy: I had exactly this thought yesterday, “what if the rules had been different & Oilers had signed Schultz for 3 years initially? Everybody would be saying, he’s reaching the prove-it segment of his deal but maximum contract was the cost of doing business of getting the guy in the first place.”

    The difference is that up ’til now Schultz has been paid — or not paid — based largely on bonuses that he achieved or didn’t. Now it’s all guaranteed money, PLUS it establishes the baseline for his future qualifying offer(s). Those are pretty big factors. There’s no longer a maximum (or a relevant minimum) to what he could have signed. Petry at an equivalent stage signed for less money total for a TWO-year deal because his negotiating power was zilch, and it turned out to be a value contract. The second contract is one area where a team can find out-performance, but the likelihood of Schultz out-performing this one is small. Worse, if he does, it will be just a single year of value which will simply inflate the next one into the heliosphere.

    Leaves me wondering at what stage of the player’s career might his actual performance (NOT: potential) be considered value-for-money.

    Bruce McCurdy,

    We typically ask a lot of the same questions.

    Sure I agree with your factors affecting Guaranteed and future QO.

    I don’t think we can use Petry as a guideline at all. We all thought he signed for undervalue at the time of his previous deal. Now he seems unwilling to sign unless he is overpaid.

    How does this help? Plus he is a different player than Schultz.

    In Schultz regard I think management never felt that they had the Hammer.

    They don’t want to piss off their biggest free agent signing maybe ever, he is also a lot harder to replace on a pure skill set base. He chose the oilers and lets face it, the oilers haven’t won anything in the court of perception in a long long time. To think this doesn’t factor in when your across the table from Meehan and Arnott is ridiculous.

    It is clear Meehan and Arnott feel that Schultz is a cut above a lot of players. If they got to FA once before they will also advise the client to use his leverage and possibly holdout because his team doesn’t have another D that could replace him.

    How bad would it look if the Oilers prized young D held out and they started the year like last year and then came running back to the table and signed this deal?

    What could the possible get of value for a massive contract problem player on the trade market?

    I don’t love the deal but in the art of negotiation this isn’t the typical draft and develop and hold RFA power type situation.

  55. wheatnoil says:

    supernova:
    speeds,

    Hit 3/4 of bonus last year which would have brought him to the $3 million range paid.

    The bonuses don’t quite work that way. There’s category “A” bonuses and category “B” bonuses. Category “A” bonuses are based on TOI, points, goals, assists, etc. The basic framework is laid out in the CBA and is available on capgeek but can be individually negotiated to higher (but not lower if I’m correct) milestones. The important piece on category “A” bonuses is that they can not exceed $850K. http://www.capgeek.com/faq/how-do-entry-level-contracts-work

    Category “B” bonuses
    Since Category “A” bonuses can’t exceed $850K, then the vast majority of bonuses is in category “B”. Theses bonuses are a little more difficult to determine. Ovechkin’s ELC was leaked a few years ago and that gives us a window into what it MAY look like, but we don’t really know what’s in Schultz’s contract. These bonuses are often given for rankings in major NHL awards (Hart, Norris, Calder, etc), making one of the all-star teams, being in the top 10 for defensive points, goals, assists, etc.. The contract can be worked out that Schultz would get the max Category “B” bonus if he hits just ONE of the criteria in his contract (as Ovechkin’s was) or he could get any amount under that. This is the part of Schultz’s contract that we have no idea for. Given how well he did in points in the lockout year and that he was in the top 10 among defense in that category that year, it’s not surprising he hit all his Category “B” bonuses for the 12/13 year. He may not have hit them last year or may have only got a partial bonus in Category “B”.

    Hence, I believe, why Speeds indicated he may have gotten paid $1.775 last year (base + Category “A”)… but as he said, we don’t know what he did in Category “B”.

  56. Bruce McCurdy says:

    supernova: I don’t love the deal but in the art of negotiation this isn’t the typical draft and develop and hold RFA power type situation.

    Good points. I certainly agree that this deal is better signed on August 29 than October 29, or even September 29. The dollar value alone (four significant digits) suggests that the haggling got hot and heavy.

  57. gcw_rocks says:

    you left out the money quote:

    “I think the analytics on players is very important; I disagree with the way it assesses our group a lot of times, but it leads us to ask different questions that we wouldn’t otherwise ask. At the end of the day I’m evaluating our team based on watching them 65 or 70 times a year and I think I have a pretty good idea where the value is.”

    The cynic in me worries about this quote. It’s giving lip service to analytics. Sure, they are important unless they disagree with what I see. Then I watch a few more games and go with what I see regardless. Schultz contract and the commentary around him would support this view.

  58. godot10 says:

    Bruce McCurdy:
    The difference is that up ’til now Schultz has been paid — or not paid — based largely on bonuses that he achieved or didn’t. Now it’s all guaranteed money, PLUS it establishes the baseline for his future qualifying offer(s). Those are pretty big factors. There’s no longer a maximum (or a relevant minimum) to what he could have signed. here.

    So assuming Jake Gardiner’s UFA year is $6 million. Then he is being paid guaranteed 4 x $3.5 for his RFA years.

    So Schultz is on a year-to-year guarantee of 4 x $3.65 to UFA status. The Oilers don’t have the risk of the long contract. The guarantee is only year to year.

    It is an overpay, but not a ridiculous overpay.

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

© Copyright - Lowetide.ca