What’s taking Johnny Gaudreau’s contract so long?

Every passing day we go without a Johnny Gaudreau contract announcement, the more nervous Calgary Flames fans get. Not only is Gaudreau one of the most exciting players we’ve seen in recent Flames history, he’s also crucial for the team’s desired return to prominence. So why hasn’t a deal been reached yet? There are some pretty compelling answers to that question, but that likely doesn’t make you feel better as a fan.

News has been hard to come by on the Gaudreau front in recent weeks. Elliotte Friedman reported earlier this month Gaudreau’s desire to put a moratorium on contract talks during the upcoming World Cup of Hockey, but I sincerely doubt that’s a hard and fast rule.

The World Cup actually helps Calgary out in this case, because even if a deal isn’t reached until well into September, Gaudreau will still have a good chunk of high level hockey under his belt already. That should help mitigate the effect of missing any of training camp, so I don’t think there is as much urgency to get this deal signed as there would be in regular years. That said, we’d all like to see a new deal put to bed, so what has held things up?

Contract length

From what I’m told, this is the biggest holdup to getting a deal done. The Flames would like to sign Gaudreau to a long term, seven or eight year contract in the same mould as Sean Monahan’s earlier this month. The problem is finding the right number for a long term deal to come in at. That’s if there’s even a long term deal in the cards. Let’s delve into that a little further.

For Calgary, a long term deal makes the most sense; Gaudreau is a franchise player and signing him to a shorter, bridge deal doesn’t really help the team much at all. I compare Gaudreau’s situation to what we saw a few years ago with PK Subban in Montreal.

Not able to come to a long term agreement, the Habs and Subban agreed to a two year deal in January 2013 as that year’s shortened campaign was getting going. While the cap hit was extremely manageable over the two year term, Subban grossly out-performed his contract and signed an eight year, $72 million pact a couple years later. Had Montreal signed Subban long term when they had the chance, his cap hit would have been significantly lower and maybe he’s still be playing there.

While it’s not a perfect comparison for Gaudreau, the moral of the story is clear. Signing franchise players to bridge deals rarely ever works. These are elite players for a reason and are extremely likely to outperform short term, more affordable deals. The Flames would much rather have Gaudreau at, say, $7.5 million now than wait a few years and be forced to pay him $9.5 million. As such, getting him signed long term now really does make the most sense.

The problem is, Gaudreau’s camp is well aware of this, too, because there’s plenty of reason to suggest a shorter term deal is better for the player in the long run. If Gaudreau signs, say, a three year deal and hits the 75-85 point range three times, then yeah, his case for a much bigger cap number is hard to argue. That’s where the finagling on a long term deal becomes the most complicated.

Because Gaudreau’s camp knows the benefit of a shorter term deal, they can leverage that into talks surrounding a longer term pact. To buy years of unrestricted free agency and to potentially lose the chance to cash in huge on a third contract, the AAV for a long term deal is going to have to go up incrementally for each additional year.

Much was the same with Monahan, in fact. The Flames and Monahan agreed on a seven year deal at $6.375 million per season, but as we wrote last week, there was a real back and forth about adding one extra year to get to the max term. In the end, the two sides settled on seven as an eighth year likely would have pushed Monahan’s AAV closer to $7 million.

If you extrapolate that to Gaudreau, things start to become even more clear. Gaudreau’s counting numbers are superior to Monahan’s, as is his underlying impact. Plotting Monahan’s WOWY in his two years playing extensively with Gaudreau will tell that story.

Screen Shot 2016-08-29 at 3.49.17 PM

Monahan’s production dropped dramatically this past season when not on the ice with Gaudreau while his offensive zone time drops without him in both seasons. Gaudreau, on the other hand, doesn’t suffer without his typical linemate nearly as much.

Screen Shot 2016-08-29 at 3.56.34 PM

From looking at those two tables, a few things are clear. First off, both players are better when playing with one another. But it’s also clear Gaudreau is able to have more of an impact when playing apart than Monahan is. When you add in Gaudreau’s advantage in overall point production, you can understand why his camp is looking for more than what Monahan ended up getting.

To conclude this lengthy portion of the article, it’s pretty clear to me Gaudreau’s AAV is always going to be higher than Monahan’s over the same contract term. That’s why finalizing a seven or eight year deal has been difficult to this point and may continue to be. It’s also why I won’t be surprised if this ends up being a shorter term when the deal is finalized.

Lack of comparable deals

Finding a market for Monahan was relatively easy after deals elsewhere for Mark Scheifele, Aleksander Barkov, and Nathan MacKinnon were agreed upon. Things aren’t as simple in Gaudreau’s case because his is a rather unique situation.

How many 5’9 former fourth round picks light the league on fire like Gaudreau has coming out of college? It doesn’t happen very often and it makes finding a market for him slightly more difficult. While there are some comparable contracts we can look at, none of them are as ironclad as the ones we saw in Monahan’s situation.

The best, and most recent, comparable deal remains Vladimir Tarasenko’s in St. Louis. I think we’re all pretty familiar with Tarasenko’s deal at this point, but the Blues sniper signed an eight year, $60 million extension last summer to give him a cap hit of $7.5 million. While Gaudreau’s numbers are stronger than Tarasenko’s were in his first two years, this still isn’t a perfect comparison.

First off, Tarasenko signed his deal after playing three years on his entry level deal. Because Gaudreau was signed late in the season out of Boston College, he only played two years on his ELC before being ready for an extension. Tarasenko has also played on a much deeper, much better team in his three NHL years, which can work for and against Gaudreau when comparing their productivity.

As we continue the difficult task of building a market for Gaudreau, I’ve added Taylor Hall and Patrick Kane to the conversation. Both were very productive in their first two NHL years and both signed lucrative second contracts as a result. Below is a comparison of all the players in this section and how they fared in their first two full NHL seasons.

Screen Shot 2016-08-29 at 4.29.29 PM

Gaudreau is the most productive of the bunch, even edging Kane by a little bit. Once again, though, the contracts are tough to compare because of when they were signed. It’s been almost seven years since Kane signed his first big extension while Hall’s second deal was signed four years ago now. The economics of the NHL have changed dramatically since both of those deals.

Let’s pretend for a second the above chart is what both sides are looking at, too. Because the economic climate has changed over the last number of years, it’s all guess work as to how Gaudreau’s worth would compare to deals signed four and seven years ago. Because we’re not talking about an exact science or anything close to it, this exercise has likely been very difficult behind closed doors.

Future uncertainty

This is an issue that has been raised by some people in the hockey community, but not necessarily an issue I put a ton of stock into. Because it has been discussed, though, it’s worth putting in this article. There is a thought the Flames are a little wary of Gaudreau’s longevity, and hence are somewhat wary of committing big money and big term.

I’ll play devil’s advocate here for a second and frame the argument. Because Gaudreau is a smaller player, some wonder if he’ll be able to consistently stand up to the physical rigours of an NHL season. Because of that uncertainty, perhaps Calgary would like a larger body of work before signing him to one of the biggest contracts in team history. I guess I can squint to see that logic, but I don’t agree with it.

Gaudreau has been nothing but durable since arriving in the NHL. Of the 176 games he’s been eligible to play in, regular season and playoffs, Gaudreau has appeared in 171. Most of those five games missed fall under the “coaching decision” category, so we’re talking about an extremely durable player thus far. The same can be said about his USHL and NCAA tenures, too. Gaudreau just doesn’t miss very many games.

The whole “smaller guys get hurt more” theory is largely a misnomer. The aforementioned Kane has been one of the league’s most durable players since entering the league in 2007, too. Of his nine NHL seasons, he’s only had two where he’s missed double digits in games and he’s missed two or fewer games in six seasons.

Gaudreau is going to run into an injury or two at some point because every player does. To suggest his stature makes him anymore susceptible to that happening is false, though. If and when the Flames sign Gaudreau to his extension, it should be done assuming he’ll be as durable as vast majority of NHL players.

  • Craig

    Sign him, I think it’s going to be AAV of 7-7.5 and that’s ok. I just hope we buy some UFA years.

    He’s the reason we watch and that’s a compelling argument on his side.

    Just pls sign him so I can cheer him and Monny on at the WC without worrying about a hold out.

    This situation kind of reminds me of when everyone was thinking he wouldn’t sign after his Junior college year and everyone worried then he ended up doing it.

  • Kevin R

    Even if we gave him 8.0 mill for 7 years, I would cringe but not be upset. This kid is our future Iginla. Face of the franchise. When Oilers play Flames, pictures of McDavid & Gaudreau will used to promote the game. I would even be satisfied with a 6 year $45 mill deal, but prefer at least a 7 year deal like Monahan.

  • Stan

    Good article Pat. I think we are all pretty tired of talking about this, but the debate will continue until pen meets paper.

    I had a bit of food for thought regarding the article.

    RE: “From looking at those two tables, a few things are clear. First off, both players (Gaudreau and Monahan) are better when playing with one another. But it’s also clear Gaudreau is able to have more of an impact when playing apart than Monahan is.”

    While I agree that Gaudreau has more of an offensive impact when playing apart then Monahan does, I feel like it is worth pointing out that when Gaudreau is apart from Monahan, he has likely been playing with one of Bennett or Backlund as his center. This is in contrast to Monahan, who likely hasn’t as good of linemates (Jones, Bouma, Jooris, etc..). Something to maybe look into a bit more.

    RE: The idea that Gaudreau’s stature makes him less durable. In my opinion, it may likely be the exact opposite. I think Gaudreau’s stature allows him to be so quick, agile, and evasive. Its pretty rare to see Johnny get hit clean, he is just so dam elusive and his hockey sense is too high. I would therefore argue the exact opposite is true – his stature makes him more durable.

  • Hockeyfan

    I would like a 4 to 6 year for JG at no more than 6.8 per. Get this done Tre or make a trade. Don’t start the year with this kid holding out, nothing good can come of that.

    • Macindoc

      4 years: only 6 per since no UFA years bought up

      5 years: no way in H-E-double hockey sticks (total capitulation by the club in terms of control, worst possible signing) unless it’s less than 5 per

      6 years: for a deal that only includes 1 UFA year, the Flames could probably live with 6.5 per for each of 5 RFA years (a little less because the term is mostly RFA years and is not to the club’s advantage) and 8.5 for the UFA year, so 6.8 would be one that the club would possibly sign, but Tre would probably have to hold his nose while doing so.

      Can’t believe what I hear is being said on The Fan 960, rumour has it they are saying he is UFA in 4 years, but according to the CBA, this is clearly not correct. Has his agent hired them or something? The extra RFA year will have a huge impact on the value of this contract, it’s likely to be about a 1.5-2M difference.

  • Macindoc

    Closest comparable is still Tarasenko, who scored fewer PPG in his 1st NHL season than Gaudreau, but slightly more PPG and 23 more goals in his final 2 pre-extension seasons. Note that Terasenko’s numbers between his 2nd and 3rd seasons were almost identical, indicating that he had reached his full potential by his 2nd season, which may have had to do with playing a number of seasons in the KHL prior to coming to the NHL. I believe that as a result of his 3 years at BC, Gaudreau similarly reached his full potential in his 2nd season, and I expect that his numbers in his 3rd season will be similar to those in his 2nd, as happened with Tarasenko (younger superstars coming into the league right after being drafted at 18 take longer to develop because they still have a lot of growth and physical development remaining at that age). So you have Tarasenko’s much higher goal totals and equal PPG in his 2 pre-contract years vs. Gaudrea’s higher PPG in his 1st season and the question about whether he still has some room to grow (figuratively) before reaching his potential.

    Deconstructing Tarasenko’s deal, the best comparable is Voracek, whose 8.25M/yr UFA contract kicks in this year (all 3 had the same PPG this past year). So if Tarasenko also got 8.25M for each UFA year, that means he got 27M for his 4 RFA years, or 6.75M/yr. Let’s give Johnny a bit more for his potential remaining room before hitting his ceiling (keeping in mind that Tarasenko has shown more pure goal scoring ability), perhaps an extra 250K/yr for each of Johnny’s RFA and UFA years. So 7M/yr X 5 RFA years + 8.5M/yr X 3 UFA years would be 60.5M for 8 years AAV 7.5625M, and that is more than generous. Any more is insane.

    Also keep in mind that the only wingers making more than AAV 7.5625M are Kane (3 Cups, Calder, Conn Smythe, Art Ross, Hart), Ovechkin (Calder, Hart X3, Art Ross, and the 5th fastest player in history to 500 goals), Perry (Cup, Rocket Richard, Hart), Voracek (on whose deal I am basing this calculation), and Nash (Rocket Richard, and grossly overpaid), and all of them are on purely UFA deals. And only Kane, Ovechkin and Perry make more than the 8.5M/yr I am proposing for the UFA years.

    If it’s a bridge deal, I really can’t see any value in it for the Flames at more than 6M/yr, because as a club you’re not putting in any extra if you’re not buying up UFA years. And no matter what, you’re not signing Johnny for 5 years under any circumstances.

  • McRib

    Only three or four teams even considered drafting Johnny Gaudreau back in 2011 (Boston was the only other team that would have taken him higher than the seventh round), now he is grinding the Flames for more than $7-7.5+ Million a season before he even turns 24 years old, I didn’t see this coming at all in the slightest to be honest.

    Gaudreau’s numbers at the same point are similar to Patrick Kane, but Kane was more than two full years younger 159-162 Games into his career. I mean Johnny Gaudreau is only one year from entering his prime, whereas Kane was still three years away at the same point and at the same age had already won a Cup signing for a reasonable $6.3 Million per on his second contract. Gaudreau is the man, but it’s honestly crazy that someone who up until four or five years ago didn’t even know if he would ever play a game in the NHL is now not satisfied with a deal in the range of 40-45 Million over six years, which would mean he would become an UFA at what 31 years old so he could then sign for another massive $50+ million deal. I mean $40+ Million isn’t enough before you turn 31 (not to mention the $3.5+ Million he has already earned)…. That’s insane.

    This whole process has blown me away. I hope he still wants to be in Calgary, but part of me is questioning that at this point, I never thought I would say that. I mean I honestly thought Monahan was going to be the harder sign, considering he was a top pick and has a big name agent (although his agent is the biggest in the game because he is widely respected).

    • Burnward

      It’s just business. No real rush on either side at the moment.

      Holding for an extra couple hundred thou or so makes sense for both parties.

      It’ll get done at a fair price.

      • McRib

        “It’ll get done at a fair price”

        This is definitely the most drawn out RFA negotiation I can remember (outside of Ryan Johansen who is no longer with Columbus).

        Honestly a fair price for me would have been $7-7.5 Million for Six Years, but holding out for a couple extra hundred thousand when you are being offered $40-45 Million makes absolutely zero sense to me (as a 29 year old with a top University buisness degree and now an electrician trade who has never made more than $64,000, I can’t fathom having to spend this long negotiating over $45+ Million before you are 31. Not bitter though that since graduating University I have now experienced my second major recession in less than 10 years… Lol).

        Who knows maybe the Flames are lower than we think, time will tell. One thing is for certain if he only signs for three or four years we are going to be in cap hell down the road and will we have two Stanely Cups when he starts asking for Kane, Toews money at 26-27… I can only hope!!!

        • Macindoc

          Way too much for 6 years considering only one is UFA. You pay the higher price to buy up UFA years

          Edit: the article should not compare Gaudreau with Kane or Hall, who had their 1st NHL years straight out of the draft at age 18, whereas Gaudreau had 3 years of college post-draft and entered the NHL (excluding his one regular season game in his 1st season) at age 21. And starting the NHL at a later age than Kane or Hall, he should reach his peak earlier in his career (in terms of seasons played) than they did, so Tarasenko is really the only comparable, and he plateaued in his 2nd season, which I suspect will be a similar situation to Gaudreau.

    • Greatsave

      I get that we fans want to see Gaudreau locked up until the day when he’s no longer the player he once was (at which point we’ll bitch and moan about paying him X million dollars, but I digress). But we don’t know nearly enough about the numbers on the actual negotiation table to be knocking either party for “not just getting it done”.

      Statements like “Treliving should just offer 7.5m x 8 (or 8m x 8 or whatever) and get it done” and “Gaudreau should just sign for $45m over 6 and get it over with” are getting tiresome for me. How do you know Treliving hasn’t offered that? How do you know what Gaudreau’s camp is asking for? Don’t knock the guy and imply he’s greedy and that he should be grateful for playing in the NHL when nobody knows what dollar figure is being asked.

      On another note, 6 years would take Gaudreau to UFA the summer he turns 29, not 31.

      On yet another note, Kane’s $6.3m in 2010 is $8m+ in today’s cap.

    • Greatsave

      I get that we fans want to see Gaudreau locked up until the day when he’s no longer the player he once was (at which point we’ll bitch and moan about paying him X million dollars, but I digress). But we don’t know nearly enough about the numbers on the actual negotiation table to be knocking either party for “not just getting it done”.

      Statements like “Treliving should just offer 7.5m x 8 (or 8m x 8 or whatever) and get it done” and “Gaudreau should just sign for $45m over 6 and get it over with” or “the Flames should’ve locked them up a year ago” are getting tiresome for me. People seem to forget that this is real life and not a video game: there are multiple competing interests involved in negotiations. How do you know Treliving hasn’t offered 8m? How do you know what Gaudreau’s camp is asking for? Don’t knock the guy and imply he’s greedy and that he should be grateful for playing in the NHL when nobody knows what dollar figure is being asked.

      On another note, 6 years would take Gaudreau to UFA the summer he turns 29, not 31.

      On yet another note, Kane’s $6.3m in 2010 is $8m+ in today’s cap.

    • Greatsave

      I get that we fans want to see Gaudreau locked up until the day when he’s no longer the player he once was (at which point we’ll bitch and moan about paying him X million dollars, but I digress). But we don’t know nearly enough about the numbers on the actual negotiation table to be knocking either party for “not just getting it done”.

      Statements like “Treliving should just offer 7.5m x 8 (or 8m x 8 or whatever) and get it done” and “Gaudreau should just sign for $45m over 6 and get it over with” or “the Flames should’ve locked them up a year ago” are getting tiresome for me. People seem to forget that this is real life and not a video game: there are multiple competing interests involved in negotiations. How do you know Treliving hasn’t offered 8m? How do you know what Gaudreau’s camp is asking for? Don’t knock the guy and imply he’s greedy and that he should be grateful for playing in the NHL when nobody knows what dollar figure is being asked.

      On another note, 6 years would take Gaudreau to UFA the summer he turns 29, not 31.

      On yet another note, Kane’s $6.3m in 2010 is $8m+ in today’s cap.

    • Greatsave

      I get that we fans want to see Gaudreau locked up until the day when he’s no longer the player he once was (at which point we’ll complain about paying him X million dollars, but I digress). But we don’t know nearly enough about the numbers on the actual negotiation table to be knocking either party for “not just getting it done”.

      Statements like “Treliving should just offer 7.5m x 8 (or 8m x 8 or whatever) and get it done” and “Gaudreau should just sign for $45m over 6 and get it over with” or “the Flames should’ve locked them up a year ago” are getting tiresome for me. People seem to forget that this is real life and not a video game: there are multiple competing interests involved in negotiations. How do you know Treliving hasn’t offered 8m? How do you know what Gaudreau’s camp is asking for? Don’t knock the guy and imply he’s greedy and that he should be grateful for playing in the NHL when nobody knows what dollar figure is being asked.

      On another note, 6 years would take Gaudreau to UFA the summer he turns 29, not 31.

      On yet another note, Kane’s $6.3m in 2010 is $8m+ in today’s cap.

  • OKG

    This is what Treliving gets for not inking an extension a full calendar year ago. Could have had Johnny for 6.5 x 8Y but they got zealous thinking he would regress.

    • Baalzamon

      Or maybe the Flames wanted to do so, but the players wanted to wait a year because they knew there was a good chance their market value would increase.

      In other words: maybe Monahan and Gaudreau (and their agents) are actually intelligent.

  • freethe flames

    Pat’s perspective that this is beginning to feel like the PK situation is a good take. If it takes signing Johnny for the short term before signing him long term then so be it. What I don’t want to see is us signing him long term and then trading him away for a lesser return like the Habs did with Subban.

    • Burnward

      Everybody relax.

      Remember how he was going to stiff us out of college too?

      There’s plenty of high quality, unsigned RFA’s all around the league. Ristolainen, Strome, Nichushkin, Rakell, Trouba, Lindholm…all unsigned.

      Business is sometimes just that.

      • Kevin R

        You forget the biggest one in Kucherov.

        Yeah you are right, what looks like insanity grinding for millions 98% of us can’t even fathom is normal course for the 2% that can.
        I think like Macindoc, if they announce Johnny’s contract at 8 years for $64mill I will cringe & think that’s insane. But I think Gaudreau will be as prominent as a Kane or Toews or Subban or Kopitar are to their respective clubs in a couple of years. If he winds having a 100 point season this up coming year, 8.0 mill will look like a bargain.

        I would be ecstatic to sees matching Tarasenko deal. Give the kid the money, he’s that good.

      • freethe flames

        I’m actually quite relaxed but discussing alternatives is not bad Karma. I also expect that the fan bases in most of the other cities are also wondering what is happening with their players. Each team also has different cap issues, team dynamics and organizational depth to deal with so there will be different issues for them.

  • Macindoc

    New article by Travis Yost on TSN is projecting JG to drop to 51st in league scoring this season, based on possession numbers and predicted regression.

    McDavid is predicted to finish first in scoring, Wheeler is 2nd and Scheifele 3rd in Yost’s predictions. Top Flame is Frolik at 35th. Monahan is 107th. With Bennett at #141 and Brouwer at #224, one wonders where the Flames’ scoring is supposed to come from this season. I guess it must be time to start getting ready for the draft lottery.

    Funny thing is that Yost comments that his model “passes the sniff test”.

    Obviously some people aren’t as convinced of our young stars’ potential ceiling as most of the posters here.

    Maybe the Flames should have Yost contact JG’s agent to share his perspective on Johnny’s expected numbers.

    • Byron Bader

      Love Yost but there’s no way any of those things are happening besides maybe the mcdavid piece. Wheeler 2nd and scheifele 3rd and Frolik finishing ahead of gaudreau. Nope.

      • Macindoc

        Couldn’t agree more. Just found it interesting that Yost didn’t seem to think there was anything major awry with his scoring prediction algorithm, saying that its results “passed the sniff test”. IMO, a better description of his chart is that at least with relation to the Flames, it smells.

    • That’s not quite what Yost’s article says.

      His model, which is admittedly rudimentary, spits out a ranking of even strength points per 60. Which is a rate stat, not a total stat. So it doesn’t say Gaudreau will finish 51st in scoring, it says he will have the 51st ESP/60 rate (of 1.91) which is within range of his 2 year career norm (2.01).

      Even If Gaudreau scores at 1.91/60, he’ll likely lead the team in points…because he’ll get a ton of premium ice time at both 5on5 and the PP.

      Yost also notes it: “it’s worth pointing out that the model is a bit harsh to top-flight scorers and a bit kind to poor scorers.”

      • Macindoc

        Although I agree with you that this is the model on which Yost’s projections are based, here is his actual claim:

        “The uniqueness of these two measurements (avoiding collinearity) allows us to consider the possibility of using both variables to forecast future scoring, as opposed to simply one measurement versus the other. And by using a combination of the two variables, our model can forecast with a higher level of accuracy.
        As for the results: I think the list checks out. Here’s a quick forecasted top-20 scorers using the above criteria.”

        Not projected 5-on-5 scoring/60. Forecasted top-20 scorers, in Yost’s own words. Perhaps his conclusion is a bit over-generalized, and perhaps I am misinterpreting his intent. Yost goes on to explain the “slight harshness” toward talented scorers as reflecting a likely season to season fluctuation in such players’ point totals. In other words, regression. This would suggest that the Flames’ top scorers’ production in the past 2 seasons would be unsustainable. So, how is it that a model can predict that a team that has been essentially in the top 1/3 of the league in scoring in the past 2 years would not have an even-strength scorer in the top 34 in the league? The last time I checked, the Flames had the worst PP success rate in the league, so if the team trails most of the league in 5-on-5 scoring and also trails the entire league in PP scoring, how can that team be in the top 8-12 in scoring two years running? This is where statistical models sometimes fall apart, because they can never take into account all of the pertinent variables (4-on-4 and 3-on-3 scoring, for example). To be fair, I do recognize that the numbers could be a bit skewed if (like the Flames) a team spent more time on the PP than on the PK.

        Anyway, my original post was intended to be a bit of a tongue in cheek comment about the contrast between the perceived excessively high value of Gaudreau versus his rather pedestrian advanced stats, as well as the disconnect that happens at times between advanced stats and real world results, so maybe I am being a bit harsh toward Yost.

  • #97Train/McDavidCopperfield

    Can’t see them not getting a deal done but obviously something is holding it up. None of us can know and only speculate. Not as close as they should be this should have been done already. No hometown discount here though. Maybe he wants to hit free agency sooner than later. Not saying he wouldn’t resign but if he can make 9.5 in 3 years why wouldn’t he wait for a shorter deal.

  • piscera.infada

    Macindoc wrote:

    Not projected 5-on-5 scoring/60. Forecasted top-20 scorers, in Yost’s own words.

    Actually, Yost’s own words:

    As for the results: I think the list checks out. Here’s a quick forecasted top-20 scorers using the above criteria.

    “The above criteria”? 5 on 5 even-strength points/60. Exactly as Kent stated above.