Let's try this again: How much can Kessel expect to make?

Earlier this week we speculated about what numbers might be involved in the Phil Kessel negotiations. At the time it seemed that Peter Chiarelli's only remaining task was to either sign Kessel, or deal him for a defenseman.

It seems Chiarelli had other things on his mind, thus the flurry of activity on Thursday and Friday. Things have actually become much clearer for Kessel, as the Bruins are now dealing with a definite salary cap number.

Assuming Chiarelli doesn't have any more surprises up his sleeve, here's where it stands for Kessel:

Bruins cap space - $1.3 million
Chuck Kobasew's cap hit - $2.3 million
Possible salary for Kessel - $3.6 million

There it is, Phil... take it or leave it. Contracts larger than Kobasew's are unmoveable, so trading Chuckie is Chiarelli's last and best hope for clearing some cap space to sign Kessel.

Last Wednesday's post pegged Kessel's market value at roughly $3.4 million, based on similar contracts and his lack of leverage in the negotiations. This should really be a very simple decision for him. End this stalemate early, spend the rest of the summer shopping for Porsches and look forward to another year of burying Marc Savard passes.

How much is Kessel really worth?

While we wait for this impasse to clear, there are only two variables left in play:

1) How much does Kessel think he's worth?
2) Can the Bruins achieve that number by dumping salary to other teams?

I'll leave Eklund to work on that second item, but #1 is something worth thinking about.

Let's take a look at the historical precedent. Kessel is 21 and coming off a 36-goal campaign -- an unusual scenario for any team trying to construct a market-value offer. In fact, I could only find five similar cases in recent history:

Marian Hossa, 2001: He rang up 32 goals for Ottawa, but was unable to come to terms when his rookie contract expired. Hossa sat out until two weeks into the season, signing a 3-year deal worth $2.8 million per. After three more seasons of similar production, he signed with the Thrashers at $5m/yr and has been a mercenary ever since.

Simon Gagne, 2002: Gagne led the Flyers with 33 goals, and signed a two-year contract the following summer for $2.35m per. He continued to climb the scoring list and landed a $5.25m/yr deal several years later. Nagging injuries that began in his early 20s have blossomed to siderail his career, though he can still hold his own.

Dany Heatley, 2003: This is, of course, an unusal story. Heatley was one of the league's brightest stars when he scored 41 goals in his second season, and under the right circumstances would have turned out quite differently. However, his personal life and the lockout got in the way and he ended up being traded to Ottawa. His post-lockout salary was in the $4.5m/yr range, but that was two years removed from his breakout season.

Alex Semin, 2007: Another odd story, which involved the Capitals suing Semin's agent for breach of contract when he split for Russia after his rookie season. When he returned, the 23-year-old scored 38 goals and was rewarded with a 2-year contract at $4.6m per. He'll be looking to hit the jackpot after this season as an RFA.

Thomas Vanek, 2007: This is the nightmare scenario. Vanek was 5th in scoring during the final year of his rookie contract, and everything seemed on track until the Oilers signed him to an absurd 7-year, $50m ($7.14m/per) offer sheet. In the wake of other free agent departures, Sabres management had little choice but to absorb this monstrosity of a contract.

So, the historical record shows a little bit of everything: from the "prove it" contract (Gagne) to a regrettable trade (Heatley) to a cap-crushing offer sheet (Vanek). Oddly, the post-cap contracts seem to be less restrained than those which occurred in a free market.

Of the five, Kessel's situation is most similar to Gagne's. He's playing on a Cup-contending, big-market team alongside one of the best setup men in the league. He's got a media-friendly personal history. If he should stay in Boston, he'll be one of the top names in this year's Winter Classic. The table is set for him to have a huge season, one in which his value could eventually elevate into the $5-6m range or higher. But that is contingent upon his health and his production, and the "if" factor is a bit too much for him to score that kind of deal right away.

Using the examples of Gagne and Hossa, it would be reasonable for the Bruins to offer a 2-year deal with a $3m annual cap hit. However, Kessel's agent will likely start the discussion with David Krejci's recent $3.75m extension. Taking the average, we arrive at $6.8 million over 2 years, with a cap hit of $3.4m per. Given Kessel's lack of leverage, and the likelihood of a big payday down the road, he'd be wise to take that offer.

In order to arrive at this number, the Bruins will be required to move one or more of the following: Chuck Kobasew, Andrew Ference, Mark Stuart.

Bruins Cap Crunch Pt 2: Bergeron's Days Are Numbered

Since last Friday, when Part 1 of this article was written, we've learned of key details in the Tim Thomas contract:


The contract is a 4-year deal worth $20 million -- more time and money than had been previously reported in the press. Despite the fact that Thomas signed the contract before his 35th birthday, the league will consider him "age 35" at the time of signing. Therefore his cap number cannot change; buying him out will have no effect, a wrinkle that Peter Chiarelli appears to have miscalculated. Oh yeah, there's a no-movement clause in the first 3 years of Thomas' contract. The $5 million cap hit is written in stone.



Good News

As pointed out at Bobby Orr's Bastard, the cap hits for Tuukka Rask and Blake Wheeler will be greatly reduced next season. In a nutshell, the terms of the new CBA will be in effect and players currently on entry-level contracts (including Rask and Wheeler) will have a maximum cap hit of $875,000. This will save the Bruins about $4 million if both players are on the active roster.


Pink Slips


At this point it's clear that the Bruins will have to move some salaries in the offseason. The question is -- who stays and who goes?

For now, we can generally guess that the team will move forward with a Thomas/Rask tandem in net. It's given that Manny Fernandez and his $4.3 million cap hit will be long gone by training camp. Compared to this season's cap numbers, that makes the goaltending position more or less a wash. All things considered, it's also unlikely that the blueliners' combined cap hit will be much different from one season to the next (unless Matt Hunwick hits the jackpot).

That brings us to the forwards.


PJ Axelsson will surely not be brought back at $1.85 million; it's up to him and his agent whether they want to re-sign for significantly less. If not, Axelsson could be replaced by Vladimir Sobotka for only $750k. The net balance of this situation should be a $1m advantage for Boston.


After that, the decisions start to get tougher. Cap casualties could include Chuck Kobasew ($2.3m), Marco Sturm ($3.5m) or Michael Ryder ($4m), though all of these would come at a significant cost to the team's forward depth. Of course, they would also need to be replaced by a bargain-basement player, leaving the Bruins shallower and damaging their chemistry.


A more emotionally-charged option would be to trade Patrice Bergeron. At $4.7 million, Bergeron made roughly the same salary this season as Saku Koivu, Alex Semin and Eric Staal. With all due respect to Bergeron's brave battle against concussion problems, he's being paid too much to score only 7 goals and to be one of only three regular forwards without a + rating.


The cost of keeping Bergeron would be more than meets the eye. Not only would it affect contract negotiations for the team's younger players (Kessel, Lucic and Krecji), but it would threaten the Bruins' chances of re-signing Marc Savard in two years. It's only speculation at this stage, but this pundit would be shocked to see Bergeron in a Bruins uniform at training camp.

How do they do it?

Only two teams in the league have managed to navigate these issues year-after-year, without seeing a significant downturn in the quality of their roster. Detroit and New Jersey have seen potential dynasties crumble in Tampa, Pittsburgh, Boston, Anaheim, Dallas and Colorado... and they keep plugging along, winning division titles and staying in the Cup race despite significant roster turnover. There are lessons to be learned from them:

1) Drafting, developing and trading new players is key to suriving turnover. Trading Petteri Nokelainen and Matt Lashoff in return for veterans made sense for this season's playoff run -- but the cost to the organization's depth is not insignificant.

2) If at all possible, it's vital to work "hometown discounts" into new contracts. Clearly this was not the case with Thomas, but Chiarelli needs to convince players like Kessel and Wheeler that playing for the Bruins is worth a slight pay cut. The Red Wings have been masterful at this game.

3) Today's hero is tomorrow's goat. The biggest risk in the Thomas extension is that he'll turn out to be the next Byron Dafoe. Signing players to long-term, high-dollar contracts is not an advisable approach to franchise-building.


So the Bruins' approach should boil down to a few simple principles:


- Ditch players like Bergeron and Axelsson who are not playing to their pay level. If possible, trade them for picks or prospects who will restock Providence when the P-Bruins are called up.

- Lock up cornerstone players like Lucic and Krejci to short, incentive-laden contracts that will keep them in Boston without removing accountability.

- Exploit Thomas' contract by working Rask into the lineup a few games at a time. He has a minimum of 3 seasons to work on his game behind a possible Vezina winner.

And pray that the cap doesn't shrink too much.

The Bruins' Slowly-Developing Cap Crunch

First, let's take a moment to revel in some good news:

- The Bruins won their 50th game of the season for the first time since 1993.

- The magic number for clinching the Eastern Conference is now 1.

- For the next 3 years (potentially), we'll have a goaltending duo of Thomas/Rask. A Vezina-potential veteran and a Calder-potential rookie on the same team? Good grief.

Now, the unsettling part. Boston.com reports that the Bruins signed Thomas to a 3-year, $5.2 million deal. While this might not even break the top 10 in goalie salaries next year, it is still Brodeur money and puts the team in a difficult cap situation moving forward.

Getting too close to the ceiling

The root of the problem is that the Bruins are a bit too young for their own good -- six key players under 25 (Kessel, Krejci, Lucic, Hunwick and Stuart) are up for contract renewal in the next two years and all but Stuart will be looking for a significant raise. But the Bruins are already squeezed against the cap ceiling, so extending these players' contracts will involve trimming salary in other parts of the roster. This is where a team can go from elite to mediocre in a hurry.

Next season GM Peter Chiarelli will need to re-sign Kessel, Krejci and Hunwick as restricted free agents (meaning they are free to entertain offers from other teams, but the Bruins will have the right to match). Their current salaries combine for a $3.8m cap hit; after renewal that number will likely be closer to $9m.

Trimming fat

There is a bit of relief on the horizon -- Glen Murray's $1.4m buyout could expire this summer, giving Boston extra breathing room [edit: Murray's cap hit is in the appeals process. If he wins, the $1.4m comes off the books; if the Bruins win, it remains until the end of next season. Perverse, isn't it? Thanks to the Bastahd for pointing this out]. Also, veteran Shane Hnidy will presumably be replaced by AHL standout Johnny Boychuck, a net cap relief of $250k. It's a safe bet that P.J. Axelsson will not be renewed at $1.8m, but there's no clear answer as to who will take his place (the Bruins could save about $1m if they can find a bargain). Also, Manny Fernandez is clearly done in the organization so his $4.3m will be a major relief. Altogether, Chiarelli will be working with between $5.5m and $6.9m.

$5-7 million in cap space... roughly $5 million in new salary. You can see the problem developing.

But wait... there's more!

As if this weren't already a fairly distressing situation, a similar crunch will develop in summer 2010. Lucic will be seeking a dramatic upgrade from his current $850k; it's hard to imagine the Bruins retaining him for less than Michael Ryder's $4m.

Then there's Blake Wheeler, who is currently making $2.8m and is eligible for arbitration if the team can't come to terms. Given his outstanding rookie campaign, it's also quite possible he will be making something like $4m in his new contract. Don't forget Stuart, who will likely hold steady at $1.3m, and Marc Savard will hit the free agent market at the completion of his $5m deal.

Oh yeah... and that's the summer that Rask will be ready to ask for a starting-goalie salary.

Sounds a little bleak, doesn't it? There are options on the table for Boston to keep the ship steady through all these changes, but none of them will be easy to swallow. Chiarelli is going to be faced with some tough decisions; check back tomorrow for details.

Memo to Minnesota: Trade Gaborik. Now.

Word on the street is that the Wild are still far apart in negotiations with semi-star forward Marian Gaborik. According to reports out of training camp, the Wild have offered him a beefy $8.5 million contract, a number matched only by Sidney Crosby, Evgeni Malkin, and Alex Ovechkin. Somehow, Gaborik's agent still feels there is something left to discuss, so the parties remain at an impasse.

(This is where I feel obligated to point out that "salary creep" has hardly even slowed down in the Cap Era. Eric Staal's $8.25m contract set the bar too high for sub-100-point players.)

If I'm running the Wild, or have a vested interest in their success, I'm spending as much time shopping Gaborik right now as I am flying to Slovakia to meet with his people. Here are three good reasons why:

1) The contract negotiations have been very public and are one ill-advised comment away from becoming nasty. We have all seen this happen before and it never turns out well, either for the player or the team. Plus, Gaborik's agent brought up Ovechkin's salary as an indicator of what Gaborik should be looking for. Red flags all over the place on this one.

2) Even if he's signed, Gaborik has never quite bloomed into a true superstar. He's a solid 40-goal scorer, which is fine but not unique. He also doesn't play particularly strong defense, which makes him much less useful. Mike Gartner was also a smooth skater who was good for 40 goals, but we all know what really distinguished him -- playing over 1,400 games and never bringing home any hardware to show for it. Gaborik is on essentially the same career arc.

3) It appears he's at the peak of his career, so his trade value is at its max right now. At age 26, he has perhaps 3-5 more years of incremental improvement before he starts to hit the veteran skids... perhaps fewer considering his injury history. While he's in the "money" phase of his career, it's an ideal time to move him and begin a search for a true franchise player. There's always a sucker team out there desperate to make a dramatic move, so the Wild could get some decent return on Gaborik before it's too late.

In the new, fiscally responsible NHL a guy like Gaborik should be pulling about $7 million per season. That would allow the Wild to go out and find him some linemates more talented than Mikko Koivu and Andrew Brunette, and everyone would go home happy. But the reality is that Gaborik will hold out for Ovechkin money, and make a PR mess if he doesn't get it. And at the end of the day, the Wild will be a lesser team if they build around a guy who plays a one-dimensional game -- and still scores less than 10 other players in any given season.

Move him now, before it's too late.