nah they got Ottinger he would lead them into the playoffs as in comparison with Campbell yeah its night and day whose playing better rn

So thats just silly. As in general without McDavid Oilers would be hanging with CBJ and Ottawa rn. Without Robertson Dallas makes playoffs via WC1 or 3rd spot as Ottinger has been playing way better than Campbell and would help Dallas

That's terrible logic. It's like saying Gabriel Vilardi deserves to be a hart finalist because the kings would go from WC2 to out of a playoff spot without him.

Yzerman will sign him in 2027 when Robertson becomes a UFA. Robertson and his family moved to Northville, Michigan, at the age of 10 to increase his opportunities for ice hockey. He played for the Little Caesars and Detroit Kings minor ice hockey teams in Michigan. He will go back to his hometown to play with Dylan Larkin, who he is friends with.

Yzerman will then clone himself and make a line of

Robertson-Larkin-Yzerman lul

As Yzerman probs be smart enough to one day pull it off

Dvorsky comparable? Talking about it with someone?

2-way playmaking C

So think of all the solid 2-way c's in the NHL he can maybe become one of em

Ok small rant for me this morning

I once again read something that triggers me, and now it's coming from nothing less than Pierre Lebrun : https://theathletic.com/3958531/2022/12/02/nhl-restricted-free-agents-2022-23/

Lebrun claims that there's something like a "Bruins-like culture" where "players sacrifice a bit on the cap in order to build as deep a contender as possible over time"

Take this as granted : players NEVER sacrifice money

If they opt for a long term deal, it's for financial security (like if they regress or if they get injured).

If this long term deal turns out as a bargain (like for the Marchand-Bergeron-Pasternak line), it's NOT because players decided to sacrifice money at the time of the signature but simply because they outplayed their contract.

At best, you can say that these players with a bargain deal got fleeced, but it's certainly not because they decided to sacrifice money.

In short, there's 2 golden rules for players in my book:

Players play to win - you can't expect them to help you tanking
Players sign for the most money possible depending on the degree of risk they want

Have a good weekend

Never is pretty strong considering crosby signed for 8.7m. but the majority of the time i agree with you, players are not going to sacrifice that much money to win. winning isn't guaranteed. take boston for example...all those players who supposedly "sacrificed money" haven't won anything yet.

Sabres need to lock up Cozens to an 8-year contract RIGHT NOW.

Crosby took up 17.3% of the cap which is more than McDavid

Who actually won the Mantha vrana trade.

Actually 14.5 which is over 2% less than Mcdavid but yes go on.

You know you can go on the site and look right? The first contract he signed was 8.7 Million which was 17.3%

Delete

Oh yea i read things, and the one he is on now is 14.5, which is more important. He bridged and then after a couple very good years took less a chunk less money. Comparables are Joe Thortons 3 year bridge deal in 07 and Scott Gomez's 7 year deal with the rangers

Wish I pressed delete or just not of got involved. Just saw what he said

It's all good, this conversation is finished anyway.

Players may take small discounts ( like Bergeron and Krejci having low cap hits but a bunch of performance bonuses ) or taking like 500k less than they could get but no player will decide to take more than like 750k less on a 8 year deal, that’s money that accumulates quickly when you add up the term

You’re both right, Crosby signed a 5 year deal worth 8.7 which was 17.3 of cap at the time, then Crosby signed a 12 year deal worth 8.7 which was 14.5 of the cap at the time, you’re simply looking at different 8.7 AAV Crosby deals

Why are you on a high horse today? Relax, you were wrong. Use your words better next time

I wasn't i was pointing up the fact that crosby signed again for 8.7m and took a 2m cap hit between deal purely on cap hit%... but im not worried. i agreed with you anyway.

so the devils were willing to pay Gaudreau over 9 mill but want Bratt to come in under Hughes number? Doesn't make sense.

I think people forget that NHL players are closer to you in terms of finance than the owners. Yes, the majority of them are millionaires and the money they make through their career will likely sustain them through the rest of their lives, but the owners are billionaires. One billion dollars is a thousand million dollars; or a whole magnitude above.

Saying "players take less for the team" is a pro-owner sentiment; no NHL player should cut slack for their bosses because it's their labor that actually increases the value and revenue of the team and of the league. You should always support players getting the most money possible for their value instead of criticizing them. They only take less because it provides them extra job security as you said.

Bratt is a restricted free agent so he has less negotiating power than Gaudreau does, who was unrestricted. I'd imagine if Bratt gets lowballed him and his agent would gladly look at offer sheets.

NJ has to be very careful with Bratt as there are times lowballing is fine and other times when it can sour a relation to where hes like **** this **** im out

I feel hes gonna wait for Pasta and get a tad less then whatever he makes but who knows