kickazz

Daley has more goals than Green. Green is deployed in offensive situation and Daley mostly in defensive. Daley is underrated around here and Green is slightly overrated

According to the scoreboard it's the most goals allowed against them this year. You know I'm correct on this. ...Except Mrazek isn't any of the best goalies in the league... At all.... The point we were making was Mrazek is inconsistent. As usual. Great goalies do have bad games but Mrazek has far too many bad ones on his plate. Making him average or below average.

He was sick

I think that was the most goals Flyers allowed in a game this season #petrmrazek

FFS all he needs to do is win 2 more games and he decides to start blowing it allowing 10 goals in 2 games.

All we need is each other bro

Great loss

Agreed. Tankit.

Ohh hoooo did we ever. @ChristopherReevesLegs

One day me you and others will meet and I'll buy you that Appletini

When's your birthday?

Pretty sure every captain in the NHL has a veto vote on certain decisions just like the coach and GM do.

So you're not sure if it's true? Then how do you conclude that Z has power? Lol. Your supporting statement for your premise isn't a fact. This is high school stuff dude. I shouldn't be explaining this.

And have you not noticed that Ken Holland has NOT done that? And taken almost all his RFAs to arbitration if they demand pay he doesn’t agree with.

About as Swedish as Andy Garcia is Italian in Godfather Part 3. Bulls*** post as usual. You’re worse than fake news bro

So we pay him $6 million x 8 for ceiling, potential and pedigree while we paid Nyquist for 27, 28 goals and actual production? Sometimes I’m glad Ken Holland is the GM for this team. Now I’m positive I prefer a bridge deal if that’s truly what the thought process is. Hell take Larkin to arbitration if it comes down to it.

Completely serious. Zetterberg is the Swedish Don. I think Ryan Gosling will be playing him in the documentary.

Thank you @PavelValerievichDatsyuk. This is exactly my point. If Larkin truly ends up being a 1C by age 25 (after bridge contract). I have no issue paying him 10 million for 8 years. He's clearly earned it at that point. But to give him 6 million x 8 years as a 21 year old with 1.5 years of good hockey is a terrible gamble. Money shouldn't be an issue when you're trying to keep your superstar, but it should definitely be an issue when you're trying to sign an unproven player long term. Anyways, unless Holland has done a 180, I'm fairly certain he will be conservative about Larkin, AA, and Mantha. Larkin will get the better $$ and term simply because he's a center but I don't see it being a day and night difference. And I vaguely remember Oilers fans wanting to sign Nuge-Hopkins much like Wings fans are wanting to sign Larkin long term today. Not looking so good currently.

What does size have to do with anything? Didn't know NHL paid based off of height and weight. Nyquist scored 27 and 28 goals consecutively and still got a fair bridge contract. His hype was huge; maybe you've forgotten. A lot of Larkin's hype is theoretical unlike Nyquist or Tatar's who had legit consistent production for a few years. Are we talking about locking his actual calibre? or potential? because the two are different things. It's not. Holland has taken his last 5 RFAs to arbitration. He doesn't blindly go with what other GMs do. That's probably the one big thing I like about the guy. He's good about his RFAs. Always has been. He's not going to overpay (if he thinks it's an overpayment even if it isn't compared to what other GMs have done) for Larkin.

Can he go to arbitration consequtively like that? Looks like he can. —- $5.5 x 6 or $6x8 for an unproven player is ridiculous. Nyquist and Tatar had to put in a lot more years to earn their contracts. Larkin hasn’t even had a consistent 82 game season yet. (He might this year). This league is terrible if that ends up happening. I hope Holland lowballs the s*** out of him and they end up meeting halfway.

I don’t think AA can go to arbitration again

If we give Larkin an 8 year deal now, it will run till he's 29. And at 29 he'll likely get another max term deal which we will have to pay him a lot more money. 29 is still considered prime. Pretty sure Z and Dats scored their highest totals around that age. And also the time Z got his long term contract. Better to give him a 4 year deal now and assess him. Once he's 25 give him a max deal till he's 33. By then his prime is over and we'll probably end up saving money and won't have to necessarily be stuck with him till he's 37 years old; paying him god knows what. Trust me my scenario works in our favor. We dont need to give this guy 2 max contracts till his late 30s or 40s if we don't need to.

A "top 10 1C" getting $5 million per? Yeah I'd walk away especially when my buddy Eichel is making a lot more and has only 6 more points than me.

Yeah, Larkin is reading this and saying “I’m not getting trapped getting underpaid for 8 years and then am no longer in my prime”

I think that's okay though. We don't really have anyone else making big money by that time and almost all of our contracts would be off the books. I can't imagine being stuck with him for 8 years with an NMC if he ends up being a bust. I know we're all Larkin fans, but there's no proof he's going to end up becoming an elite player. He's had a total of maybe 1.5 years of NHL in his 3 year career. Hell, even McDavid and Eichel were more proven and consistent and hence are locked up for 8 years each. Both of them have had 3 solid years in the NHL and neither suffered from a sophomore slump or whatever it is.