• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Jonas Mahonas

I Love Larkin

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Guys, come on, this isn't complicated.  I don't think we need to try spinning it in terms of how each performed the year before they signed the contract, how they performed in the 1st year of the contract, how long they've been in the league....it's stupid.  MacKinnon is less than 1 year older than Larkin, they each have 4 years left on their contract, with MacKinnon's paying him $6.3M and Larkin's paying him $6.1M.  I didn't think the question was what contract do we think will end up being better by the time we get to the end of the contract (though, my answer probably doesn't change), it's what contract is better right now and I don't think there is any argument right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, toby91_ca said:

Guys, come on, this isn't complicated.  I don't think we need to try spinning it in terms of how each performed the year before they signed the contract, how they performed in the 1st year of the contract, how long they've been in the league....it's stupid.  MacKinnon is less than 1 year older than Larkin, they each have 4 years left on their contract, with MacKinnon's paying him $6.3M and Larkin's paying him $6.1M.  I didn't think the question was what contract do we think will end up being better by the time we get to the end of the contract (though, my answer probably doesn't change), it's what contract is better right now and I don't think there is any argument right now.

It sounds like you're spinning age in favor of your argument though? MacKinnon has been in the NHL for 6 years and Larkin 4. What does same age have to do with NHL experience? 

Experience has a correlation to consistent performance in the big league. 

 

 

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kickazz said:

It sounds like you're spinning age in favor of your argument though? MacKinnon has been in the NHL for 6 years and Larkin 4. What does same age have to do with NHL experience? 

Experience has a correlation to consistent performance in the big league. 

 

 

Not sure how you think I'm spinning age in anyway whatsoever.  I actually brought up the age to try and remove it from the argument since they are almost the same age (about 9 months in difference).   That was my point.....basically the same age, so you can't use that to argue in favor of Larkin's contract.....they have the same term left, so can't use that in favor of Larkin.....what is there really to use to favor Larkin's contract?

Edit:  I think the grasping at straw argument was that Larkin's deal was better at the time he signed it because he had a better year prior to the deal than MacKinnon did (which isn't really true....on a per game basis, they were very similar).  If you look at their first 3 years before they signed their contracts, the only edge Larkin would have is health.  MacKinnon still put up more goals and more points in fewer games played in those 3 years.

Edit again: not sure why I'm really wasting my time with this really as I'm not that passionate about this, I just saw a statement that he has the best non-ELC contract in the league which struck me as odd and MacKinnon was the first guy I found to convince myself that wasn't the case. 

Edited by toby91_ca

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, toby91_ca said:

Not sure how you think I'm spinning age in anyway whatsoever.  I actually brought up the age to try and remove it from the argument since they are almost the same age (about 9 months in difference).   That was my point.....basically the same age, so you can't use that to argue in favor of Larkin's contract.....they have the same term left, so can't use that in favor of Larkin.....what is there really to use to favor Larkin's contract?

Edit:  I think the grasping at straw argument was that Larkin's deal was better at the time he signed it because he had a better year prior to the deal than MacKinnon did (which isn't really true....on a per game basis, they were very similar).  If you look at their first 3 years before they signed their contracts, the only edge Larkin would have is health.  MacKinnon still put up more goals and more points in fewer games played in those 3 years.

Edit again: not sure why I'm really wasting my time with this really as I'm not that passionate about this, I just saw a statement that he has the best non-ELC contract in the league which struck me as odd and MacKinnon was the first guy I found to convince myself that wasn't the case. 

Spin job.  Larkin is the man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, toby91_ca said:

Not sure how you think I'm spinning age in anyway whatsoever.  I actually brought up the age to try and remove it from the argument since they are almost the same age (about 9 months in difference).   That was my point.....basically the same age, so you can't use that to argue in favor of Larkin's contract.....they have the same term left, so can't use that in favor of Larkin.....what is there really to use to favor Larkin's contract?

Edit:  I think the grasping at straw argument was that Larkin's deal was better at the time he signed it because he had a better year prior to the deal than MacKinnon did (which isn't really true....on a per game basis, they were very similar).  If you look at their first 3 years before they signed their contracts, the only edge Larkin would have is health.  MacKinnon still put up more goals and more points in fewer games played in those 3 years.

Edit again: not sure why I'm really wasting my time with this really as I'm not that passionate about this, I just saw a statement that he has the best non-ELC contract in the league which struck me as odd and MacKinnon was the first guy I found to convince myself that wasn't the case. 

Dumb stupid Toby and your spinning stuff with facts all the time. Just stop. Pls

DYB67_8W4AIXY3d.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, toby91_ca said:

Not sure how you think I'm spinning age in anyway whatsoever.  I actually brought up the age to try and remove it from the argument since they are almost the same age (about 9 months in difference).   That was my point.....basically the same age, so you can't use that to argue in favor of Larkin's contract.....they have the same term left, so can't use that in favor of Larkin.....what is there really to use to favor Larkin's contract?

Edit:  I think the grasping at straw argument was that Larkin's deal was better at the time he signed it because he had a better year prior to the deal than MacKinnon did (which isn't really true....on a per game basis, they were very similar).  If you look at their first 3 years before they signed their contracts, the only edge Larkin would have is health.  MacKinnon still put up more goals and more points in fewer games played in those 3 years.

Edit again: not sure why I'm really wasting my time with this really as I'm not that passionate about this, I just saw a statement that he has the best non-ELC contract in the league which struck me as odd and MacKinnon was the first guy I found to convince myself that wasn't the case. 

@Jonas Mahonas just brings the fiery red passion out of everyone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now