From what I've saw of the guy he always seems to be in the right place at the right time and has a hell of a shot, he certainly isn't going to make us a slower team. I'll take some hockey sense to go with our speed anytime.
Buffalo has had so much cap space to burn they would have offered Kane the moon if he would have become an ufa..think about merchandise from Jersey sales and all that stuff. At one point they were exactly 13 million under the cap floor so bringing in Kane would have made a lot of sense. Same goes for Winnipeg and Toews, a hometown kid who has won 2 cups, 2 gold medals and is just so clutch when needed ? Yup that's when the richest owner in the nhl would have opened his massive pocket.
We can argue about semantics all day long but basically a pay cut is defined as a reduced salary so compared to the potential he could have made on the open market yes he took a pay cut..if you are looking at it for the perspective of going from the 2 to the 3 contract then no he didn't.
And yes, you are right I am mad at the NHL but I don't view it as a win or victory if a player gets a nice contract. In fact I am not that emotionally attached to these things all I am saying is that I can understand every player who wants to get paid close or maybe even above what they are worth.
So maybe people are right and Goose signs a deal for 4 x 4 but I think it would suck if people turn at him because he commands and gets something significantly higher.
And guess what if Larkin delivers even 2 cups in 6 years I couldn't care less for what he asks just pay it and enjoy the ride..which sadly is exactly what Toews is doing for the Hawks
Frank, at the end of the day you are just guessing, who knows what Buffalo would have offered Kane. Even if they were under the cap floor, that was for 1 season. If we are talking long term contract year, being under the floor one year means nothing.
The fact that you are bringing up that the Winnipeg owner has deep pockets just reinforces to me that you don't get it. Its not about how much money an owner has, its about managing a team in a salary cap system for the short term, and the long term. Giving one player 13 million for a long time could absolutely screw a team over if that player doesn't produce, or even if he does produce, handicap that team.
I still don't get your "pay-cut" logic. You are saying that because he is allowed to get paid 13mil, if he signs for anything less its a "pay-cut". He is literally the highest paid player in the league, and his salary is constantly rising, not a pay-cut. If he signed for 13mil x 8 it would do Chicago more harm then good, hence he is not worth it.
I don't understand this talk about Nyquist not being very good defensively...? I think he is one of our top defensive forwards, at least when it comes to stripping opposition of the puck. He's very Datsyukien when it comes to pickpocketing opponents. No, he doesn't play on the penalty-kill, nor should he, with the likes of Glendening, Miller, Helm, Abdelkader, Ferraro / Callahan / Andersson in the lineup. I'm not sure what Nyquist will get, I think some people are over shooting what he should get / will get and others are under shooting. I have full confidence in Ken that he will get a fair deal done over the next week or so...
Buffalo would have and I'm sure Winnipeg was prepaired to pay Toews the max and guess what Toews would still have been worth it, also people need to finally understand the differense between pre new CBA and post new CBA AAV terms it's not that hard really.
This stupid line of thinking that nobody deserves maximum is just false, Toews is a top 3 ! player worldwide so he would for sure have gotten it from Winnipeg or someone else with enough cap-space. Can't wait till Stamkos signs his 12,5 AAV or whatever extension and people crying about him not being worth it...
You say Winnipeg & Buffalo were prepared to pay Towes 13.3 million a year? Please post a link to someone from either organization verifying or even hinting to this. Or are you just making up things as if they are facts because it helps your argument?
I don't think Towes is a top 3 player, I think he has been lucky enough to play with great players for the last 6 years, but that is irrelevant to this argument. I'm starting to see your philosophy Frank, you are pissed at the NHL/owners and anytime a player can get as much as they can out of them, you consider it a small "win". Nyquist is the perfect example, you seem to want him to get paid as much as possible even though if he does get a ridicoulas O'Rielly type contract, it hurts the Wings.
No one is disputing with you that these players CAN ask for the moon, what people including myself are saying is that in a team game where the team can only spend so much money with the cap, for a player to take a huge percentage of that money especially when the player is not worth it (ie. O'Rielly) it can and will hurt the team. Players that only look out for themselves are then perceived as selfish and entitled.
There is a reason why guys like Lidstrom & Datsyuk are so well respected around here, they never put themselves first and even though they COULD get more money, they are/were willing to take a slight decrease in salary for the good of the team. They are still paid well, but not to the point where it hurts the team.
Pulkkinen is far from "slow"... He has a very awkward stride but he can actually get up and down the ice pretty quick. He's not Helm fast, but not many are. I bet if there were a race between the entire team, he would finish somewhere in the middle. But yeah, it is completely unreasonable to think he would produce more than Tatar, being much more productive in the AHL...Pulkkinen - 121 points (65 goals, 56 assists) in 119 games and Tatar - 196 (87 goals, 109 assists) in 265 games... Also very similar numbers to start their NHL careers... Pulkkinen - 8 points (5 goals, 3 assists) in 34 games and Tatar - 8 points (5 goals, 3 assists) in 27 games...
- Kadri has the skill to be an elite player, we'll see if it happens. Signing him to a 1 year deal makes total sense. He's a risk to sign long-term as there are question marks with him, but signing short term is a risk too because he could pull it all together this year. That part of the business and the risks you have to take. I don't have a problem with what Babcock said, because he could turn it around and also, as someone else mentioned, you want to motivate your players.
- Mitch Marner has played both centre and wing and the Leafs want him to come in as a centre (this is coming first hand from Marner).