RememberTheRoar
“I’m not as worried about the 5-on-5 scoring.”
Wow...
He and he alone has the power to do it...
Spoken like a true spaghetti topping.
Wow...
Oh ffs, how exactly would you have done that against the advice of their agents and the NHLPA?
I want to hear how you’d open that conversation, word for word.
Are you saying the NHLPA where giving advice to T & K on contract negotiations?
Not sure what I would have said but it likely would have went something like this.
hey JT you have already made 35 million in your short career, this contract will at 9.5 will make you another 75 million, that is 110 million bucks.
hey PK you have already made 34 million in your short career, this contract will at 9.5 will make you another 75 million, that is 110 million bucks.
how about you take those deals to keep a team together so that we could maybe win say 5 or 6 cups, that 2 mill/year extra will be used to pay other players a bit more.
or you can be greedy spoiled young lads and demand 9 mill extra each and see the team be unable to field effective players in the future.
So do you need 119 million or could you manage on 110 million and hope to keep in contention for a longer period of time so you may win more cups.
Oh and by the way either one of you can go out and make an additional 10 million in marketing at the drop of the hat if you want
In any case I am sure that people will critique and rip apart what I have wrote here but it is what it is, the truth.
a couple spoiled punks that don't think they can manage on 110 million bucks...
Stan got beat plain and simple, he is a terrible negotiator and that is clear as day.
And if they still say no, and wait till ufa then what so you do?Are you saying the NHLPA where giving advice to T & K on contract negotiations?
Not sure what I would have said but it likely would have went something like this.
hey JT you have already made 35 million in your short career, this contract will at 9.5 will make you another 75 million, that is 110 million bucks.
hey PK you have already made 34 million in your short career, this contract will at 9.5 will make you another 75 million, that is 110 million bucks.
how about you take those deals to keep a team together so that we could maybe win say 5 or 6 cups, that 2 mill/year extra will be used to pay other players a bit more.
or you can be greedy spoiled young lads and demand 9 mill extra each and see the team be unable to field effective players in the future.
So do you need 119 million or could you manage on 110 million and hope to keep in contention for a longer period of time so you may win more cups.
Oh and by the way either one of you can go out and make an additional 10 million in marketing at the drop of the hat if you want
In any case I am sure that people will critique and rip apart what I have wrote here but it is what it is, the truth.
a couple spoiled punks that don't think they can manage on 110 million bucks...
Stan got beat plain and simple, he is a terrible negotiator and that is clear as day.
But Stan has been a very successful GM at the NHL level. And ChiHawks asked for someone better, not an unknown who isn't better.who knows, he has never been a GM at the NHL level so you don't know that and niether do I, as I mentioned before it was a suggestion, that is what chi hawks 10 asked for.
Seabs is the only one that's a problem. AAs contract is fine, as are most of the other deals on the team.sure you can pay your best players within reason, but if you do you need to cut back on some other peoples salaries and he did not keep that in mind when he signed Seabrook or AA to his extension without even skating a day for the club
Stan got beat plain and simple, he is a terrible negotiator and that is clear as day.
It would have been interesting to see how a GM like Stevie Y would have handled the T/K signings. I doubt for example they both would have negotiated identical salaries.... but that's water under the bridge and Hawks (with both players in their primes age-wise) find themselves in a fight to stay out of the Central Division basement, languishing in the bottom third of the NHL. As for Seabs contract, embarrassingly bad from the day it was inked. Everyone agrees on that one. Well, most everyone.
I think theres a big difference in the value there. But also Yzerman has done things like let his star player go to ufa to get his price down but during a playoff race you're contending. Maybe if Stamkos was locked up he'd be able to be more secure in play and not get criticized for poor elimination game play. But they choose the stay competitive longer game but could of had him locked in vs that Pittsburgh ecf series.Yzerman hasn't had to deal with his players actually winning something.
Go back and check. I said at the time that history would show that the T/K signings would be the beginning of Hawks downfall and it certainly looks that way today.Ya, that’s information you have now. You didn’t know that would happen when the deals were being negotiated
Go back and check. I said at the time that history would show that the T/K signings would be the beginning of Hawks downfall and it certainly looks that way today.
At the time, why did you believe that? Not doubting you said it.
who knows, he has never been a GM at the NHL level so you don't know that and niether do I, as I mentioned before it was a suggestion, that is what chi hawks 10 asked for.
Yzerman hasn't had to deal with his players actually winning something.
Hawkaholic meant cups. Toews and Kane's value skyrocketed once they won in 2013. Multiple cups and each having a Conn Smythe jacks the price way up. And if they walked in summer 2015 after another cup win, they would've gotten $12m from someone.
Pretty sure he won that after he signed his extension. And Tampa also has a tax advantage over every other team in the league.
Stan had no leverage in the negotiations. Let the two guys who won two previous Cups walk to save $4m in cap? Who was in the pipeline to replace half the Hawks core? You can't bank on FA at that time when the team was in the midst of their three Cup run. Pay them.Are you saying the NHLPA where giving advice to T & K on contract negotiations?
Not sure what I would have said but it likely would have went something like this.
hey JT you have already made 35 million in your short career, this contract will at 9.5 will make you another 75 million, that is 110 million bucks.
hey PK you have already made 34 million in your short career, this contract will at 9.5 will make you another 75 million, that is 110 million bucks.
how about you take those deals to keep a team together so that we could maybe win say 5 or 6 cups, that 2 mill/year extra will be used to pay other players a bit more.
or you can be greedy spoiled young lads and demand 9 mill extra each and see the team be unable to field effective players in the future.
So do you need 119 million or could you manage on 110 million and hope to keep in contention for a longer period of time so you may win more cups.
Oh and by the way either one of you can go out and make an additional 10 million in marketing at the drop of the hat if you want
In any case I am sure that people will critique and rip apart what I have wrote here but it is what it is, the truth.
a couple spoiled punks that don't think they can manage on 110 million bucks...
Stan got beat plain and simple, he is a terrible negotiator and that is clear as day.
When Toews signed his contract, he was easily just as important to the Hawks as Kane was, and he was a 68pt player (in 76 games) the year he signed it, and a point per game player the year prior, not to mention, a Stanley Cup Champ for the 2nd time. You can't say he was overpaid at the time, and that Kane wasn't. Hindsight is 20/20.
Those contracts are not the problem. Seabs is, as was Bickells.
When Toews signed his contract, he was easily just as important to the Hawks as Kane was, and he was a 68pt player (in 76 games) the year he signed it, and a point per game player the year prior, not to mention, a Stanley Cup Champ for the 2nd time. You can't say he was overpaid at the time, and that Kane wasn't. Hindsight is 20/20.
Those contracts are not the problem. Seabs is, as was Bickells.