You somehow consider Pasta contract being part of the reason for that?
there was once upon a time where a young guy would sign a contract after 3 years and people would talk about what an amazing bargain it was as he turned 25-26-27. this was how the owners/gms were able to build through the draft
teams were told... do good at drafting... find a stud outside the first 5 picks... get lucky... and you can turn the fortunes of your team around
boston did this with Bergeron, marchand, krejci, lucic… some great drafting allowed us to sign all these guys to some livable contracts in the early 2010's and this group grew up together and took us to 2 Stanley cup finals together as a core
these days if a guy has a 60 point season in his first 3 seasons people start talking 7 million dollars and they argue 'he will grow into it.'
this is the EXACT OPPOSITE MENTALITY the last 2 lockouts were fought over. when the league insisted on capped contracts for entry level deals... it was because of this thinking. when the league insisted on limiting the term of contracts... it was because of this thinking
players fought for earlier access to ufa
the two sides were planning on contracts remaining reasonable for non-ufa… and then the paydays happening once a player has earned them and become a big flashy name that can sell tickets... as an ufa
well... something happened on the way to the track Charlie brown
so... you want to get all defensive about the pastrnak contract. compared to more damaging contracts it is by far not the worst offender. and it seems like he will be a bargain even at this inflated price if you compare him to the worst possible comparables
but why are we just comparing him to the worst possible contracts? the rules allowed him to get this deal... and boston was forced to comply with it or have him become unhappy and decide to leave town on us. but why... why is that the way it is? why?
trust me if an idiot like me can see this question being risen... you know that Jacobs and his fellow governors are starting to discuss it too.
the funny thing about billionares… they will spend money on the stupidest things to satisfy their ego. 40 million on a house when 4 million would have done the job... check
400k on a car when 60k buys you a perfectly safe enough vehichle… check
4000 on a bottle of wine when most of us are happy with 40 dollars... check
billionares can spend money on whatever they want... but when the tax department comes to collect these are some of the cheapest people on the planet paying 6 figure salaries to a team of accountants to save every penny they can.
billionares don't like to be told they MUST spend their money. they want to CHOOSE... and they like to choose status symbals that boost their ego
so... when a billionare gives a 33 year old guy 6 mill... it makes him feel like a big man. hes heard of this 33 year old. the casual fans have heard. friends who don't follow hockey have heard.
its like hiring 60 year old rock stars to play at the kids birthday party... the old billionares have heard of these 60 year old rock stars
you don't have to like it... even I don't have to like it... this is straight up human nature
and its why the next lockout is going to catch almost everyone with their pants down. you seem like you might be surprised what a billionare might decide to do if they get their egos offended. sadly I was a bruin fan for over 45 years and I saw what Jacobs has always done when young kids want to get paid more than he thinks they are worth