PullHard
☂
- Jul 18, 2007
- 28,421
- 2,517
Maccelli is 22 years old. A three year deal leaves the club with two years of RFA remaining, A five year deal would take Maccelli to UFA.
TF bettman have to do with this?Thanks a lot, Bettman.
WHY?But now Arizona will have to trade him two years instead of four!
2 hours. They're slow up there with their faxes.How close is nearing an extension?
An hour. A day. A week. A month.
Too hot out?Good deal, he will outperform it.
I really am puzzled by NHL GM's and agents work schedules. Very little happened during the last week, yet a flurry of signings this weekend, lol.
The only way it would've been 8years is if Arizona was going to pay him north of 8m dollars.Would have been nice to see an 8yr deal here but I understand why a 3 year was done. I'm okay with it too. If it's a bridge I think it'll look really good by the end of it.
Yeah right,LOL, more like 8 x 4.5 - 5M.The only way it would've been 8years is if Arizona was going to pay him north of 8m dollars.
With his stats? Because he's older, he had a shorter ELC. But his rookie campaign was better than William Nylander, who got 6x7mil and that was 5 years ago when cap was lower.Yeah right,LOL, more like 8 x 4.5 - 5M.
Yeah right,LOL, more like 8 x 4.5 - 5M.
... and why they did a bridge deal. What I put up there was the most likely offered by the Coyotes.With his stats? Because he's older, he had a shorter ELC. But his rookie campaign was better than William Nylander, who got 6x7mil and that was 5 years ago when cap was lower.
Obviously, Arizona wouldn't do that because they want to see Maccelli repeat this for multiple times before committing big money. And Maccelli nor his agent are stupid enough they would take 8x4,5, when we his ceiling is probably somewhere around 8-9mil. He was that good.
His SPC expiring a year short of UFA eligibility would mean he could choose to take his QO and limp into UFA. It's not an ideal position to negotiate an expansion with him. With this contract his QO will be $4.11M, I think (assuming there's no signing bonus in the final year).Great point. That’s way to risky. 4 would have been ideal.
We are not in a disagreement. I just put up what Maccelli and his agent should counter if Arizona said they wanted 8 years.... and why they did a bridge deal. What I put up there was the most likely offered by the Coyotes.
I expect him to start shooting more, but there was no way Armstrong would have even considered that. He is not known for long term contracts (since I said that, he'll probably get McBain to sign an 8 year contract).We are not in a disagreement. I just put up what Maccelli and his agent should counter if Arizona said they wanted 8 years.
He had a phenomenal last year, if he keeps it up during these 3 years he's in for a big payday. Cap is probably around or over 100mil by then.
I doubt that.Fantastic deal for not quite 3.4. Honestly could have seen other teams giving him 5 or 6.
Bill Armstrong prefers short deals in large part because it keeps players motivated to prove themselves and earn more. If Maccelli is asking for the moon in a few years, it's because he's become a star. That's good for the player and good for the team.But it creates a really awkward situation a few years from now, when he's going to probably be asking for the moon on his next contract.