Well, there are women but with all the touques and scarves and heavy jackets it is hard to tell which ones are which.Damn I know it's cold there but no women too?
Well, there are women but with all the touques and scarves and heavy jackets it is hard to tell which ones are which.Damn I know it's cold there but no women too?
Top 5, no? Sanheim and Provorov are 1 and 2.Can't remember the last time I saw a team redo its top 4 D in one offseason quite like Philly has, now bringing in Yandle, Risto, and Ellis.
That is one hell of a deal for a almost a PPG player. Garland will blossom in Vancouver.5 years x 4.95 for Garland
Damn I was so close at 5x5!
I'd have been okay with that deal here but far more comfortable with 4 years or less.
Good value, no clauses. Nice job by Vancouver not to cave to the agent.
It almost makes me sick seeing that contract. I thought the ask was high and that's why BA decided to trade him. Guess not.
I think it was 3 things: 1, why get locked into a small winger with term, its the easiest position to find replacements. 2, he needed to add something to get rid of OELs contract. 3. BA wanted a top 10 pick.The initial ask probably was high - based on the numbers of the deal he signed with Vancouver, I'd guess around $6M with term. Based on how these things usually go, that's just the first offer to kick off what an agent generally considers to be a back-and-forth until they arrive at a compromise deal. I don't think either Garland or his agent figured that Armstrong would shut things down completely after that, based on their communications in the media and online.
All I can think of is that Armstrong is not necessarily a fan of small wingers and was only going to consider holding onto Garland if his initial ask was ballpark reasonable. The first offer was probably BA's excuse to start leveraging Garland for a top draft asset immediately.
I don't know if that's how it all went down, because obviously I wasn't there, but I've been through enough contract negotiations in other sports over the past 20 years that I have a good idea how these things play out.
I think it was 3 things: 1, why get locked into a small winger with term, its the easiest position to find replacements. 2, he needed to add something to get rid of OELs contract. 3. BA wanted a top 10 pick.
Yandle’s a 3rd pair at best and probably more likely a 7th dman once the streak ends.Can't remember the last time I saw a team redo its top 4 D in one offseason quite like Philly has, now bringing in Yandle, Risto, and Ellis.
Not sure the body holds up.
Canes reportedly looking at Tony D and/or Jake Virtanen..... yikes.
This is hockey. They play hockey. Montreal drafted a defenseman. The ‘Canes are looking to sign one in free agency. And maybe a winger. Cool.
In Winnipeg? One can always settle for a sheep.Well, there are women but with all the touques and scarves and heavy jackets it is hard to tell which ones are which.
Conor, if your money home is up there, your home is here.
Don't forget to come back when it is all said and done.
Remember the Thomas Wolfe saying. Also remember that when players get traded from the team with whom they assumed they'd spend their whole career, they very rarely either return to it or, indeed, have very positive feelings about them.
The initial ask probably was high - based on the numbers of the deal he signed with Vancouver, I'd guess around $6M with term. Based on how these things usually go, that's just the first offer to kick off what an agent generally considers to be a back-and-forth until they arrive at a compromise deal. I don't think either Garland or his agent figured that Armstrong would shut things down completely after that, based on their communications in the media and online.
All I can think of is that Armstrong is not necessarily a fan of small wingers and was only going to consider holding onto Garland if his initial ask was ballpark reasonable. The first offer was probably BA's excuse to start leveraging Garland for a top draft asset immediately.
I don't know if that's how it all went down, because obviously I wasn't there, but I've been through enough contract negotiations in other sports over the past 20 years that I have a good idea how these things play out.
We all know wingers are the easiest to replace, but not wingers with .80 P/PG making him 16th best producing RW in the NHL, on a team that can't score, and a player that led by example, and literally bleed Coyote red, and played his heart out every shift. These players are not easy to find, let alone replace. All I hear is his body won't stand up, or he will get injured, which is true not only for Garland but for any player.I think it was 3 things: 1, why get locked into a small winger with term, its the easiest position to find replacements. 2, he needed to add something to get rid of OELs contract. 3. BA wanted a top 10 pick.
We all know wingers are the easiest to replace, but not wingers with .80 P/PG making him 16th best producing RW in the NHL, on a team that can't score, and a player that led by example, and literally bleed Coyote red, and played his heart out every shift. These players are not easy to find, let alone replace. All I hear is his body won't stand up, or he will get injured, which is true not only for Garland but for any player.
*drafts Logan Mailloux*
: "Hold our beer."
That’ll somehow be about the Coyotes?Another Katie Strang article incoming….
That’ll somehow be about the Coyotes?