It's HF. It's who we are and what we do.
also marchand was an extension he had 1 year left on old dealPastrnak signed - Sept. 14, 2017
Marchand signed - September 26th, 2016
My concern is the McAvoy camp is looking for AAV that would make him the highest paid player on the team and I just don't see the exec team being able to digest that. Granted, the top paid players have all taken hometown discounts, but I just don't see him signing anytime soon at this point unless it's a bridge deal.
$8 mil per is still too much for him. I get the concept of starting high, but asking $10 mil per coming off a 26 pt season, inconsistency, and not being incredibly multidimensional is just stupid and not even worthy of serious consideration. Honestly, it's hard for me to believe that report in the first place, but then again some of these RFAs are getting uppity.Word on the street is that Provorov wants $10 million per.
https://www.tsn.ca/report-columbus-...nski-is-looking-for-three-year-deal-1.1353943
This is getting out of hand my friends.
They also played more than 60 ish games a year.The top players also signed a few years ago. Bergeron/Marchand/Pastrnak/Krejci/Rask contracts should be irrelevant.
The top players also signed a few years ago. Bergeron/Marchand/Pastrnak/Krejci/Rask contracts should be irrelevant.
hes nowhere near worth 8mil a year.
should get 5.5 no more than 6.5 the most.
On a long term deal he's absolutely worth $8M per year
I don't get why we are trying to sign an 8 year deal. That costs more money because you are buying out free agent years.
I think they should just go with a 6 year deal as that is the cheapest.
The comps suggest that McAvoy should be signed to around a 6 year/$5.5m average. And then bump up his pay when he hits free agency or extend him a year before the contract expires.
So McAvoy's argument is that he is a level above all these guys and deserves an extra 1-2 million on a similar length deal. And the Bruins are going to counter that his injuries mitigate that.
Good post, though I don't see how McAvoy can argue he's a level above either of player. McAvoy has played 1st line minutes while the others played 2nd and 3rd line minutes , not because they weren't on par but simply, as you stated, because of defensive depth. Both players are better defensively and are more imposing players. They also played on teams with less offence production which would also be part of the reason for less production. I see 6 x 6 closer to the ceiling rather than the floor.
Good post, though I don't see how McAvoy can argue he's a level above either of player. McAvoy has played 1st line minutes while the others played 2nd and 3rd line minutes , not because they weren't on par but simply, as you stated, because of defensive depth. Both players are better defensively and are more imposing players. They also played on teams with less offence production which would also be part of the reason for less production. I see 6 x 6 closer to the ceiling rather than the floor.
I'm don't think the bolded is true. Jones, even then, was certainly more physically imposing, but hard to compare a guy who played against the bottom 6 defensively vs a guy in McAvoy who plays against the best talent. TODAY obviously Jones is better, but when he signed his deal? Lindholm really stalled in his development. I would take McAvoy over Lindholm today over 200 feet.
Because he clearly is better today than either of those guys when they signed their contracts.
I disagree but let's set that aside. Do you see him being better than Jones going forward? Some projection should be considered.
Well you would be wrong because neither of those guys were #1 dman on one of the top teams in the league before their ELC ran up(only 2 seasons btw).
Lol, well you don't get to decide who's wrong and who's right, especially not based on the arguments you make. The fact that neither of those guys were #1 Dmen had more to do with the depth their team had on D than their skill. They would have been #1's on the Bruins as they are currently constructed. So that doesn't mean anything. Victor Mete is playing 1st line D on the Habs. Is he a 1st liner? Hell no, he'd be a 7 on the Bruins. What line you play on doesn't necessarily mean you qualify for that position. McAvoy wouldn't be a 1st pairing D man on many teams.
You think McAvoy is going to be the #D in the league? I sure hope so but there is a lot he needs to work on before he can make that claim. A Norris, while possible, will be a long time coming I would think.
Victor Mete was 7th in TOI for defenders last season for the 13th best GA canadiens. A non playoff team.
Seth Jones was 3rd in TOI from 2013-2015 playing under 20 minutes on the Preds, the 15th best GA team, 14th most points over that time.
Mcavoy is #1 over the last 2 years on the 3rd best GA team, and second best team in points over that time.
Seth Jones is one of the best Dmen in the league today but he was not that player at 19-21. Most dmen aren’t. Could he have been the number 1 on a Stanley cup contending team at that age? Probably not but we’ll never know. What we, Mcavoy, the Bruins, and Mcavoy’s agent do know is Mcavoy is.
I’d love to know what teams you think Mcavoy wouldn’t be on the top pairing if u have the time.
hes nowhere near worth 8mil a year.
should get 5.5 no more than 6.5 the most.
If it eats even a single UFA year, Charlie under 8 is a steal.
Regardless of TOI Mete played 1st line minutes, that is a fact.
Again, how many times do I need to make the point? These guys were held back by defense depth on their teams . IT DOESN'T MEAN ****. McAvoy got the chance for lack of a better option. That's how it works.
As per teams he wouldn't be top pairing,
Sharks
Blues
for sure
He, as a RD would play behind (and never would have had the chance he had in Boston) the following players ,
Ekman-Larsson
Pietrangelo
Parayko
Ekblad
Weber
Doughty
Karlsson
Burns
Jones
LeTang
Subban
Carlson