Likelihood Sens sign both Duchene and Stone

[supsens]

Rinse. Repeat?

It does seem like many in this market have been at least somewhat convinced that it is normal for the team to sign emerging star players to at least reasonably market deals during their RFA period, and then trading them away in their late 20's , and starting anew.

There is no reason to believe that if the same conditions are in place for the next few years, that when Chabot and Tkatchuk hit this point in their careers that the same sort of slow distancing and eventual trading of players due to salary won't happen.

We still don't know the end of the story with Stone and Duchene.

But with Stone in particular, if he leaves, we can start to legitimately have a conversation about who the last Sens developed elite player was that we kept through their prime.

From where I'm sitting, there has been a total of 1 elite level NHL player the Sens have kept through their prime, and it's been Daniel Alfredsson. There is no one else.

Hossa was a elite, and was traded away early. I know that's not evidence of money issue.. you could argue Heatley was the start of the money issues.

Spezza is as close as you can get I think. And why did he want to be traded again?

Karlsson was a draft steal, he gone.

Stone was a draft steal, he could be gone.

For what it's worth, I suspect they will try to get Duchene on a shorter deal (6 years) , because they need to be seen spending money on talent somewhere and #1C's are so hard to find and Brown doesn't look like he's heading that way now.

I think you can argue missing the playoffs every second year was the start of the money issues.
I thought spezza asked to be traded because the local fan base was booing him on the ice and he was taking a lot of heat for the team not kicking ass anymore. Or at least I remember something like that. If your own fans boo you on the ice, that is a large crowd of real people making you feel unwelcome

 

[Rhaegar Targaryen]

I think you can argue missing the playoffs every second year was the start of the money issues.
I thought spezza asked to be traded because the local fan base was booing him on the ice and he was taking a lot of heat for the team not kicking ass anymore. Or at least I remember something like that. If your own fans boo you on the ice, that is a large crowd of real people making you feel unwelcome

Well, the fans booed Spezza in, what, 2010? And he requested a trade in 2014? So I’m not sure it was cause of that.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

They traded turris because they wanted to go another direction, there is nothing to speculate there and they offered EK a fair value contract. I don't think there is much evidence out there other then him wanting to leave because he did leave without negotiating.

This team needs to tank and suck for a few years (after this year) if they ever want to get out of bubble team territory

That's not the Senators public position on the matter. Go back and read interviews and articles from the time. Their stance is that they offered him 5 and he never countered with 6.

Yes, they wanted to go in a different direction and/or not commit to Turris, but that's not what we're debating. You seem to take issue with my idea of the Sens not negotiating in good faith, it's pretty clear with the Turris scenario, that is what happened. They didn't want to resign him, engaged in a negotiation with no attempt of getting it done, and did not admit publicly to wanting to move on from Turris.

 

[supsens]

Well, the fans booed Spezza in, what, 2010? And he requested a trade in 2014? So I’m not sure it was cause of that.

He was the whipping boy year in and out. He was heavily booed in 2010 but they still kept at it to a lesser extent. 2010 was also when he first suggested he wouldnt mind being traded.

There is a sun article not sure if I can post a link? Murray straight up says Spezza is tired of having fingers pointed at him and wants to go somewhere that hockey isnt such a big deal.
But let's blame uncle scrooge for that one too

 

[supsens]

That's not the Senators public position on the matter. Go back and read interviews and articles from the time. Their stance is that they offered him 5 and he never countered with 6.

Yes, they wanted to go in a different direction and/or not commit to Turris, but that's not what we're debating. You seem to take issue with my idea of the Sens not negotiating in good faith, it's pretty clear with the Turris scenario, that is what happened. They didn't want to resign him, engaged in a negotiation with no attempt of getting it done, and did not admit publicly to wanting to move on from Turris.

They traded him. Is there anything more public in that? Its not good or bad faith. He said I want x amount, they said see ya. Trying to make it dark or evil is absurd. Your 'good faith' is a made up standard catchy phrase to call someone else bad
They checked to see if the could get a good deal, it didnt happen so they said bye-bye

 

[TeamRenzo]

I think both Stone and Duchene are signed mid-January.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

That's not the Senators public position on the matter. Go back and read interviews and articles from the time. Their stance is that they offered him 5 and he never countered with 6.

Yes, they wanted to go in a different direction and/or not commit to Turris, but that's not what we're debating. You seem to take issue with my idea of the Sens not negotiating in good faith, it's pretty clear with the Turris scenario, that is what happened. They didn't want to resign him, engaged in a negotiation with no attempt of getting it done, and did not admit publicly to wanting to move on from Turris.

Exactly.

They entered in to "negotiations" with no intention of offering a market value contract, just like Karlsson and used it as an excuse to move on and play it up like they made the required effort to keep them.

You can say that's fine for the team to do, but it certainly shouldn't be put on the players as if they walked away from a fair deal. No, they walked away from a team refusing to offer what they knew the whole time it would take and gave them low ball offers to save face.

Hopefully their intentions with Stone and Duchene are different, cuz at some point you just have to pay to play.

 

[supsens]

Exactly.

They entered in to "negotiations" with no intention of offering a market value contract, just like Karlsson and used it as an excuse to move on and play it up like they made the required effort to keep them.

You can say that's fine for the team to do, but it certainly shouldn't be put on the players as if they walked away from a fair deal. No, they walked away from a team refusing to offer what they knew the whole time it would take and gave them low ball offers to save face.

Hopefully their intentions with Stone and Duchene are different, cuz at some point you just have to pay to play.

They offered karlsson a large contract. Why do you all keep saying the same thing over and over even tho its not true?

 

[JD1]

That's not the Senators public position on the matter. Go back and read interviews and articles from the time. Their stance is that they offered him 5 and he never countered with 6.

Yes, they wanted to go in a different direction and/or not commit to Turris, but that's not what we're debating. You seem to take issue with my idea of the Sens not negotiating in good faith, it's pretty clear with the Turris scenario, that is what happened. They didn't want to resign him, engaged in a negotiation with no attempt of getting it done, and did not admit publicly to wanting to move on from Turris.

your point about good faith and Turris is kind of bullshit.

If the team had no interest in the player on a 6 by 6 type deal, how is it bad faith to have not gone there?

 

[JD1]

Exactly.

They entered in to "negotiations" with no intention of offering a market value contract, just like Karlsson and used it as an excuse to move on and play it up like they made the required effort to keep them.

You can say that's fine for the team to do, but it certainly shouldn't be put on the players as if they walked away from a fair deal. No, they walked away from a team refusing to offer what they knew the whole time it would take and gave them low ball offers to save face.

Hopefully their intentions with Stone and Duchene are different, cuz at some point you just have to pay to play.

I think you need to separate the Turris and Karlsson situations. They are quite different. Lumping them together might suit the hfSens narrative but those two situations were not very similar

 

[NyQuil]

They offered karlsson a large contract. Why do you all keep saying the same thing over and over even tho its not true?

I think most people feel as if it's not really close to market value, particularly with the apparent lack of front-loading and no NTC.

I feel, and a lot of other people feel similarly, that it was a token gesture meant to save face on the part of the organization, and that he did not fit in to their long-term plans.

The question is whether Ottawa routinely goes into these "negotiations" with a single offer which they know will not be accepted, only to turn around and say "we tried" when they really had no intention of it.

This applies to both the Turris and Karlsson situations.

I'm not sure why Spezza is even being brought up.

It was becoming evident that his injuries were catching up with him, he didn't want to be the Captain of a re-building team, and deliberately chose a location where he would be second fiddle to a younger #1 C as opposed to a better team like Nashville which was coveting a superstar centre.

Finances have nothing to do with Spezza, aside from the tangential argument where he knew that this team would never pay enough to be competitive so he pulled the chute. That to me is a bit more indirect.

 

[topshelf15]

Thinking the owner relents here and signs both ,he needs to start rebuilding some sort of trust back up with the fans

 

[NyQuil]

Thinking the owner relents here and signs both ,he needs to start rebuilding some sort of trust back up with the fans

It would go a surprisingly long way in doing so if the team manages to stay relatively competitive in hockey games this year.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

Thinking the owner relents here and signs both ,he needs to start rebuilding some sort of trust back up with the fans

That might almost take some bits of compassion. IMO unless the bums return to the seats in steady numbers, he will not spend as he more or less stated last year. I think Melnyk will be stubborn.
If they can get Duchene signed before January .. they have a good chance to sign both. If Duchene waits, in part to see what Stone does, it could drag to the point where they are both traded and they will say they tried. Both players are going to want some lockout protection in the way of bonuses and limited NTCs so they can have some control over where they get shipped out to at a minimum. Imagine trusting Dorion and/or Melnyk in a hand shake deal.

 

[topshelf15]

That might almost take some bits of compassion. IMO unless the bums return to the seats in steady numbers, he will not spend as he more or less stated last year. I think Melnyk will be stubborn.
If they can get Duchene signed before January .. they have a good chance to sign both. If Duchene waits, in part to see what Stone does, it could drag to the point where they are both traded and they will say they tried. Both players are going to want some lockout protection in the way of bonuses and limited NTCs so they can have some control over where they get shipped out to at a minimum. Imagine trusting Dorion and/or Melnyk in a hand shake deal.

I agree SOA,they either sign both or they lose both...If the latter happens then likely the team will have even more difficulty filling the seats,but again who knows with Uncle Nutbar

 

[Studzle]

Hopefully Scroogene pulls some sort of Christmas miracle and decides we cant lose either of them.

Wishful thinking though.

 

[Masked]

I think the Sens future would be better off if they were traded at the deadline instead of re-signed. They would demand 8 year deals and most of those 8 years would be outside their prime years. Unless you believe that the cap will rise high enough to offset the decline in their skills, and I suspect the cap will plateau for the next little while, their contacts will become boat anchors like Bobby Ryan's is now.

The way forward for smart NHL clubs is to sign players to 8 year deals off their rookie contracts and then hand out shorter contracts after that. That gives you up to 11 years of service and you don't have to worry about players declining.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

They offered karlsson a large contract. Why do you all keep saying the same thing over and over even tho its not true?

Market value, not just a large contract. No NTC and no competitive bonus structure means it was not a market value offer or something he could accept and know they wouldn't just trade him anyways, especially considering they'd just spent months trying to trade him. We're a very low budget team, so everything but the lack of an NTC is understandable, but blame shouldn't then be put on players that won't take discounts or make concessions, it's the team that needs to own not being able to offer what it takes.

 

[GCK]

The narrative that everyone gives out signing bonuses and that constitutes fair market value is bogus.

Multiple teams do not believe in structuring contracts that way.

For example Winnipeg has only done SBs in year 1 if a contract and Nashville doesn’t do them at all. McGuire was talking about this a while ago. I am too lazy to verify the others.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

The narrative that everyone gives out signing bonuses and that constitutes fair market value is bogus.

Multiple teams do not believe in structuring contracts that way.

For example Winnipeg has only done SBs in year 1 if a contract and Nashville doesn’t do them at all. McGuire was talking about this a while ago. I am too lazy to verify the others.

For a top 5 in the game, best defense man in the league, generational talent they do. It's fine if some teams can't afford it, but that's on them, the blame doesn't get to just be put back on the player.

Also, the lack of an NTC is probably a bigger issue considering they'd been trying to trade him for months.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

Thinking the owner relents here and signs both ,he needs to start rebuilding some sort of trust back up with the fans

Retaining both would be absolutely massive.

The team has been playing well so that's a good start but it is also unsustainable (leading league in sh% by a big margin). The team will start to flounder, that's when announcing contracts to Stone and Duchene would do a lot of heavy lifting.

 

[stempniaksen]

For a top 5 in the game, best defense man in the league, generational talent they do. It's fine if some teams can't afford it, but that's on them, the blame doesn't get to just be put back on the player.

Also, the lack of an NTC is probably a bigger issue considering they'd been trying to trade him for months.

This gets glossed over too much when people try to pass the buck to Karlsson. If the organization was negotiating in good faith their offer would have contained a full NTC/NMC. We don't even need to get into the dollars and cents side of things, as the lack of contract protection essentially guaranteed the offer would be rejected by EK's camp.

 

[coladin]

Stone looks different this year. Just afeeling I have that he is fully committed to this team, and knows that he can put his stamp on this team. Duchene too, who never said anything of note last year. This year he certainly has been more outspoken.

Stone is the franchise player.

 

[GCK]

For a top 5 in the game, best defense man in the league, generational talent they do. It's fine if some teams can't afford it, but that's on them, the blame doesn't get to just be put back on the player.

Also, the lack of an NTC is probably a bigger issue considering they'd been trying to trade him for months.

Without arguing top 5 in the game, best defenceman etc.... How can you know that Winnipeg and Nashville would alter their policy.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Without arguing top 5 in the game, best defenceman etc.... How can you know that Winnipeg and Nashville would alter their policy.

Ya no point in arguing those

If those teams wouldn't either, that's totally fine because you do have to operate within your means, but then they would need to reap the potential consequences of players not playing along. Anyone playing for those two teams also has the enticement of an organization that really has their shit together and is a contending team, we don't have that to offer right now.

All I'm saying is that it's not fair to put the blame on the player for not accepting an offer that's not a market value offer in more than just the AAV aspect. If you can't compete financially with other teams in the league then it is just a matter of the team not having the resources, and the league having a bit of a broken system, but players shouldn't be held accountable for not giving a discount, or in this case not being willing to take a contract without no trade protection.