VainGretzky
Registered User
- Jun 4, 2015
- 13,148
- 10,763
Other than his price tag, I don't see a problem with Russell mentoring Jones on the 3rd pair
I haven't paid much attention to these boards lately other than checking here and there, but some of the comments as well as what I've heard on 1260(this morning again) is just ludicrous.
I can't wrap my head around people that wouldn't want to spend 12.5mil on one of the best players in the game. They'd rather get a lessor player and spread the wealth. Having a center that is one of the best in the game allows you to spend less on other parts of your team. Instead of having to bank on multiple elite wingers you can get away with 1. You can overcome not having a number 1 d-man. Have people not seen what Pittsburgh has done?
The guy out of Buffalo this morning suggesting that if Eichel won the Hart that he wouldn't want to spend in the neighborhood of 12.5mil on Eichel just seemed off base. I guess some people rather have multiple 5 million dollar men that are 50 point players instead of 1 100 point player that makes everyone around him better.
CapFriendly has the breakdown of McDavid's contract:
https://www.capfriendly.com/players/connor-mcdavid
Year 1: $13M signing bonus, $2M base salary
Year 2: 13, 1
Year 3: 12, 1
Year 4: 13, 2
Year 5: 11, 1
Year 6: 10, 1
Year 7: 7, 3
Year 8: 7, 3
Total: $86M in signing bonuses, $14M in base salary
so why the decline in salary in year 2 and 3, then year 4 is the same as year 1?
pending lockout
It's kind of painful how bad McDavid is at interviews. I don't think it's an Edmonton thing and more a media thing.
Not that he needs to worry about that crap. It'll come eventually or it won't. It should get easier with success and cups too....or so I'm told.
pending lockout
The agents are getting smart with structuring these bonuses.
Players with bonuses, payable before a potential lockout begins are smart for the individual players and the NHLPA as a whole. Drai will do the same with his contract.
I suspect that the combined costs of McDavid and Drai's bonuses alone will be a major factor pushing Katz to oppose a lockout.
I don't think there will be another lockout in the league for a long, long time.
If a future lockout lasted a whole year wouldn't Mcdavid play the next season for his one million base salary only?The agents are getting smart with structuring these bonuses.
Players with bonuses, payable before a potential lockout begins are smart for the individual players and the NHLPA as a whole. Drai will do the same with his contract.
I suspect that the combined costs of McDavid and Drai's bonuses alone will be a major factor pushing Katz to oppose a lockout.
I don't think there will be another lockout in the league for a long, long time.
I don't think think it's much of a reach. He got 100 while still in a boys body. Imagine once he has man strength. He's only gonna get more powerful and faster.
If a future lockout lasted a whole year wouldn't Mcdavid play the next season for his one million base salary only?
Just seen this on McDavids happy to be a Oiler Tweet
So in what year of Mcdavid's contract does he not receive his bonus? Or does he get more than 100 million if there were a lockout that lasted a year?No. This was a major part of the Weber offersheet. Philly tried to make it as intolerable as possible. If the whole 2012-13 season was lost to a lockout then by July 1, 2014 Nashville would have paid $40M for just 82 games of Weber.
So in what year of Mcdavid's contract does he not receive his bonus? Or does he get more than 100 million if there were a lockout that lasted a year?
The agents are getting smart with structuring these bonuses.
Players with bonuses, payable before a potential lockout begins are smart for the individual players and the NHLPA as a whole. Drai will do the same with his contract.
I suspect that the combined costs of McDavid and Drai's bonuses alone will be a major factor pushing Katz to oppose a lockout.
I don't think there will be another lockout in the league for a long, long time.
It's not unlikely but one positive sign was that the owners were willing to go to the Olympics if the players agreed to not reopen the deal until the end of this CBA. This is a sign that the owners do not have a significant agenda that will drive a long lockout at this point.There almost certainly will be a lockout in 2 (or 3? Can't remember). They are setting it up already.
It's not unlikely but one positive sign was that the owners were willing to go to the Olympics if the players agreed to not reopen the deal until the end of this CBA. This is a sign that the owners do not have a significant agenda that will drive a long lockout at this point.