This management team has proven to be tight lipped with Dhaliwal discovering the Willander target 17 days ahead of the draft, that their 2 offer meetings with Pettersson get leaked (first one in November, Friedman), and that 4 days after Pettersson is signed, Lindholm (so integral to EP's signing) is on the trade market (Weekes)... A veritable vault.
Yes, I think this management has generally been tight lipped. That isn't to say there are no leaks, but the leaks usually seem to come from the agent side.
On that, your reasons for why Pettersson flipped his no-negotiation policy in February are that the team was competitive, Pettersson was on break, his comfort level and the Lindholm trade. All of these aspects would remain true until the offseason, so why not stick to his original timeline?
Pettersson's agent literally gave the reason for not waiting in the article I've already linked (i.e., they wanted to management to have certainty regarding their future cap structure in advance of the trade deadline).
Allvin says all teams call. This does not refute that one call (CAR) stood out over and above the others. Friedman isolates CAR specifically.
The Carolina rumour can be true. I haven't rejected that. What I have questioned is Freidman's rumour, or inference, that the Carolina rumour was the impetus to the Pettersson re-signing. Again, this rumour or inference doesn't line up with Alvin or Brison's direct evidence.
Rutherford also says "he didn’t know if the possibility of a trade ignited Pettersson’s willingness to sign a new deal." Meaning, it may or may not have...
The Rutherford reference doesn't mean much, if anything at all. We don't have the context of his answer, and it would seem that he was asked whether it ignited Pettersson, and that Rutherford simply said he didn't know because, ugh, obviously Rutherford doesn't know. Rutherford didn't speculate as to what caused Pettersson to sign.
Funnily enough, Rutherford points out the obvious point I've generally made to you several times in that Pettersson would have always known that he may be traded if he didn't re-sign (i.e., the specific Carolina rumour wouldn't have been something that was new or surprising to Pettersson, and therefore, being unlikely to affect his decision making process):
“Anybody that knows anything about the league would know that teams would be calling about a player with this pedigree,” he said.
And so, taken together with Friedman's report, who isolates the CAR rumour as the impetus to sign, both are considering it as a timely factor to Petterson's decision.
Taken together? The Rutherford comment is meaningless. It doesn't add anything at all. He literally said he didn't know, likely in response to a direct question asked.
You've basically just got a rumour from Friedman which may be nothing more than an inference by him based on the timing of the Pettersson signing and interest shown by the Carolina Hurricanes.
Not that Pettersson had already decided to re-sign and a potential trade was a disconnected factor to that decision, unlike Brisson.
You are welcome to disregard the direct evidence given by Alvin and Brisson.
None of the rumours, even Seravelli's breaking news, align with Brisson's timeline. Not in the timing of when they are released, nor in what they reference of when the decision was made. Seravelli in video specifically states that things picked up in the last 3-4 days, not a month ago in his Feb 28th hit.
You seem to think that the media are privy to all contract negotiations, including when the start and how heated they are. This is obviously false, and its also very obviously possible that the parties commenced negotiations around the allstar break, but that the media didnt't get wind of it until closer to the deadline when the rumours arose.
JP Barry interview is relevant because the agents couldn't get him to reengage. June to February, nothing. What changed in late February? They were approaching the deadline. What happens at the deadline? People get traded. When no TDL loomed, Pettersson didn't budge for almost 9 months.
It's not relevant because it happened before Pettersson decided to re-engage. This isn't rocket science.
And again, Pettersson and his agent absolutely would have known that if he didn't re-sign he was likely to be traded.
Ah, so direct evidence of Pettersson saying "I always wanted to sign here" is a normal thing for players to lie about (Rutherford lied too, I guess?),
Yes, I think this type of thing would be a pretty normal thing to lie about. But even then, perhaps he wasn't lying? Perhaps he always did want to sign here, but perhaps he also always wanted to sign with a competitive and competent team? Both can be true.
but Brisson moving the impetus to sign away from the CAR trade rumour is not a normal thing for an agent to lie about?
Correct, that would be a pretty weird thing to lie about. Why make up a convoluted story about when and why Pettersson's re-engaged, which story also seems to just make sense. He could have just not lied?
Certain direct evidence are lies, but other direct evidence are not lies... right.
This is obviously true. We all know people lie about certain things but not others. For you to suggest otherwise is frankly stupid.
I'll leave you with this:
Brisson spoke just an hour after his client put pen to paper on an eight-year, US$92.8 million deal, the richest in Canucks history. It wasn’t a firm target, but one that made sense if they were going to change course and negotiate a new deal before the end of the season, rather than wait till the end which had been Pettersson’s preferred course since last summer.
Why didn't this dollar amount make them change course in the offseason? Because it wasn't there then, and the TDL wasn't there either.
I don't think that was a quote from Brisson and looks to be conjecture from the author.