Speculation: So ownership just didn't want to pay Mark Stone

[Sensung]

I don't get it either. I can only guess they are worried about him turning into Jason Allison, and immovable.

The real answer is that it was the poison pill designed to ensure the offer was rejected.

 

[stempniaksen]

Stone found a way to help himself and the Sens at the same time.

I think the better way of phrasing it would be that Stone found a way to help himself, and as a result, managed to help the Senators get a better deal.

There's no way a guy on the way out makes a conscious decision to help his own team like that, but it's also hard to argue it didn't (indirectly) help Dorion land the better package.

You guys are arguing over minutia at this point.

 

[Sensung]

I think the better way of phrasing it would be that Stone found a way to help himself, and as a result, managed to help the Senators get a better deal.

There's no way a guy on the way out makes a conscious decision to help his own team like that, but it's also hard to argue it didn't (indirectly) help Dorion land the better package.

You guys are arguing over minutia at this point.

Stone going UFA was a viable option. Either way he was getting paid.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

The real answer is that it was the poison pill designed to ensure the offer was rejected.

Eugene did say himself on the day of that trade that this was always part of the plan.

 

[stempniaksen]

Stone going UFA was a viable option. Either way he was getting paid.

"Getting paid" is relative though. Even if he got the same AAV from another team, it wouldn't necessarily have been in a 'tax free' state and there was no guarantee it would have been with a team as successful as Vegas (with the McCrimmon factor coming into play as well). A bird in the hand is better than two in the bush, after all.

I'm sure Stone (and his agent) were looking out for #1, the fact their decision helped the Senators as well is just gravy.

 

[Sensung]

Eugene did say himself on the day of that trade that this was always part of the plan.

Yup

 

[Sensung]

"Getting paid" is relative though. Even if he got the same AAV from another team, it wouldn't necessarily have been in a 'tax free' state and there was no guarantee it would have been with a team as successful as Vegas (with the McCrimmon factor coming into play as well). A bird in the hand is better than two in the bush, after all.

I'm sure Stone (and his agent) were looking out for #1, the fact their decision helped the Senators as well is just gravy.

Speculate for me.

How many teams do you think would have been bidding on Stone if he got to July 1st?

 

[stempniaksen]

Speculate for me.

How many teams do you think would have been bidding on Stone if he got to July 1st?

30.

Now you can speculate.

How many (successful/playoff) teams do you think would have offered him $76 million (tax free) with $48 million in SB's and full NMC?

 

[Grizz MacArthur]

The Sens haven't signed any player to a multi-year contract with a salary cap hit exceeding $1 million since Mark Borowiecki in the Fall of 2017. None.

What happened with Mark Stone is hardly surprising to anyone who has been paying attention.

 

[5ive4Fighting]

I think 5 out of 8 is a reasonable ask of a player to share some of the risk of extending him well into his 30s. These current "market" contracts for superstars heavily expose teams to virtually all the risk. Lockout and no revenue? Sorry. Gotta pay me anyway. Want to build in some future flexibility in asset management in case it's needed? Nope. I'm too good right now for you to get to worry about if I'll ever be bad. You can't fault players for aggressively pursuing their own interests at the potential expense of the team when the market will bear it, but you can note that the player didn't choose to compromise with you when the cost of that was leaving the team and the city and the fans behind. There's no arguing that Ottawa's stance has been prudent. Whether it's been stupid prudent or wise prudent won't be known for some time.

 

[Sensung]

30.

Now you can speculate.

How many (successful/playoff) teams do you think would have offered him $76 million (tax free) with $48 million in SB's and full NMC?

More than 1...who knows how high the bidding would go?

Teams would likely be willing to move players out (for assets) to get a free wallet like Stone.

There is merit in your point that Stone also benefited from the path he chose, but acting like it was his only option and that it didn't come out much better for the Sens ignores reality.

 

[stempniaksen]

I think 5 out of 8 is a reasonable ask of a player to share some of the risk of extending him well into his 30s. These current "market" contracts for superstars heavily expose teams to virtually all the risk. Lockout and no revenue? Sorry. Gotta pay me anyway. Want to build in some future flexibility in asset management in case it's needed? Nope. I'm too good right now for you to get to worry about if I'll ever be bad. You can't fault players for aggressively pursuing their own interests at the potential expense of the team when the market will bear it, but you can note that the player didn't choose to compromise with you when the cost of that was leaving the team and the city and the fans behind. There's no arguing that Ottawa's stance has been prudent. Whether it's been stupid prudent or wise prudent won't be known for some time.

They just lost 3 of the best players to ever put on a Sens jersey, it's stupid prudent.

It's also not "reasonable" to ask for superstars to take less than market value. As of right now, the market dictates these players get full No-Trade/No-Move protection. The Senators can impose whatever internal rules they want, but all it's going to do is push long-time/loyal star players out the door.

 

[Crosside]

Eugene did say himself on the day of that trade that this was always part of the plan.

Melnyk and Dorion said stuff like that everytime he fail thing. It s just for show that he have the control on the situation

 

[stempniaksen]

More than 1...who knows how high the bidding would go?

Teams would likely be willing to move players out (for assets) to get a free wallet like Stone.

There is merit in your point that Stone also benefited from the path he chose, but acting like it was his only option and that it didn't come out much better for the Sens ignores reality.

NHL players (historically) don't like the unknown. The Vegas offer (with the 8th year) provided enough money/term/security that he felt comfortable not going to UFA. I'm going to assume his agent is smart enough to know that if they left any money on the table this summer it was a negligible amount, and when you count all the other benefits Vegas can offer (weather, on ice success) it made the deal a no brainer.

You're kind of glossing over that 8th year, imo. It was likely a big part of Stone re-upping so quickly. He would have had to sign for (just shy) of what Tavares got to get the same money overall. Personally, I'm not convinced that type of offer would be on the table, I think his agent probably feels the same way.

 

[DaveMatthew]

I think 5 out of 8 is a reasonable ask of a player to share some of the risk of extending him well into his 30s. These current "market" contracts for superstars heavily expose teams to virtually all the risk. Lockout and no revenue? Sorry. Gotta pay me anyway. Want to build in some future flexibility in asset management in case it's needed? Nope. I'm too good right now for you to get to worry about if I'll ever be bad. You can't fault players for aggressively pursuing their own interests at the potential expense of the team when the market will bear it, but you can note that the player didn't choose to compromise with you when the cost of that was leaving the team and the city and the fans behind. There's no arguing that Ottawa's stance has been prudent. Whether it's been stupid prudent or wise prudent won't be known for some time.

Giving back on a NTC would be fine for players, if that’s all it was.

But you can’t ask a player like Stone to sacrifice salary AND upfront money AND a full no trade clause AND winning for the next 2-3 seasons.

If that’s the expectation from Ottawa, than say goodbye to Chabot and Tkachuk next.

It’s one thing to ask players to take less so you can reinvest savings into the team. It’s very different to ask them to take less when you’re barely hitting the cap floor, while also not giving them security for the length of the contract.

 

[Micklebot]

Not sure I totally get the hang-up on giving out an NTC/NMC. If the player has declined to the point where the Senators want to move him that in itself is probably going to kill any trade possibilities.

Take Bobby Ryan and Milan Lucic for example. Both have NMC's but they are functionally irrelevant due to how poorly they've been playing vs. their cap hit and salary costs.

It's not a Ryan/Lucic scenario that scares teams away fron NMC/NTC it's the Spezza/Heatley/Redden scenario where we had a good offer on the table and had to accept a lower quality offer because the player invoked his NTC.

Redden for nothing instead of Marleau
Spezza for a 2nd and Chiasson instead of a 1st and Hornqvist
Heatley for Michalek and Cheechoo instead of Penner Cogliano and Smid

 

[Sensung]

NHL players (historically) don't like the unknown. The Vegas offer (with the 8th year) provided enough money/term/security that he felt comfortable not going to UFA. I'm going to assume his agent is smart enough to know that if they left any money on the table this summer it was a negligible amount, and when you count all the other benefits Vegas can offer (weather, on ice success) it made the deal a no brainer.

You're kind of glossing over that 8th year, imo. It was likely a big part of Stone re-upping so quickly. He would have had to sign for (just shy) of what Tavares got to get the same money overall. Personally, I'm not convinced that type of offer would be on the table, I think his agent probably feels the same way.

Good point re 8th year.

Stone took the sure thing, but in doing so did the Sens a favour.

 

[aragorn]

Clearly this franchise & specifically this owner has been having some financial difficulty for some time & are losing more money than it can afford. How bad it is can be anyone's guess but we have been seeing them cutting costs all over the off ice operations as well as the on ice operations. Once the decision was made to rebuild & we can argue this to death but my guess would be when they decided to move on from EK.

And from that time forward they started slowly moving every piece they could & that process is continuing which is why I think all of the UFAs may get moved again this coming season. Out with the old & in with the new cheaper players, coaches, management, employees .... & everyone else involved with this franchise it seems. It really looks like the Sens have become the NHL's version of the Expos, although EM may step up that one yr that they look like Cup contenders, we hope. Until that day, this could be the normal version of operations around this team with this owner.

 

[NorthCoast]

It's also not "reasonable" to ask for superstars to take less than market value. As of right now, the market dictates these players get full No-Trade/No-Move protection. The Senators can impose whatever internal rules they want, but all it's going to do is push long-time/loyal star players out the door.

^^^This^^^

I keep seeing people stating what a good offer would have been, or what would have been over-payment, or that Stone should have given a discounts...it's all mute.

EVERY STAR PLAYER GETS ABOVE MARKET VALUE ON THEIR UFA CONTRACT.

Find one that doesn't and you found the exception that proves the rule. And if you pick TB/Vegas contracts then add 10-15% for tax variations.

If you want to sign a star player over the age of 27 then you are going to pay above their value. Facts.



So the question is not what he is worth. The questions are simply:

1) Can you win the cup without the ability to sign 27+ star players to new/overvalued contracts?

2) Is Stone a 27+ star player that you can win a cup with?

Listening to Melnyk he clearly believes that the answer to number 1 is Yes.

Which is a pretty clear indication to their thoughts on #2...and certainly calls into question their motivations during negotiations.

 

[Liver King]

once again, f*** Melnyk and f*** Dorion

two scumbags

 

[5ive4Fighting]

They just lost 3 of the best players to ever put on a Sens jersey, it's stupid prudent.

It's also not "reasonable" to ask for superstars to take less than market value. As of right now, the market dictates these players get full No-Trade/No-Move protection. The Senators can impose whatever internal rules they want, but all it's going to do is push long-time/loyal star players out the door.

You can and you do. The hometown discount has been a thing forever. And these players were not loyal to Ottawa. Come on now. EK was was talking about money and "when I go to free agency" and barely returned a phone call as far as I can tell. Duchene has not demonstrated loyalty to any of his three teams as of yet. Stone doesn't say much, so we ascribed a lot of loyalty and other qualities to him, but the fact is he left a fair offer on a table in Ottawa too. I wish we had our players here as much as anybody, believe me, but this casting them as helpless victims of Ottawa management has got to go. Everybody involved made choices that they own themselves, which they believed to be in the best interests of somebody or something.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

Okie dokie, poor guy only got 9.5M , 8yrs and 48M bonus money. The lengths people go to help the Ottawa Senators.

This was not some groundbreaking deal, this happens in negotiations. Can't sign him? Ok, let's find a place that will and see if they will sign him at Ottawa's benefit. What if another team offered a 1st and other picks as a rental? Some now are pissed because Brannstrom didn't score a hat trick in his first game that Ottawa didn't get a 1st, and Bran is small, Bran is undersized, etc...

I think Brannstrom is a very good prospect. Fact is he is undersized and his value is less than at least 2 other D drafted ahead of him in 2017. He is an exciting player with a bright future. I think a signed Stone should have returned him and a 1st. IMO Dorion did not get enough back for the quality of player Mark Stone is. Let's just say I am not quite as proud as Dorion in that deal

 

[DaveMatthew]

You can and you do. The hometown discount has been a thing forever. And these players were not loyal to Ottawa. Come on now. EK was was talking about money and "when I go to free agency" and barely returned a phone call as far as I can tell. Duchene has not demonstrated loyalty to any of his three teams as of yet. Stone doesn't say much, so we ascribed a lot of loyalty and other qualities to him, but the fact is he left a fair offer on a table in Ottawa too. I wish we had our players here as much as anybody, believe me, but this casting them as helpless victims of Ottawa management has got to go. Everybody involved made choices that they own themselves, which they believed to be in the best interests of somebody or something.

Players only take hometown discounts when they believe that their sacrifice will enable the team to build a better roster around them. (See: Sidney Crosby)

Or, they take one because they love the city/community and want to live their for the duration of their contract. In most of these cases, the players simply don't want to uproot their family and take less money to make sure they don't have to. (See: Oliver Ekman-Larsson)

Two things stick out with Stone:

• Ottawa is not a cap team and doesn't need cap savings. They had plenty of room to surround Stone with a more competitive team, but they chose not to do so. He knew that if he took less, it wouldn't mean those savings are reinvested in another player. It's not like if Stone took 8M instead of 9.5M, they would've kept Duchene or went out and signed Panarin.

• Ottawa wasn't willing to give him a NMC for the duration of the deal. So even if he was okay with playing on a non-competitive, budget team because he loved living in this city, the Senators couldn't guarantee that he would play out the contract here.

Essentially, they asked him to take a hometown discount without offering him the chance to win or security in return. That's not how it works.

 

[SensontheRush]

You can and you do. The hometown discount has been a thing forever. And these players were not loyal to Ottawa. Come on now. EK was was talking about money and "when I go to free agency" and barely returned a phone call as far as I can tell. Duchene has not demonstrated loyalty to any of his three teams as of yet. Stone doesn't say much, so we ascribed a lot of loyalty and other qualities to him, but the fact is he left a fair offer on a table in Ottawa too. I wish we had our players here as much as anybody, believe me, but this casting them as helpless victims of Ottawa management has got to go. Everybody involved made choices that they own themselves, which they believed to be in the best interests of somebody or something.

Just a bunch of grossly misconstrued conjecture. "All these players left for their own individual reasons, but its not management's fault". If you are willing to deny a CLEAR trend, then whatever man.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

You can and you do. The hometown discount has been a thing forever. And these players were not loyal to Ottawa. Come on now. EK was was talking about money and "when I go to free agency" and barely returned a phone call as far as I can tell. Duchene has not demonstrated loyalty to any of his three teams as of yet. Stone doesn't say much, so we ascribed a lot of loyalty and other qualities to him, but the fact is he left a fair offer on a table in Ottawa too. I wish we had our players here as much as anybody, believe me, but this casting them as helpless victims of Ottawa management has got to go. Everybody involved made choices that they own themselves, which they believed to be in the best interests of somebody or something.

Loyalty only goes so far and its a two way street. Sens have shown they have no loyalty. They want it but they don't give it. even Erik Karlsson got traded .. and he was the 8th day creation that would be a Senator for life. Ask Zack Smith about their loyalty. Ask Turris. Further as a pro hockey player I am at your mercy to build a team to win. When you do the exact opposite of that you affect me personally. Don't ask me to be loyal if you are a complete screw up that can't hold up your end.