wildandwoolly
Scrappy Salad
There's one massive flaw in this idea - Jack would have to sign it. Which he wouldn't. Why? Because it's only 4 years. He'll use this offer as fuel to get a Price like contract (buy-out proof, etc).
To do this just to eff up another team's roster is career suicide. Can you imagine pulling this stunt and then show up at the next GMs week long conference? You'd end up sitting at a table in a corner all by yourself.
The flaw is that if they don't match you just paid top dollar plus four firsts for only four years of Eichel and then he walks.
There's one massive flaw in this idea - Jack would have to sign it. Which he wouldn't. Why? Because it's only 4 years. He'll use this offer as fuel to get a Price like contract (buy-out proof, etc).
One of the top three players in the league getting paid less than league maximum is why we have lockouts??This is how we get lockouts.
And then the players realize that they'd rather not risk losing tens d millions of dollars if they get injured or have a decline in their play.It shouldn't, because no one else has a McDavid. Not even the Leafs with Matthews.
Teams can still do bridge deals if they want. Nothing says they can't. In fact, I bet a few of the young guys you expect to follow McDavids lead, will get bridge deals. And here is why:
McDavid set the bar. No one is going over that unless they prove they are better....which seems unlikely at this point.
If you think Matthews is going to get 11 million next summer because of what McDavid signed, that isn't likely to change much in 2 years later due to a bridge deal.
In fact, if I was the Leafs, I would sit down with Matthews, Marner, and Nylander, and tell them ALL, that they are only going to get 2 year bridge deals. Tell them that the reason is cap space and the window to win. By having them all on bridge deals at a lesser amount, it increases the chance to win a Cup. Now I tell them that they are not going to be squeezed into crap contracts, but lesser ones....in the 5-7 million mark. That also keeps them as Maple Leafs longer as well.....none become UFA's at age 29...but rather when they are in their 30's.
So now the Leafs window to win before the big 3 get big deals, is open longer due to them getting bridge deals.
The story goes back to Burke’s days as GM of the Anaheim Ducks when Lowe gave an offer sheet to restricted free agent Dustin Penner. Burke didn’t match and the Ducks lost Penner. Burke was furious at Lowe. The two had a war of words in which Burke said Lowe challenged him to a fight in a radio interview.
“That’s not really how you challenge a guy to a fight,” Burke told The Score. “If you want to challenge a guy to a fight, you pick a place and time. So I called (Rangers GM) Glen Sather and said: ‘This guy went on radio to challenge me to a fight.’ I said, ‘I’m going to be in Lake Placid at the U.S. junior camp.’ I gave him three dates. I told him I would rent a barn.
The Bruins should do this with Eichel, but less $$. Bet he'd love playing for the Bruins so he'd sign it. Then Buffalo can match and be in trouble. 4 middle 1sts isn't the worst price in the world.
Offer sheets are inflationary by nature, as was pointed out by Oilers GM Chiarelli. Owners and shareholders are not going to endorse moves by a manager that will simply result in a business environment with decreased profit margins.
It's wasted effort talking about offer sheets. There's collusion in the NHL. It almost never happens. And when it does, that GM is crucified by everyone despite doing a 100% legal move which is in the rulebook.
There was no retaliation against Edmonton after offer-sheeting Vanek. Will GM's be sore? Sure. But they also know that if they hold grudges, it can only hurt their team.
It doesn't take much effort at all to discuss something, I promise. To call the fact that most NHL clubs find the inflationary and predatory nature of an offer sheet to be counterproductive "collusion" is a bit of hyperbole. If something simply doesn't make sound business sense and this is recognized across the board by most business owners, it's simply good business.
Yeah it's easier to just trade for what you want instead of over paying a guy and losing all your picksIf people want to see more offer sheets they should focus their energy on making the practice more palatable to the clubs. Anybody blaming the GM's or owners for not using this tool more often under the current parameters is barking up the wrong tree.
the argument that there will be revenge, blackballing that GM for putting an offer sheet out is laughable. the reaction on this board and on other internet sites make it look like its illegal or something
Well. That's one way to start a barn fight.