Fozz
Registered User
And that deal only includes 4 UFA years and allows him to hit complete free agency at the age of 29. Not the ideal scenario for the Kings.
Rumor: (The Score update) PK Subban looking for a 7 year deal north of $6.5M
- Thread starter Habset
- Start date
And that deal only includes 4 UFA years and allows him to hit complete free agency at the age of 29. Not the ideal scenario for the Kings.
Fozz
Registered User
That's probably because those people live in a fantasy world and, while spending all their time in front of their computer, imagine they could be better NHL GMs than folks that have spent their lives in actual competitive hockey environments. I'll bet you most of them don't even know how to skate!
Oh cool...sarcasm
Anyways...The Habs offered Subban more on his bridge deal than both Price and Pacioretty got.
Unless you are PK Subban's agent or family member, i'm not sure why you're so concerned with the fact he signed a below-market RFA deal. That's the whole point of having players as restricted free agents (emphasis on the word restricted).
If teams continue to hand out big money deals to players coming off their ELC...then we might as well just scrap the entire restricted free agent system then
hockeyfan2k11
Registered User
- Jun 11, 2011
- 12,150
- 6
The same people who wanted us to trade him and let Diaz take his spot. Go pull up that thread and read the many people who were saying "pay the man". You're a "scout" and can't even see PK's value. The guy came off a "bad" year and led the D in scoring. The team had no one at the position near Subban's level but you suggest playing hard ball. Logical.
Lafleurs Guy
Guuuuuuuy!
- Jul 20, 2007
- 75,023
- 44,739
Again...you seem to missing a very important factor
The whole point of the RESTRICTED free agent system is to allow teams to CONTROL player salaries. So yes, players who are RFA, especially the really good one's like Subban, are RESTRICTED in terms of their earning potential early on in their careers.
Some teams choose to not take advantage of this built-in mechanism within the CBA and prefer to pay those young players way more money than they deserve based on their potential...which is fine
But there is nothing wrong with using the CBA as its intended to be...
And who cares if the Habs were lucky Subban didn't tell them to **** off...he didn't. So how is that of any relevance right now????
Lafleurs Guy
Guuuuuuuy!
- Jul 20, 2007
- 75,023
- 44,739
This 'lowball' theory is just your own...didn't Subban sign it? I guess he must of thought it was a good enough offer to take right? Unless your next theory is that Bergevin held a gun to his head and forced him to sign this 'lowball' offer.
As for giving the minimum because they're restricted? Using hyperbole doesn't make your argument any more solid.
By definition, any offer to an RFA (at least in the case of good young players with potential) is a lowball offer. That's why the RFA system exists...
Lafleurs Guy
Guuuuuuuy!
- Jul 20, 2007
- 75,023
- 44,739
Yeah, he signed it after holding out. He was worth more than what we gave him. That's not my own theory... If you think he wasn't worth more than what we gave him you don't understand hockey. You keep coming back to "but, but he was a free agent"... it doesn't pass the smell test.
Just give it up.
Why give it up? I'm just having a debate with you? If you can't handle someone not agreeing with you, then I suggest not posting on here??
Nevertheless...
Of course I think Subban was/is worth more than what he signed for. But the Habs didn't HAVE to pay him that because, again key words here, HE WAS A RESTRICTED FREE AGENT. Again, the system as it currently stands, allows teams to not have to pay their young players whatever that player demands, this is COLLECTIVELY BARGAINED. Whether it's fair or not, whether it hurts the players feelings or not, it's COLLECTIVELY BARGAINED. Why do you feel teams are wrong for taking advantage of that if they so choose????? Give me a valid argument that's not based on your perceived interpretation of those players feelings, but on something tangible...
If YOU can't understand that very simple theory, then IMO, YOU do not understand hockey. This has nothing to do with 'passing a smell test'...it's just how the system works.
Maybe in the next CBA...the players will get their way and following their ELC's, theyc an become UFA's. Then everything will be right in your world because all players coming off their ELC's will make what their worth, not what the system allows them to be paid
Last edited:
After this specific line, I don't think I can take you seriously anymore.
He was forced to take 5.75m dollars, poor guy. He had offersheets available to him, but he wanted to play here. PK is an adult who makes his own decisions, and PK has an agent who does this for a living.
PK decided not to sign any offersheets because he wanted to stay. It was his choice. You act as if he was forced, as if is family was being held captive
We're talking about a millionaires here, boohoo a 25 year old guy had to wait two years before making 6m+ a year, and had to take 5.75m
(lol) as a compensation, when meanwhile, he's going to get more money now as a result of that bridge deal and proving himself even more.Did PK fire his agent? Did PK publicly state he was mad at management, or that he should have gotten more money? No, because PK is an RFA, the league has rules, and MB was well within his right to offer any sort of deal he wants. PK had options and he decided to choose that offer over holding out for better or signing an offersheet.
Key words are decision, decided, chose, choice, etc. He wasn't forced to do anything, and next time somebody "forces" me to sign a deal worth 5.75m dollars over the course of two years, I'll give you a call when I'm down on myself for being "forced" to accept such a deal.
The only person who should give it a rest here is you. This is the way the league works if you don't like it go whine to Bettman about it, don't blame MB for smartly making it so he can lock Subban in for an extra 2 years down the line.
Lafleurs Guy
Guuuuuuuy!
- Jul 20, 2007
- 75,023
- 44,739
He chose to sign with us. So what?After this specific line, I don't think I can take you seriously anymore.
He was forced to take 5.75m dollars, poor guy. He had offersheets available to him, but he wanted to play here. PK is an adult who makes his own decisions, and PK has an agent who does this for a living.
PK decided not to sign any offersheets because he wanted to stay. It was his choice. You act as if he was forced, as if is family was being held captive
We're talking about a millionaires here, boohoo a 25 year old guy had to wait two years before making 6m+ a year, and had to take 5.75m
Did PK fire his agent? Did PK publicly state he was mad at management, or that he should have gotten more money? No, because PK is an RFA, the league has rules, and MB was well within his right to offer any sort of deal he wants. PK had options and he decided to choose that offer over holding out for better or signing an offersheet.
Key words are decision, decided, chose, choice, etc. He wasn't forced to do anything, and next time somebody "forces" me to sign a deal worth 5.75m dollars over the course of two years, I'll give you a call when I'm down on myself for being "forced" to accept such a deal.
The only person who should give it a rest here is you. This is the way the league works if you don't like it go whine to Bettman about it, don't blame MB for smartly making it so he can lock Subban in for an extra 2 years down the line.
That doesn't mean we didn't lowball him and it doesn't mean we handled things the way we should. Mgmt was stupid in how they went about this.
End of story.
Lafleurs Guy
Guuuuuuuy!
- Jul 20, 2007
- 75,023
- 44,739
Just because he was a restricted free agent doesn't mean we went about this the right way.
Your argument that the Habs only had to pay him X because he was RFA is total BS. They can offer him whatever they want, he can still refuse. And if he refuses there's a holdout or some other team can make an offer.
The fact that he stayed with us doesn't mean he wasn't lowballed and it doesn't mean that we were right in how we went about doing this. We forced this on him and we were lucky he accepted. Totally stupid way to go about negotiating with your best young players.
As for you disagreeing... disagree all you wish. This was flat out dumb by our mgmt group. It's been discussed at length in threads that were created last year and I'm not going to put forth the same effort now in explaining this as I did then.
If you can't see that we made a mistake here, you are blind.
The same people who wanted us to trade him and let Diaz take his spot. Go pull up that thread and read the many people who were saying "pay the man". You're a "scout" and can't even see PK's value. The guy came off a "bad" year and led the D in scoring. The team had no one at the position near Subban's level but you suggest playing hard ball. Logical.
I don't recall anybody saying to trade Subban and use Diaz in his spot...must be your imagination.
As I said he led the D in scoring because Hamrlik was near the end and Markov was injured. He should have been playing a lesser role.
My Ignore list is building...tired of arguing with some who are set in their opinions and won't listen to any reason.
But he didn't refuse...he signed that deal and is about to sign again
So who's argument is BS here?
Also, i'm a reasonable guy...I usually try to see both sides of an argument and i'd love to in this case see how management was dumb for getting a franchise player signed under value, but you've yet to make any solid argument supporting that. I don't really care about old threads or that it was discussed at length, there's more information today than there was then.
Once Subban signs his long term deal. You realize that you and everyone else who has so vehemently argued against the bridge deal will have to admit you were wrong right?
Again...your opinion of how the negotiations went or were handled are completely irrelevant.
Management was stupid? If they can't get him signed long term, i'll agree with you.
But if they do, i'll be looking to discuss this further with you...
Lafleurs Guy
Guuuuuuuy!
- Jul 20, 2007
- 75,023
- 44,739
Won't matter what they do going forward. They were stupid in how they handled this. And I really hope this doesn't become our policy because we will end up ****ing ourselves over at some point down the line if it is. As it is we'll be paying way more than we had to over the next three seasons. Totally dumb way to handle things.
There is no other side here. This one's black and white. Our mgmt mishandled this.
It's easy to throw up baseless arguments...here's one, the sky is actually orange.
The hard part is proving it, still waiting for you to show how this is going to '**** us over at some point down the line'.
Feel free to do so at any point
Not sure why you keep repeating that he was a RFA. Everybody knows this.
It was a stupid management decision. Of course it was well within their rights, nobody is arguing otherwise, they can sign a RFA to an 8 year deal if they want too.
Not suggesting they should have signed him to such a long term but it's within the team's rights.
PK was already a solid player and pretty much everybody except a handful knew just how special PK was going to be.
Bergevin didn't know PK. I remember listening to him on the radio say how he needs to get familiar with the team because being out west in Chicago he didn't really know Montreal's team. So he wasn't going to sign a player coming off his sophomore year to a longer deal, which is fine. But we all knew how good PK was and the potential that you knew he was going to reach.
The bridge deal was stupid. Players are investments, PK was well worth the investment risk. Simple as that.
Except that PK isn't just another player. He was well worth a big contract already and we should have had the foresight to signing him at a longer term with more cash not to put us in the position we are in today.
PK held out, so ya, it's pretty evident he was lowballed. How naive are you? You know this. Even you said he was worth more than his deal.
Worth more+Player holding out= Not lowball? Really buddy? If that's not a lowball then nothing is.
I remember some saying to trade him. That he was selfish, putting himself before the team, and that he should be traded for it. Of course none of them believed he was holding out to sign a deal that didn't even reach a 3M cap hit. They all thought he was asking for 7m. But yes, there were people saying to trade him.
Maybe. Not sure how Martin would have used him if Hamrlik was in his prime and Markov there. That's completely irrelevant anyways because PK was used as the #1 and he handled it very well.
hockeyfan2k11
Registered User
- Jun 11, 2011
- 12,150
- 6
Sterling Archer
Registered User
- Sep 26, 2006
- 22,976
- 13,449
Anyone know the expression "there's more than one way to skin a cat"? Besides being incredibly gross and not really reflective of anything in real life in the modern age, it does bring a good point.
Different GM in different situations with different players may employ different strategies to achieve differing results.
Seeing as the PK ordeal hasn't even played itself out yet I think it's hilarious and idiotic how so many people are so steadfast and incredibly convinced that they're absolutely right and that the other side is absolutely wrong in every conceivable way.
This fanaticism is really pretty sad considering both sides have very relevant arguments and are both right and both wrong depending on future events that have as yet to materialize. So let's not get too hard-core with the opinions yet as there's a long way to go before seeing who was ultimately right and who was wrong, if ever.
Different GM in different situations with different players may employ different strategies to achieve differing results.
Seeing as the PK ordeal hasn't even played itself out yet I think it's hilarious and idiotic how so many people are so steadfast and incredibly convinced that they're absolutely right and that the other side is absolutely wrong in every conceivable way.
This fanaticism is really pretty sad considering both sides have very relevant arguments and are both right and both wrong depending on future events that have as yet to materialize. So let's not get too hard-core with the opinions yet as there's a long way to go before seeing who was ultimately right and who was wrong, if ever.
You can't blame all posters because one is clueless...
I found he survived it more than "handled it very well". A lot of ups and down and bumps in the road, definitely not the ideal situation.
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
GDT: WCQF Game 3: Dallas Stars @ Vegas Golden Knights | 7:30PM PT |- Latest: Clint Eastwood
