News: Was July 1st 2016 one of the worst signing days ever?

[hockeykicker]

Click to read more...

 

[NobleSix]

Looks like it, yeah.

 

[member 157595]

Good lord. It's like a Murderer's Row of bad contracts.

 

[Slyfox]

Easily AINEC.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

Sure looks like it

 

[Aceboogie]

Remember though, GMs are super smart people

 

[member 157595]

Remember though, GMs are super smart people

Every time someone gives you the "these are professionals and you're just a nobody on a message board" routine, you can point to this thread. No more evidence is needed that these guys have their fair share of dumbass attacks.

 

[CapSpace]

''What a day!''

-vomiting jet

 

[krt88nc]

All GM's today have to learn the TERM is the killer word. If the player wants seven years, offer six. Always go one less than they want. Teams should be all holding out for more 3 to 5 year deals. Years 6 and 7 are killer for the teams.

 

[M2Beezy]

Erikssons the WORST by far

 

[member 157595]

All GM's today have to learn the TERM is the killer word. If the player wants seven years, offer six. Always go one less than they want. Teams should be all holding out for more 3 to 5 year deals. Years 6 and 7 are killer for the teams.

Term, NTC/NMC and signing bonus money. Many of these contracts are written up so that the bulk of the money is paid in signing bonuses, which makes a buyout extraordinarily painful.

 

[Reaper45]

Ugh and Dean Lombardi offered Lucic 4.5 million for 8 years.

 

[Aceboogie]

Every time someone gives you the "these are professionals and you're just a nobody on a message board" routine, you can point to this thread. No more evidence is needed that these guys have their fair share of dumbass attacks.

amen, there is like 15 GMs Id consider worse than your average HF user. Due to the Old Boys Club menality of GMs, my view is that being stupid/irrational is the rule in the NHL and being a smart, levle headed GM is the exception. To my eye there is 5-7 GMs Id actually say are obviously good to great

 

[TheDoldrums]

All GM's today have to learn the TERM is the killer word. If the player wants seven years, offer six. Always go one less than they want. Teams should be all holding out for more 3 to 5 year deals. Years 6 and 7 are killer for the teams.

I mean normally I agree, but a lot of these deals were terrible by year 2.

 

[member 157595]

Ugh and Dean Lombardi offered Lucic 4.5 million for 8 years.

That reminds me that it was rumored that back when the Leafs signed David Clarkson to that nose fisting of a contract, that the Oilers offered even more money. I don't know how you out-stupid Dave Nonis, but if the rumors are true MacTavish did exactly that.

 

[joestevens29]

As bad as it was. It could've been worse. Everything was kept under 6mil a year which seemed rare

 

[Rebels57]

Astonishingly bad..and we all knew it at the time for most of those deals.

 

[Rebels57]

Erikssons the WORST by far

How is it worse than Lucic?

 

[joestevens29]

All GM's today have to learn the TERM is the killer word. If the player wants seven years, offer six. Always go one less than they want. Teams should be all holding out for more 3 to 5 year deals. Years 6 and 7 are killer for the teams.

The problem is GM's don't care about that far down the line. If they don't put a good team together now they will be fired. So saving some money today usually makes the most sense.

Now if GM's were guaranteed to be able to stay for 5 years, then maybe they start thinking differently. But as of June 30th this year how many guys truly can say in 5 years they will be with their current club?

 

[member 157595]

Astonishingly bad..and we all knew it at the time for most of those deals.

That's the thing that gets me.

This site has its share of both Captain Hindsights and blind homers that will defend ANY move their team does, but no one could seriously take an objective look at basically any of those contracts at the time and think they were a good idea. They were terrible the moment they were signed.

 

[robertocarlos]

They aren't worth half the dollar amount on those contracts. OK maybe half.

 

[Rebels57]

That's the thing that gets me.

This site has its share of both Captain Hindsights and blind homers that will defend ANY move their team does, but no one could seriously take an objective look at basically any of those contracts at the time and think they were a good idea. They were terrible the moment they were signed.

Desperation is a hell of a drug.

 

[member 157595]

The problem is GM's don't care about that far down the line. If they don't put a good team together now they will be fired. So saving some money today usually makes the most sense.

Now if GM's were guaranteed to be able to stay for 5 years, then maybe they start thinking differently. But as of June 30th this year how many guys truly can say in 5 years they will be with their current club?

Exactly, and that's why these type of contracts will still be offered.

 

[InfinityIggy]

The interesting part is most of us knew the majority of those contracts were atrocious the moment they were announced.

 

[kunekune]

Those are some awful contracts. But if you wanted one of those players that's the price you had to pay. Most of those guys had similar offers from other teams.