Fivealive5
Registered User
- Nov 6, 2017
- 251
- 351
I have to imagine other plays wouldn't be pleased at their own value being dragged down if, say, MacKinnon and Landeskog took massive underpayments to keep the core together.
I think you underestimate how badly most players want to win a cup-they do they do indeed. However, they want money and the ability to take care of their family more.
1) Money
---
--
-
...
..
.
*
#
2) Stanley cup
They have no say, hence the "free" part of free agency.
Happens all the time, guys take less for the good of the team.
Just on the Bruins you have Pastrnak signing for "only" 6.67 a year over 8, Marchand for 6.125 and Bergeron at 6.875. Even McAvoy signed for only 4.9
You can make an easy case that Pastrnak and McAvoy took 75%. Marchand signed his right when he was breaking out so that's a little different
I have to imagine other plays wouldn't be pleased at their own value being dragged down if, say, MacKinnon and Landeskog took massive underpayments to keep the core together.
Funny, I think if you ask around here most of us would say we'd be able to take care of our respective family just as well with $5 million as we would with $10 million.
Yeah but imagine having the opportunity to make $10M instead of $5M.... you would turn that down? Doubtful.Funny, I think if you ask around here most of us would say we'd be able to take care of our respective family just as well with $5 million as we would with $10 million.
Pastrnak had one good season at the time of signing. That was not a discount especially considering he was a RFA who didn't have arbitration rights.
I have to imagine other plays wouldn't be pleased at their own value being dragged down if, say, MacKinnon and Landeskog took massive underpayments to keep the core together.
Yeah but imagine having the opportunity to make $10M instead of $5M.... you would turn that down? Doubtful.
In fact, it should be exactly the opposite reaction since this would benefit the majority of players at the expense of a relatively small number. The NHL salary pool is a fixed pot. The less one player gets the more that goes to everyone else.
Winning answer here.At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter because the players get 50% of revenue regardless. If anything, it helps the NHL's "middle class" if star players take a smaller piece of the pie.