I'm still not seeing any real justification for the contract figures you're throwing out there. The market clearly showed otherwise. Marleau's contract didn't prevent them from taking care of any of those RFA's and a big reason why Michalek and Bernier were looking promising was by playing on Marleau's wings.
Then don't see it. The archives of internet comments don't share the hindsight. And yeah, i know you don't agree with the old "majority opinion" because you said so in your last post. im merely saying i was far from alone in my thoughts.
Michalek and Bernier looked promising because they were high first rounders and could break out at any time.
Also, why wouldn't you think the cap was going to keep increasing as it did? They didn't exactly have a choice in terms of how the cap would rise as it was a collectively bargained agreement that still had multiple years to go. Why would you let Sather's complaints about it influence you about the cap but not influence you in the possibility of him throwing money at Marleau in the open market? I don't think you can have that both ways.
Because they literally talked about it not going up. it wasn't Sather's complaints. it was complaints about Sather again throwing huge money at marginal players.
And yeah, they did stop raising the cap. They just waited another year, and it went up only a trickle of 100k more. Some teams were banking on it going up 5 million again and it hurt them when they stopped the increase that year.
Hannan left before they even signed Marleau to that extension. They let him go because they already had Ehrhoff and Vlasic and were working on getting Boyle that included them taking Lukowich.
That changes what about Hannan being on of the best defensive Dman in the game? yes it was before Marleau signed. the point is, we were feeling the strain of knowing we had to let some folks go because we could not afford them due to cap constraints. So yes, the hope was players would give nice hometown discounts on their caphits. Marleau didn't.
Why would you compare Marleau to Spezza like that though? At no point did Marleau make more than Spezza. At no point did Marleau make more than Kovalchuk. The only time Marleau made more than Sundin was in that first year of his extension by like 800k when Marleau was 29 and Sundin was 37 playing his final season.
Spezza at the time, was getting under 5 million a year. He signed an extension for 7 million later in the season after Marleau signed his. But he was considered significantly better than Marleau at the time.
And oh, sorry. That should have read "makes as Much as Kovalchuk", who was a game breaker who was a regular 40-50+ goal scorer and a line driver(And yeah, had a 6.38m caphit)
Sundin looked consistent and ageless at the time and was largely considered a better player who constantly put up a ppg playing with guys like Darcy Tucker lol. And no, his last year as a leaf he was signed for 5.5 million on a one year deal, then he signed for 5.6m for 4 years with the Nucks before the injury and early retirement.
Joe Sakic produced 100 points at age 40. most people figured Sundin would keep producing.
Like this all comes off as bellyaching that Marleau wasn't the player you wanted him to be and thus value him less and looking for reasons to justify it when the market doesn't support that view. If Marleau wanted to sign for a longer term, they could have given him that for less of a cap but they chose a shorter commitment. But plenty of Marleau-like forwards in the NHL were getting 3-6 year contracts and the average was probably around 4. Any top center hitting the open market, regardless of their warts, was going to get paid. I really don't understand the thought process that just because he wasn't Joe Thornton or that caliber of center that he still wouldn't have been sought after given the numerous overpayments that had already happened before the 2008-09 season started.
All the bellyaching seems to be you? I get it. You are Patty's big fan and feel a certain way about him. That's your right. I don't feel that way about him.
its forgivable that he wasn't a Jumbo caliber center. He was probably one of the best 2nd line Centers at the time(or a poor team's 1st line C).
The thought process and perception was, he was so much less a player that many felt his Caphit should have been 5.3 million tops because of all factors at the time, regardless of contract length. Many felt 6.3 million caphits should be for game breaking, play driving first liners, not perceived good 2nd line centers whose numbers seem inflated by playing on the PP with a Franchise level Jumbo. Jumbo had a history of inflating people's numbers so they seemed better than they actually were and Marleau had spent his first 7 years as a 20-28 goal, 40 to 57 point forward until Jumbo came and dragged the team out of that 10 game loss slump and propelled Marleau to be better
If that widely shared perception of the time bothers you, I don't know what to tell you. Eventually Marleau became the new dependable Mike Gartner lite. A terrific complimentary player, never among the great or a scoring title/Selke/Hart finalist threat, but solid and dependable.