I think the reason this hasn’t become commonplace is because gm’s understand that offer sheets for somewhat unproven rfa’s are inflationary, it offers negotiating leverage to agents and drives up AAV’s, drives up qualifying offers and drives up comparables during arbitration which is become more common and more contentious. Most executives aren’t generally so shortsighted and understand that by doing this it may benefit them slightly in the short term but long term they’re just driving up the cost on players you try to keep the cost down on to supplement your roster during critical competitive phases so in reality you’re kinda screwing your future self when you’ll be the contending team trying to keep your window open.
It also makes negotiations harder, if you look at comparables to these two players this summer, Armstrong blew them out of the water because he had to in order to ensure Edmonton walked away but those become the new comparables for agents, so even if you’re a GM who wants to offer a fair contract, an agent would be doing his client a disservice in signing an extension before getting to the period where he can go to other teams and fish for an above market offer, and at the very least use that leverage to squeeze more out of his clients current team.
I could see this creating a situation where besides the absolute top picks on bad teams many of these mid range prospects don’t see an NHL ice surface at all until their elc is done. Make it more difficult for other organizations to assess these players upside and make it far more risky for them to offer higher AAV’s and locking themselves in to higher qualifying offers. You take that leverage away from agents and reduce the risk of teams poaching guys coming off their elc.
You offer many interesting and logically sound thoughts so kudos for writing this and thinking it thru as you did. You're no dummy.
Let me offer a retort though. The GMs make pretty good money. Many over $2MM per year. A few over $3MM per. And these guys aren't guaranteed to be around all that long. Like the NFL... and most pro sports leagues, the NHL is a win now endeavor.
We've gone thru a few bad lockouts because owners and GMs can't help themselves from signing bad player contracts. So we've got evidence they can't really help themselves when it comes to trying to improve a team with some bizarre contracts and trades.
I think a lot of these GMs, esp the GMs of the bad teams, are incentivized differently than your long dated point of view. And lets be honest - the Blues aren't good. They haven't made the playoffs for a few years now and probably won't make them this season either. But I hear absolutely no one critizing Doug Armstrong for those two offer sheets today. Have you heard this?
It's usually the bad teams that have the most cap space and GMs in the most precarious positions. And now you use an offer sheet to steal a good young player from a contender and give up a measly 2nd or 3rd round pick in doing so? That is a tidy piece of business in the short run.
I still think I'm right and the long dated risks you speak of (which are very valid points you made, clever ones) don't outweigh the rewards in the short term nature of this well paying, but fleeting NHL job of GM.
Lets have a gentlemen's bet you and I. I bet you $1 preverbal dollar we see another offer sheet next summer and the compensation will be a 2nd or 3rd round pick going back to the team that has the decision to match or not. I think the new paradigm will be offer sheets on the mid tier young players like Holloway and Broberg. Not the elite ones like Bedard or Bouchard.
My retort to what I just wrote... It will be the agents, not the players, that are nervous about offer sheets and how the NHL GMs will react to this potential paradigm shift. I think Broberg and Holloway have amazing agents, but I bet several NHL GMs do not feel the same way about what happened with the Oilers this summer... using the reasons you illuminate in your post. It's an interesting dance Doug Armstrong started this summer.
