henchman21
Mr. Meeseeks
- Feb 24, 2012
- 65,976
- 51,580
The entire issue with that deal is the term.And that 5,75 for Mitts is not bad at all. Starting to look just fine.
OEL and Tanev actually sound like good gets for the Leafs.OEL to leafs
The entire issue with that deal is the term.
Ya same.I'm still pissed we didn't get Kovacevic...766k for a reliable bottom pairing RD
Is Nashville going to sign everyone? I thought that was Toronto’s job
Looks like Chicago got Terravainen, I thought for sure he'd land in Seattle, Seemed like an ideal fit for them,
I bet it adding term would had been extremely expensive. Cap is going up like crazy in the next few years.
Does not bother me one bit. Teams that build through FA have a long history of not turning out well.
Turns out that winning Free Agency rarely if ever leads to winning titles.Nashville going to start winning offseasons like Dallas used to?
Close to 5 would be too big of an ask. Mitts had arbitration rights. Why wouldnt he get close to 5 in arbitration.The deal signals the long-term ask was around 7. But the 3 years is the entire issue with the contract. If the AAV was closer to 5, it would be a lot better. Or if the AAV was 6.5 but the term was 5 or 6 years, it would be a lot better. The Avs got a poor mix of the two. He's a fantastic player and worth 5.75m, just the structure is off.
Takes 2 parties to sign a contract. Obviously this is where they landed. You're giving ideal case scenarios in the Avs favor but you can't force Mitts to sign it.The deal signals the long-term ask was around 7. But the 3 years is the entire issue with the contract. If the AAV was closer to 5, it would be a lot better. Or if the AAV was 6.5 but the term was 5 or 6 years, it would be a lot better. The Avs got a poor mix of the two. He's a fantastic player and worth 5.75m, just the structure is off.