Yeah, there's a whole lot of that going on here and with every big signing. I'd go so far as to say it's a misunderstanding of economics, period. So many variables come into play when trying to "compare" deals that it's rarely possible to actually do so. It'd require a direct comparison between two players in near identical situations signing with teams in very similar situations to even begin laying that groundwork, and that's still a shaky foundation to build any rational argument on.
There's a lot of opinion over fact, as is par for the course, but there are so many measurable quantities we can point to as well. I refrain from doing so because it just leads to bickering with endless back and forth debates that largely ignore how different almost every situation is. There are, of course, outliers. There are genuinely and largely accepted bad contracts that were fairly obvious from the day they were given out (and even then, it still sometimes makes sense for the team doing so at the time in shorter term), and then there are the opposite, steals of deals. And of course big contracts will almost always be directly compared to those fantastic deals disregarding every other metric. Because it makes people feel tingly inside to have a negative hot-take, particularly when it matches their feelings for said team. It's actively wanting the team to fail and wanting the contract to be bad down the line in most cases. I won't lie, I've wished similar on rivals, but I always look at it logically and more often than not no matter how much I'd want to mock it, I can see the reasoning and rationale.
Saying "he's the 5th highest paid D-man but not nearly the 5th best D-man" is absolutely, 100% correct and anyone with any knowledge of the game will agree on that. But it's simply flawed logic (at best) to take that at face value when evaluating this (and most) contracts signed, especially ones signed now vs. years ago. I mean, I could lay out all the reasons why and I'm sure you could too, but it's a losing battle. I'm just happy seeing other people who do understand how it works even when they're supposed to be my mortal enemy =)
At some point I just shrug and let it go. All teams have their warts and their gems. And many posters are much happier to jump on the wart train be it through bias, jealousy, or a relative chip on their shoulder (with a smattering of people who are neutral and have genuine belief/concerns thrown in) than they are to jump on the gem train. Clearly I don't think this is a wart for us, but we definitely have a few and I'll gladly admit that. I know what mistakes we've made in the past and as of now I don't think we've made any in a while other than Shattenkirk and getting a bit too little for Zucc (those conditionals were great, but ended up hurting!) and our big trade with Tampa. We're not perfect and I'm sure we'll make more mistakes in the future and have to suffer through them down the line. But this isn't one that is of any concern to me. This is something we needed to do, one way or another, and this is how it landed. I'm good with it. Whether I will be in 2, 3, 5 years? I have no idea. No one can know those things except for the really obvious horrible contracts. This isn't one. It may become one, sure. Hopefully it doesn't, and I don't think it will (other than injury risk) so I'm happy that we did what was needed.
I think Hayes' deal is an overpay that can potentially hurt sooner than later, but I also understand why it happened and how it makes sense in the moment and the shorter term and so I don't knock it.
It is what it is. You have hockey fans who love the sport and cheer for a specific team but follow the business side of things (even with rivals) and the evolution of the game. Then you have fans of a team who stop there but still love to be vocal and stir it up for the sake of it without understanding much. I live it everyday in person living in Montreal, and anytime I go back and visit friends and family in NY and NJ. You can quickly tell which group someone belongs to in a 5 minute conversation. What's harder to figure out, and control, is when you stop paying attention and arguing.
Anyway, another long-winded post from me. I'm sure it's a TL;DR for most, particularly the latter group. Cheers One Winged Angel, see you on the ice! =)
edit: To be clear, I'd love Hayes back with us for this build since we really do need that #2C who's proven capable in all situations like he is. We couldn't have done $7M if we wanted to, and since we're rebuilding the hope is that eventually we'll develop a #2C (or be forced to acquire one somehow when a lot of cap comes off the books in 2 seasons) so he'd have been a bit wasted with us during his prime years (the next 3-4 I figure) and that's why it doesn't make sense for us. I do believe his later years will be a burden, but as stated that's just part of the game and we all go through it at some level. So that's why I'm not knocking it. It totally makes sense for the Flyers to have done that now. Can't say I hope it works out because, I mean I hate you and all (=P) but I do think he can be successful and provide what you needed. And hey, I love the guy and his dorky *ss voice =)
I do wish all of our previous homegrown guys would stop appearing on rival teams tho. If Minny trades Zucc to the Isles I'll lose my mind.
Cheers! Unless I missed sarcasm, in which case... well, cheers anyway but sarcastically.
Last edited:
