Loyalty doesn’t pay the bills. I don’t care if you’re a 4th line plug or a superstar. You do what’s best for you. If Laf’s agent is saying he might be able to get more by waiting, so be it. It’s not his responsibility to keep us cap compliant. He can be a team first guy after he signs his next contract.
What? I’m not saying he should be loyal- he owes the Rangers nothing more than a good solid effort but my entire point is he looks pathetic groveling over such little money when his track record of improvement in the off season is virtually nothing. You’d expect this guy to want to prove something so he can earn the big bucks next year might actually inspire him to maybe take a few less dollars. But I agree that the Rangers have also wildly screwed this up because it’s on them to offer their best deal.
Exactly how is bad vs good extreme at all? He’s a good NHLer. Already at the age of 21. What does “too extreme” even mean in this context? That makes zero sense. Laf is a good player. Period.
are you kidding? you can't invite this guy to any wedding. the bride would rip the balls off the groom if this guy wound up eating half of the wedding cake.
“Not signing YET” is not the same as “not signing”… you want to get worked up over it, that’s your prerogative. But don’t expect everyone else to get upset over it.
Too extreme means there are much more descriptors than just “bad and good.”
Sure- the Rangers only have so much salary cap space available. As others have pointed out is somewhere between 2.7-3.1ish based on some possible roster alterations that are doable. Baring a major trade to free up more space( which I’m assuming is not happening and would be wrong to do) and based on multiple media reports— you know guys in the know- he’s expected to be offered between 2.5 and 3 million dollars.
New team policy. They call it the Brendan Smith rule.
The recent growth of Riko’s in the lower Fairfield County area has forced Drury to work relentlessly on a new 4 cheese pizza at Colony’s. There are rumors he might even introduce a new Hot Honey pie to the menu, though my sources cannot fully confirm this.
It’s good vs bad because people have said “he’s bad.” It’s not extreme, it’s simple.
Actually it could be over term. And not money at all. In fact I think it’s more likely. But I won’t pretend I know what’s going on in negotiations.
cue up classic Beatles: Honey Pie and Wild Honey Pie from the White album
You are talking in circles. First you think good vs bad is the issue now you won’t admit he’s a bad first overall pick but think he’s a good NHL player. Let me let you in on a little secret- when you draft first overall you don’t really want a 3rd line plugger who maybe gets 40-50 points a season. You want a game breaker. Now if you are happy with what he’s done over the past 3 seasons and think he’s been “good” then you have perhaps the lowest standards of anyone on earth. It’s like saying he’s a “good” player because he rarely falls down when he skates. He’s “good” because occasionally the puck touches his stick. He’s “good” because occasionally you notice he gets within 10 feet of the opposition goal. I mean if that’s the standard you hold him then sure I’ll agree he’s “good.”
dude, as david letterman used to say, you crystallized my thought eloquently. also don't bother - you're not going to change minds. the main points are always repeated: better d1 season than jack hughes, he's been decent for a 21 year old, has comparable or even better ev numbers than certain members on the top two lines, etc.
