Before the player gets arbitration rights the player more or less has zero leverage. After the player gets arbitration rights he can get to UFA in a few years.
The best managed franchises would never even dream about presenting a 2-3 year contract to a player that does not have arbitration rights. They will get their QO, if they don’t sign that they will have to sign the long term deal presented to them by their team or leave the NHL for several years until they become UFAs.
And like — why would a NHL franchise do it any other way with a solid young homegrown kid? It’s the only way that makes sense.
Sather never got this. Brooks went on and on and on about Winnipeg and Nashville and co ‘destroying the cap’ by locking up Schleife, Ehlers, Wheeler and co to great long term deals, with some 110% delusional motivation of how it destroyed comparable contracts in the arbitration process.
With a short contract you have an opportunity to get a raise often, with a long contract you have the opportunity to get a raise few times. However around this franchise there is a notion deeply established that if you have to play well for a long time to earn the right to get very few raises (ie a pony contract). It’s just totally backwards and have cost us soooo much over the years.
Imagine if Slats/Gorts locked up all the guys we traded recently as low value rentals, we would have been able to get a such better return for them OMG.
