Those included quotes makes me think our long pursuit of the perfect deal kept us from making a good deal.
Roster Building XXII: Too Many Forwards, Hopefully One Cup
- Thread starter cptjeff
- Start date
Those included quotes makes me think our long pursuit of the perfect deal kept us from making a good deal.
- Oct 31, 2007
- 40,201
- 45,461
That's the message I got as well. We took too long trying to get him off his asking price that by the time we finally said "Ok, we'll give you want you want", other options had opened up that he may not have considered a month or two before.
Though I believe Tampa made those trades knowing they'd be getting Guentzel. They didn't clear up all that cap space coincidentally.
WreckingCrew
Registered User
- Feb 4, 2015
- 13,090
- 40,150
Definitely not tampering...just like LTIR abuse was in no way convenient cap-circumvention (within the letter of the law but definitely not the spirit)
AhosDatsyukian
Registered User
- Sep 25, 2020
- 11,214
- 32,668
I'm completely fine hard negotiating with a guy like Guentzel. He was not a must-keep and I'm happy to have the long term cap flexibility. Would've been fun if it worked out to keep him here but we were able to give up what we gave up without really impacting the future so no harm done. Took our shot last year and it didn't work out, it happens. Florida gave up a ton at the trade deadline a few years ago while not re-signing any of those guys and flamed out before now winning it all a couple years later.
We've been able to very easily lock up legit long term core players in Slavin, Aho, Svech, Jarvis. All on very good deals IMO. I have no issue with how our front office negotiates deals.
We've been able to very easily lock up legit long term core players in Slavin, Aho, Svech, Jarvis. All on very good deals IMO. I have no issue with how our front office negotiates deals.
- Oct 31, 2007
- 40,201
- 45,461
I don't know how anyone can look at our forward group as it stands today and say missing out on resigning Guentzel because we f***ed up negotiations is fine.
Nikishin Go Boom
Russian Bulldozer Consultent
- Jul 31, 2017
- 23,604
- 55,059
I don’t know how anyone can assume we messed up the negotiations without knowing what we offered Guentzel.
Add in we are coming in with nearly the same group as we started last year minus a, then, 37 point Turbo. Maybe we aren’t as bad off as people think
Add in we are coming in with nearly the same group as we started last year minus a, then, 37 point Turbo. Maybe we aren’t as bad off as people think
- Oct 31, 2007
- 40,201
- 45,461
IIRC, the week of the draft, one of the Insiders (LeBrun, maybe?) mentioned our offer was high 6x8. Then obviously, around the draft itself, we agreed to match Guentzel's ask if 8x8, something that Friedman mentioned was his ask for "a while."
Given what we know about Dundon and his negotiation tactics, it's not at all unreasonable to assume we tried to "win" the negotiation by getting Guentzel to sign a cheaper deal than he wanted, he refused to budge, and by the time we finally said "Ok, 8x8 it is", Guentzel had set his mind elsewhere.
Nikishin Go Boom
Russian Bulldozer Consultent
- Jul 31, 2017
- 23,604
- 55,059
Lebrun said we were really close to the Guentzel camp ask weeks before the draft. I never saw a specific number. then we matched at the draft.
what is really close? being 16 million off the ask, doesnt feel like 'really close'. so i doubt that was it. again without knowing what really close was, its hard to judge.
- Jul 7, 2017
- 3,195
- 12,057
CandyCanes
Caniac turned Jerkiac
- Jan 8, 2015
- 7,501
- 25,987
- Oct 31, 2007
- 40,201
- 45,461
May not have been LeBrun, but I can't be bothered to find a tweet from months ago to rehash a topic this board has discussed to death. I have my belief as to how this played out (and that quote from Guentzel and his agent only add to my belief), but if others want to believe it was handled well, more power to them
I'll only be worried when RBA states it's only a week to week injury
- Dec 6, 2011
- 12,659
- 40,834
First, as mentioned, our forward group overall really doesn't feel that different than it often has at the start of seasons, including last season. It's flawed and/or relying on bouncebacks/progressions/good first seasons as it often has been in this era of great success. We will likely be looking for a deal at the deadline, and like most years, it probably won't end up being anything at the Guentzel level barring a perfect opportunity. But it's most likely capable of playing our style of regular season hockey that has resulted in very good regular season and pretty good playoff runs. Will that ever be enough? We'll see.
Also, the Canes clearly aren't going to look at someone they are signing to a long term contract as just a where our forward groups stands today. They have to also have a long term vision. I think it's pretty obvious that they viewed Guentzel as an elite secondary piece but not necessarily part of our core. That's probably why they were comfortable playing things the way they did. We'll also never know for sure how things were presented to the Canes. If the indications were always along the lines of meet our ask and we'll totally sign but then the timing changed that, well, we certainly gambled by waiting but the scenario changed from what we were told. On the one hand, eff around and find out, on the other hand, we may have played by the rules as presented and then the game was changed. Maybe it's a learning moment to an extent, but I think they are largely going to play things that way because that's been the philosophy for a while and it's largely worked out.
