This whole argument is dumb semantics - who cares if people were concerned the later contract would be bad because of injuries, or just bad because he'd age and get bad, it's substantially the same point - but I just have to say that if you doubt that people here were upset about contract length at the time of the signing, you're wrong. They were clearly in the minority of posters at the time, but they absolutely were there:
Confirmed with Link: - LOOOOOOOOOOOCH (Oilers Sign Lucic, 7-years, $6M AAV, NMC)
"This really is an abhorrent contract. Hopeful it pays off in the short term.
Money. Term. and the NMC.
Did Chia bother to negotiate? Or did he just fold like he did with the Hall/Larsson deal."
""Ya those details made a suspect contract even worse IMO."
"I approved of the 6 million and term but A full nmc 1st 5 years hinders us if he falls of the cliff"
"Surprised you did not quote my 1st post on this. I guess you approve of a full nmc for 5 years . Is this a good thing? Chia is not a strong GM not going to stop being a fan because I think we have a moron Gm and because I am A Oiler fan does not mean I have to embrace every idiotic move he does like you do . "
"We'll get some good hockey out of Lucic, but ultimately we will regret this signing prior to his 7 year contract running out. Doesn't have the skill or hockey smarts to age gracefully, he relies very heavily on his physical attributes."
And finally, because this made me lol -
@GreatKeith posted this:
"People wanted to get bigger, they got bigger.
Should we try to get smaller again?"
Suck on that, people who say all he ever did was ***** about the team's moves. He was there DEFENDING THE LUCIC SIGNING!