It is not his job to worry about other people's contracts.That is wrong.
Especially when his teammates share the same pool of money
It is his job to recognize he’s part of team and see the bigger picture as it relates to his actions and how they affect his teammates.It is not his job to worry about other people's contracts.
PK is an ex player who’s expressing the players’ perspective. We, as fans, almost always side with our clubs, because it’s the constant as players come and go. PK is showing that the players focus their anger at management. They side with each other. Which makes sense considering they are the employees and management are the bosses.Subban is a guy who, in the last few years of his career, was top 5 most paid defenseman but played like ass and looked like his summer training was going into as many all-you-can eat buffets as he could find.
His plea in favour of Swayman getting paid makes me even more sympathetic to the Bruins, not less.
That’s true but not when it comes to negotiating a contract. The players are employees (much like a lot of us) and want their fellow workers to get the best deal possible. It raises the bar for everyone.It is his job to recognize he’s part of team and see the bigger picture as it relates to his actions and how they affect his teammates.
I’m sure the NHLPA would love that.It is his job to recognize he’s part of team and see the bigger picture as it relates to his actions and how they affect his teammates.
I’m mainly talking about his whining to media and the ‘ infamous’ list .I’m sure the NHLPA would love that.
Yes professional athletes and sports leagues as a whole make entirely too much money relative to their benefit to society. Swayman isn't negotiating in a world where athletes are compensated relative to their benefit to society, though, so it doesn't matter.I could feed my family on 1.5% of his salary. Just saying.
So every player ought to take the minimum according to this reasoning.It is his job to recognize he’s part of team and see the bigger picture as it relates to his actions and how they affect his teammates.
Yah. He’s not running to the media and giving them quotes. He’s being asked questions and he’s just being honest.Yea I don't have a problem with a player taking it personal. It sounds more like he used it a motivation, than he's whining.
Pay is never about worth to society.Yes professional athletes and sports leagues as a whole make entirely too much money relative to their benefit to society. Swayman isn't negotiating in a world where athletes are compensated relative to their benefit to society, though, so it doesn't matter.
You mean the counter-whining to the whining that was started by the GM?I’m mainly talking about his whining to media and the ‘ infamous’ list .
No ever player ought to consider all possible outcomes, including how his actions can eventually become a detriment to the team. I promise you he’s losing some support in that locker room, even if they don’t publicly admit it.So every player ought to take the minimum according to this reasoning.
You’re terribly uninformed. You need to do some research before you come in with your gotcha hand grenade one liners.You mean the counter-whining to the whining that was started by the GM?
But that's the thing: You can't raise the bar for anyone in a salary cap system.PK is an ex player who’s expressing the players’ perspective. We, as fans, almost always side with our clubs, because it’s the constant as players come and go. PK is showing that the players focus their anger at management. They side with each other. Which makes sense considering they are the employees and management are the bosses.
That’s true but not when it comes to negotiating a contract. The players are employees (much like a lot of us) and want their fellow workers to get the best deal possible. It raises the bar for everyone.
No ever player ought to consider all possible outcomes, including how his actions can eventually become a detriment to the team. I promise you he’s losing some support in that locker room, even if they don’t publicly admit it.
You’re terribly uninformed. You need to do some research before you come in with your gotcha hand grenade one liners.
What about Jeremy Jacob’s net worth? That get you a steak dinner or two.I could feed my family on 1.5% of his salary. Just saying.
Yes I am very much aware of that. It was kind of my point.Yah. He’s not running to the media and giving them quotes. He’s being asked questions and he’s just being honest.
Pay is never about worth to society.
Frankly for me the cap has nothing to do with it, I'm not even a Bruins fan. He's simply a guy who is trying to get a check for something his body of work hasn't proven yet.Prime example why the hard salary cap sucks. It turns fans against their own players because they are not giving up enough money to make the team better.
Yeah athletes should go back to the pre union days where the owners owned them and got every ounce of profit. It’s like people think if athletes make less then some random underpaid blue collar worker has been vindicated….no the billionaire owner just gets more lmao.Yes professional athletes and sports leagues as a whole make entirely too much money relative to their benefit to society. Swayman isn't negotiating in a world where athletes are compensated relative to their benefit to society, though, so it doesn't matter.
With my starting off with yah. I’m just reinforcing your point for the cretins who think otherwise.Yes I am very much aware of that. It was kind of my point.
No, we can't. Boston has $8.5M in cap space, so Swayman getting $9M vs. $8M absolutely would impact one of the players on the bottom of the roster.My mistake; I guess we agree that under Boston's current cap situation, demanding/getting $9M instead of taking $8M won’t cost another player their NHL job and salary and won’t materially impact another player’s NHL dream or their ability to feed their family.
If Boston was notably under the cap, even after a prospective Swagman signing, this might mean something. But they're not.What about Jeremy Jacob’s net worth? That get you a steak dinner or two.
A wall of text for a cherry picked contract. Now go look at games played for the guys he is really being compared to today. The guys making $8m+ are not part of tandems. If you are paying $8m for a 40 game "starter" you are getting ripped off.I think that's a stupid argument. It's not like today's goalies are incapable of playing 60. It's the GMs and coaches refusing to give goalies those loads these days. Only 3 goalies played over 60 games last season. Go back 15 years and half the goalies in the league played 60+.
This whole situation kind of reminds me of how Rask didn't get games when he had to play behind Thomas and everyone still knew Rask was geat and capable of handling the load. And btw Thomas played less than 60 games both times he won Vezina, because Bruins had a good backup goalie sharing the load. Rask got his 56 million 8 year deal after playing only 36, 23 and 29 games the 3 previous seasons, so there is a precedent for Swayman getting paid despite not topping 44 games and having only 132 games total. Rask had played 138 total and 45 games at most and that was 4 years before he signed his extension. But to be fair Rask got his deal after one of the best playoff performances of the modern era and reaching the Cup finals, so I don't think Swayman is quite at the level Rask was.
When Rask signed his 7M per deal the salary cap was 64.3M, which makes it 10.9% of the cap. Salary cap is now 88M. If Swayman was to get equivalent amount of money that would be 8 years and 76.6M or 9.58M per year.
I think 8x8 is a fair deal at this point of his career if they structure it with loads of signing bonuses.
Why is the Bruins cap situation Swaymans problem and where is the line there? Would you be saying the same thing if they only left 3 million in cap space? Oh sorry Jeremy guess you have to sign for 2.5 it’s all we have left!No, we can't. Boston has $8.5M in cap space, so Swayman getting $9M vs. $8M absolutely would impact one of the players on the bottom of the roster.
If Boston was notably under the cap, even after a prospective Swagman signing, this might mean something. But they're not.
Hang on, are you siding with me, or did you take something from my post that I didnt mean?Yeah athletes should go back to the pre union days where the owners owned them and got every ounce of profit. It’s like people think if athletes make less then some random underpaid blue collar worker has been vindicated….no the billionaire owner just gets more lmao.
For the same reason that Edmonton's cap isn't McDavid's problem, and yet he's probably "only" going to get ~$15M and not 20% x $92.5M on his next deal.Why is the Bruins cap situation Swaymans problem and where is the line there? Would you be saying the same thing if they only left 3 million in cap space? Oh sorry Jeremy guess you have to sign for 2.5 it’s all we have left!