Toggle sidebar

Speculation: What would you pay Larkin on an extension?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Larkin has been doing nothing but improving his value, if we can get him at 9.0... lets just sign the deal and get on with it. I was pretty against it but these last 5 games have softened me. I want meaningful hockey again. Im ready to be hurt.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Detroit Knights
saska sault said:
Larkin has been doing nothing but improving his value, if we can get him at 9.0... lets just sign the deal and get on with it. I was pretty against it but these last 5 games have softened me. I want meaningful hockey again. Im ready to be hurt.
Click to expand...
rAuIT2A.png
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Wow
Reactions: ColdToiletSeats, JohanFranzenstein, KJoe88 and 5 others
Frk It said:
rAuIT2A.png
Click to expand...

I just have this fantasy where Yzerman and Larkin are screwing around on some gentleman's bet bullshit.

Yzerman:
"We both know neither of us will walk away without a deal, so wanna make a bet on it? You finish at a point per game level and we make the playoffs, I give you the $9. If one of those happen, we settle at $8.5. If neither happen, you accept my $8."

Larkin:
personally.png
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Love
Reactions: ColdToiletSeats, KJoe88, Air Budd Dwyer and 5 others
Watch us give Larkin 9x8 then he is miraculously back to hurt or long scoring droughts.... I DO NOT TRUST pending UFA high level production from players.....
 
Steve Yzerlland said:
Watch us give Larkin 9x8 then he is miraculously back to hurt or long scoring droughts.... I DO NOT TRUST pending UFA high level production from players.....
Click to expand...

It’s too bad that he doesn’t have a couple of other 30 goal seasons near a point per game clip….oh wait. This looks like it will be his third.

Don’t pretend that this is somehow new or that his current season that projects to 32 goals and 85 points in 82 games is somehow significantly different than his season last year that equated to 35 goals and 80 points in 82 games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SoupNazi
I don’t think that this stretch is pushing his value up anywhere near as much as anyone may be thinking. Conversely, had he gone on a fifteen game scoring drought, i don’t think that affects it badly either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OgeeOgelthorpe
Lil Sebastian Cossa said:
I don’t think that this stretch is pushing his value up anywhere near as much as anyone may be thinking. Conversely, had he gone on a fifteen game scoring drought, i don’t think that affects it badly either.
Click to expand...

This.

On a bad team with little to no support Larkin is a 60-70 point center, as we've seen.

With more support Larkin is a 70+ point center in a healthy year.

I think we're going to see production more similar to this current version of Larkin moving forward as the team around him gets better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jkutswings and SoupNazi
I have not read the whole thread, so if this has been asked and answered just point me there. But.

When I was in Ann Arbor getting introduced to hockey and the Red Wings in 95 or 96, my buddy told me something along the lines of "that's Steve Yzerman. He came in the league hot and his coach/owner/whatever said 'you can be a 50 goal a year guy on a losing team or learn how to play both ends and be a 40 goal a year guy on a winning team.'"

Or something to that effect.

Assuming that's vaguely accurate - and I know that was the pre-cap era so maybe comparisons are meaningless - but were there other times where SY sacrificed notoriety or salary for the team?

I ask because everything I know about professional hockey beyond liking to watch games is in between these two parentheses: ( ).

Could SY be testing Larks in the "if leading this team to a Cup is so important to you, are you going to do it for a squinch less money?" sense?
 
dalem177 said:
I have not read the whole thread, so if this has been asked and answered just point me there. But.

When I was in Ann Arbor getting introduced to hockey and the Red Wings in 95 or 96, my buddy told me something along the lines of "that's Steve Yzerman. He came in the league hot and his coach/owner/whatever said 'you can be a 50 goal a year guy on a losing team or learn how to play both ends and be a 40 goal a year guy on a winning team.'"

Or something to that effect.

Assuming that's vaguely accurate - and I know that was the pre-cap era so maybe comparisons are meaningless - but were there other times where SY sacrificed notoriety or salary for the team?

I ask because everything I know about professional hockey beyond liking to watch games is in between these two parentheses: ( ).

Could SY be testing Larks in the "if leading this team to a Cup is so important to you, are you going to do it for a squinch less money?" sense?
Click to expand...
Rules were different then. Legend is always stated that the stars "took less" to allow the ridiculousness of the '01-02 team. But reality was that some of the key players took deferred payment. It got delayed but they still got their money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SoupNazi
norrisnick said:
Followed closely by Larkin and a 1st for JT f'n Miller and I don't even give a shit about the rest of it...
Click to expand...
How could we forget, JT Miller is the kind of player both Yzerman AND LaLonde want...

SoupNazi said:
The thing is...Kotkaniemi isn't even that bad.

But losing 2/3 of a line at once is oof. That trade isn't good for either team.
Click to expand...
Kotkaniemi does not seem like a first line center though
 
  • Like
Reactions: SoupNazi
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom