Juste curieux de connaître les réflexions de tout le monde car je ne comprends pas vraiment pourquoi KD n’essaierait pas d’éviter de le jouer pendant 10 matchs pour empêcher son contrat d’entrée de commencer cette saison, au lieu de glisser à 26-27.
On a l’impression que nous avons perdu un an de son contrat d’entrée juste pour qu’il joue 2 ou 3 matchs supplémentaires ?
—
pres_ofcanada
7 Comments
Feels like GMs care less about this now with high-end players because it means they might get a cheaper bridge deal instead of needing 12+ mil x 8 right away after ELC
A lot of players have a bit of a handshake agreement with the GMs that they’ll sign and get a year burnt earlier.
It’s a common practice that’s been done for years now
Because you save a year but piss off the player in the process (see what the NY Rangers did this year)
I think it’s a good will thing did the same with Rinzel and Moore last year
The goal is to get to the long-term contract a year earlier under the assumption that this will lead to a lower AAV than they could demand the next year assuming steady player growth.
It’s kind of the opposite of the way things work in the NFL, where rookie-contract players are older/farther along in the development curve and extensions mostly go 2-3 years instead of 6-8.
Bc Kyle knows Frondell is going to be a hawk for a LONG time so who cares about one year ? Its not like they have cap problems 😆
Get to his long term contract earlier so it will be cheaper in theory. This has become pretty common around the nhl for top prospects these days