2010-08-19 16:22:01 +0000 #1
Interesting. Sounds like your kinda screwed either way...
But at least we have the ultimate contract negotiator in Slats
2010-08-19 16:36:59 +0000 #2
2010-08-19 17:04:52 +0000 #3
This is Levine flip flopping at his best...on one hand he says this-
"We all expect Staal to get a deal somewhere between four and six years with a value of around $4.5 million per. Compared to the contract Johnson got, that seems grossly excessive. On the face, it sure seems like it is, but I two years, what type of deal will Johnson get if he continues to progress? Will he be worth more than Paul Martin? Likely. Andrei Markov, maybe. What about Visnovsky, maybe a bad example, Phaneuf, Pronger etc. Hard to determine, but one could easily see him being a $6 mil a year d-man, so the savings now, will be lost down the orad, something the Rangers are trying to avoid with Staal."
So in essence he is saying that paying 4.5 over 4-6 years is not as bad a deal as it looks because we'll be saving money long term.
And then he says this-
"For me, the view is, as much as I want Staal here, Mr. Sather, don't overpay as you have done in the past."
So what? Is 4.5 over 6 years overpaying or is it a deal? He flip flopped the hell out of this and no matter which way things turn out he's gonna say he was right...this is crap.
Also, if he thinks Johnson is gonna be making 6 million in three years, he's crazy, the way the salaries inflate it'll be 7+ if he plays the way he should. 6 million is a deal NOW for an good defenseman. If he doesn't think Sather would throw a 7 million dollar offer sheet at Johnson after two years, he's nuts.
"We all expect Staal to get a deal somewhere between four and six years with a value of around $4.5 million per. Compared to the contract Johnson got, that seems grossly excessive. On the face, it sure seems like it is, but I two years, what type of deal will Johnson get if he continues to progress? Will he be worth more than Paul Martin? Likely. Andrei Markov, maybe. What about Visnovsky, maybe a bad example, Phaneuf, Pronger etc. Hard to determine, but one could easily see him being a $6 mil a year d-man, so the savings now, will be lost down the orad, something the Rangers are trying to avoid with Staal."
So in essence he is saying that paying 4.5 over 4-6 years is not as bad a deal as it looks because we'll be saving money long term.
And then he says this-
"For me, the view is, as much as I want Staal here, Mr. Sather, don't overpay as you have done in the past."
So what? Is 4.5 over 6 years overpaying or is it a deal? He flip flopped the hell out of this and no matter which way things turn out he's gonna say he was right...this is crap.
Also, if he thinks Johnson is gonna be making 6 million in three years, he's crazy, the way the salaries inflate it'll be 7+ if he plays the way he should. 6 million is a deal NOW for an good defenseman. If he doesn't think Sather would throw a 7 million dollar offer sheet at Johnson after two years, he's nuts.
2010-08-19 17:32:06 +0000 #4
Yea, that article was mostly crap. I noticed him flip flopping like that. If you can't have a clear cut position on an piece, then don't take a stance. If you think it's an interesting topic and want to, then play Devils Advocate, but write it accordingly.
Seems like he convinced himself midway through he was wrong?
Seems like he convinced himself midway through he was wrong?
