View Single Post
09-17-2013, 01:10 PM
Off Sides
Registered User
Off Sides's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,378
vCash: 1217
This idea about setting precedent also confuses me, do you guys really think the next rfa without arbitration rights is going to just sign the first thing offered because of the way the Rangers handled past non arbitration eligible rfas?

Same for the leverage idea? Is the next player without leverage, except for holding out or signing an offer sheet, going to give in just because of this leverage without exploring every other option to maximize his guaranteed money?

And how does that work? Does the agent say in a shaky unconfident voice, well we know what the Rangers are going to do so we might as well just sign?

How about the player going forward, is he going to be like, we'll they really have a lot of faith in me offering me a bridge contract and all, I'll give a little next time and sell my UFA years cheap when I have the leverage.

If the Rangers want to sign their non arbitration eligible 2nd line center to a 6M dollar bridge deal under the guise of leverage, they may want to get it done before their 60M dollar ufa top line center that they signed two years ago falls off the map making that 2nd line center their top line center.

Yeah we messed up giving Richards 60M in guaranteed money, please take 1/10th of what we gave him to do the job we signed him to do. Please?

Off Sides is offline