No need to explain anymore, expect ill just say this, while it might be some headaches, at some point the team could have got value for the player, Parise walked and NJ got nothing, but the Sens at least got a return for Yashin.
It' funny you're using Parise as an example.
Parise was 5 years away from UFA when he signed a 4 year contract. Benn is 4 years away, and you previously said a 3 year deal where they could get an additional RFA year is better.
That move by Parise allowed him to sign a 1 year deal and walk. NJ failed twice to lock him long term ... the RFA year ... and leading up to his UFA year.
If Benn wants to leave Dallas, he'll leave Dallas. There's no special formula to prevent it. Parise bolted the second he was eligble for free agency. Dallas gets an extra year to work out a trade or long term contract. I'll gladly take 8 years of Benn then 6 and uncertainty over being able to lock him up or afford some crazy offer sheet should it happen.
Finally ... of course 7 years favors Dallas, but they can't force him to take the money. Benn wanted short term deals (rumored to be only 2 or 3 year deals) because he knows his value is just going up and up. The fact he even signed 5 is pretty surprising and awesome.
Can someone explain to me why this is a steal for Dallas, ya he is signed for 5 years, but he would be a UFA at 28, wouldn't it have been better to give him 3 year at say 6M and that way you can sign him at 26 years old to a long term contract without the treat of him leaving, which allows you to have a little upper hand when talking about the next deal...
Just from my perspective - absolutely not, especially if the Stars are worried about Benn leaving.
3 years x $6M = $18M. After 3 years, let's say he's a legit #1 center, at which point he is arbitration eligible. He files, and let's say he conservatively get awared a $7M deal. At which point he's going to be a UFA. So the Stars got 4 years of service for $25M, and Benn can hit the open market to really cash in. Even if he only got awared $5M in arbiration, he'd still be making $23M over 4 years (average of $5.75M per year), and he'd be a UFA one year sooner.
That's why I don't understand the organization's desire for a 3 year deal for guys coming off of their ELC. I understand the "2nd contract" theory, but that is really based around a player still developing and not proven yet. I can understand from PK's perspective that he's really the teams #1 d-man, and has already been operating at that level. Hard to compare that to a guy like MDZ who was the teams #4/5 d-man the last year of his ELC.
I know it's tough, but look at Nashville, they actually got to keep Weber and it seemed like he wanted to leave. Another thing to look at is Perry and Getz with the Ducks, both are UFA this summer, and I'm just speculating but they can basically as for the moon and if they don't get it they will treat to walk in July, if they were maybe still a 1 away from UFA ducks might have a little more control like Nashville did with Weber
Weber is a really bad comparison. Weber wanted to land a retirement contract before the CBA changed, and they likely wouldn't be allowed. If Weber REALLY wanted to leave Nashville, he could have filed for arbitration, taken a 1 year deal at about $7.5M, and been an UFA on 7/1/13. Of course, his UFA contract would have been under the new CBA and limited to 7 years (assuming he didn't resign in NASH).
With arbitration - the "one year before UFA" to negotiate a deal is kind of fools gold. Because the team pretty much has to sign a "going rate" UFA contract with the player, or watch the player "pull a J-Bo", where they file for arbitration, get a one year market contract, and then hit UFA. It's not like the team has ANY leverage except for the ability to grant a long term contract at a UFA rate that year prior.