Quote:
Originally Posted by curves2000
I do wonder in hindsight if some of the highest level, elite of elite athletes sometimes "regret" taking the money in their contracts and if they would rather have some additional control and input in decisions.
Mcdavid's contract initially was 13.25 million agreed upon but when some roster moves meant they would not have had the same flexibility, he went with 12.5.
I am totally for getting paid and I would argue that in SOME ways, some of the best in the NHL may be underpaid overall when it comes to their economic impact for the respective teams. On the other hand, going without sniffing a championship for Mcdavid and other's might also be a tough pill to swallow.
I recall Tom Brady would always restructure his NFL contract for way less than market value, in order to sign players he thought would help him and his team be and stay competitive. He did win 7 Superbowls, appeared in 10 and lost 3, countless division championships, deep playoff runs and more. He would would say things like " I don't need the extra 5 million, I need an O-line or D or receivers so that I can win"
If I was ever in someone like Mcdavid's position, knowing what I know about how hard it is to win. I would do some crazy things. I would retire, sign a new lower AAV deal, make sure the savings went to areas of need and than have a handshake deal on partial team ownership or something down the road to make up for it.
|
I'd argue one of the Oilers problems has been giving McDavid too much control. Reports are the he and his team have approved of all the GM hires since he arrived. They hired his agent and former coach now. Brought in his buddy Brown. Asked the team not to trade another buddy. That's just what we have heard about.
Teams don't have much success when run by the players. Look at Gretzky. In Edmonton, Sather was clearly in charge. After leaving, Gretzky always had too much of a say as he brought in as many ex-Oilers as he could and never won again.