My stance throughout this is that both sides are in the right, and no one looks bad in this situation.
Flames have acted in good faith throughout this ordeal, and given Kylington all the time in the world to work through his troubles. But from what he's shown since coming back, objectively based on just his on ice performance, he doesn't really warrant a long term deal. It's totally fair for them to want to negotiate a shorter term deal, as with any other player based on performance alone.
And Kylington is also in the right to test free agency should he choose to. He's earned that right, and doesn't "owe" the Flames anything.
If, at the end of the day, both sides can't come to an agreement, I would hope it's a mutal understanding and respect for one another, and both sides move on. Why does there need to be a good side / bad side in this?
|