Quote:
Originally Posted by butterfly
Yeah, totally insane. Because it's so likely that Draisaitl is going to repeat the past, right? So let's take the percentage of cap Draisaitl was making from ages 22-29 and increase it by 35% for ages 30-37. That's smart.
They're overpaying from day one.
 |
Now picture this:
You do this exact same thing, except you do it for a player that has not played a single game for your organization.
I mean, if you're arguing that the Oilers shouldn't have kept Draisaitl, I don't think you'll find a hockey mind in the game that would agree with you. You're effectively arguing for tanking, drafting elite talent, and then trading them away before or right around when they generally win a Stanley Cup (see: Colorado - MacKinnon, Tampa - Stamkos, Hedman).
Sure you could make the argument they should have kept it shorter term, but I'm guessing the player wouldn't have signed that contract and then yep - Edmonton's competitive cycle is over.
E will always = NG, but the idea of drafting elite talent and then losing them because you refuse to sign them long-term once they're 29? Nah, can't agree with that.