Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
You can never pay less than 50% of the highest salaried year and you can never move more than 35% year to year, and of course you can't sign a guy for longer than eight years (seven if he is someone else's free agent or a player you acquired in this calendar year or some such BS)
9 is the highest and 4.5 is the lowest, not less than 50%. And if my math is right no year is more than 35% lower than the preceding one. But then again math is not not strong point.
Hockey Widow wrote:We'll his numbers work then no?
9 is the highest and 4.5 is the lowest, not less than 50%. And if my math is right no year is more than 35% lower than the preceding one. But then again math is not not strong point.
Neither is English I think
Thanks dbr, I thought I heard something else on the radio.
Hockey Widow wrote:We'll his numbers work then no?
9 is the highest and 4.5 is the lowest, not less than 50%. And if my math is right no year is more than 35% lower than the preceding one. But then again math is not not strong point.
My numbers work, I'm a math wizz and I've read posts from people that know the new contract.
I wanted to start with 10 mil in the first year but it just didn't work to get the AAV down to where I wanted it.
Hockey Widow wrote:We'll his numbers work then no?
9 is the highest and 4.5 is the lowest, not less than 50%. And if my math is right no year is more than 35% lower than the preceding one. But then again math is not not strong point.
My numbers work, I'm a math wizz and I've read posts from people that know the new contract.
I wanted to start with 10 mil in the first year but it just didn't work to get the AAV down to where I wanted it.
So are you saying this will be the new deal? If so I like it very much. Fair deal for all sides.
Hockey Widow wrote:We'll his numbers work then no?
9 is the highest and 4.5 is the lowest, not less than 50%. And if my math is right no year is more than 35% lower than the preceding one. But then again math is not not strong point.
Neither is English I think
Thanks dbr, I thought I heard something else on the radio.
Hockey Widow wrote:We'll his numbers work then no?
9 is the highest and 4.5 is the lowest, not less than 50%. And if my math is right no year is more than 35% lower than the preceding one. But then again math is not not strong point.
My numbers work, I'm a math wizz and I've read posts from people that know the new contract.
I wanted to start with 10 mil in the first year but it just didn't work to get the AAV down to where I wanted it.
So are you saying this will be the new deal? If so I like it very much. Fair deal for all sides.
Sorry, not the new Sedin contract the new players contract outlining how contracts can be written.
I would love to see the Sedins sign a contract like that as well.
Even if you were still in Asia you would be more connected to the Canucks than me!
SKYO wrote:Watching these Canucks games it should be pretty clear that without the Sedins' this team would be so atrocious!
This. A lot of this. As long as they are productive, we should be at least attempting to keep them.
Letting the Sedins go pretty much guarantees us a shot at a lottery pick. BTW, the draft lottery format has changed, so even if you're the worst team in the league, you only have a 25% of selecting first overall, and every team that misses the playoffs has a chance to pick 1st.
SKYO wrote:Watching these Canucks games it should be pretty clear that without the Sedins' this team would be so atrocious!
This. A lot of this. As long as they are productive, we should be at least attempting to keep them.
Letting the Sedins go pretty much guarantees us a shot at a lottery pick. BTW, the draft lottery format has changed, so even if you're the worst team in the league, you only have a 25% of selecting first overall, and every team that misses the playoffs has a chance to pick 1st.
I dislike the system of rewarding teams for tanking. In the SHL, the two teams that finish last have to play relegation games against the four best teams from the second tier league to defend their SHL status. Almost every year some team is demoted and another team takes their place.
Helps keep the bad teams trying their hardest all the way till the final game of the season, as being demoted means economic disaster, and it makes the cutoff line for the two worst teams as interesting as the cutoff line for those who make the playoffs.
Whatever you do, always give 100 %!
Except when donating blood.
SKYO wrote:Watching these Canucks games it should be pretty clear that without the Sedins' this team would be so atrocious!
This. A lot of this. As long as they are productive, we should be at least attempting to keep them.
Letting the Sedins go pretty much guarantees us a shot at a lottery pick. BTW, the draft lottery format has changed, so even if you're the worst team in the league, you only have a 25% of selecting first overall, and every team that misses the playoffs has a chance to pick 1st.
I dislike the system of rewarding teams for tanking. In the SHL, the two teams that finish last have to play relegation games against the four best teams from the second tier league to defend their SHL status. Almost every year some team is demoted and another team takes their place.
Helps keep the bad teams trying their hardest all the way till the final game of the season, as being demoted means economic disaster, and it makes the cutoff line for the two worst teams as interesting as the cutoff line for those who make the playoffs.
So you're saying we should have sent dEdmonton to the SEL years ago?!