That's what OP said, but we gave Bennett a pay cut this past summer so I'm not sure that's right. Anyways, if the minimum is 3.9 AAV, I take a hard pass
- Victoro311

Yeah me too. To me it just doesn't make sense that you would have to pay a player at least the exact same amount of money. Players regress quite often by the time the next contract is needed. Something cant be right about that.

l
Best players in the world? Cmon mate maybe in the reg season but come playoffs the two of them are basically no shows you keep talking about your cup in 2009 that's all you got with "some of the best players in the world" it must take a while for mediocrity to reach Australia. Like 7 years.
- Bobd62

There are very few of you - feel special?

I've never mentioned our cup in 2009 but thanks for the congratulations!

How many has Lundqvist won??

I've said this before & I'll say it again, if he wants to win the Stanley Cup, he better ask to be traded!

That's what OP said, but we gave Bennett a pay cut this past summer so I'm not sure that's right. Anyways, if the minimum is 3.9 AAV, I take a hard pass
- Victoro311

Pretty sure I've seen that away from this board as well. But if he or we pass, then he's UFA & we can offer lower I believe. If he can find a fit here, be coached by Gonchar & win a Cup , I think he will accept a lower offer in UFA - who will offer him anything anyway if he doesn't get decent toi??

That's what OP said, but we gave Bennett a pay cut this past summer so I'm not sure that's right. Anyways, if the minimum is 3.9 AAV, I take a hard pass
- Victoro311

I'd like to see him play first. He will be in a much better position playing 3rd pairing minutes in a system that favors his skill set. He might be a gem. Or he might be a piece of poop but I can't see us giving up a 3rd if we thought he was the latter

l
Best players in the world? Cmon mate maybe in the reg season but come playoffs the two of them are basically no shows you keep talking about your cup in 2009 that's all you got with "some of the best players in the world" it must take a while for mediocrity to reach Australia. Like 7 years.
- Bobd62

Or we could talk about 1994?

I'd like to see him play first. He will be in a much better position playing 3rd pairing minutes in a system that favors his skill set. He might be a gem. Or he might be a piece of poop but I can't see us giving up a 3rd if we thought he was the latter
- dbell646

The thing is, the guy does have a great skill set but openly admitted to having a big confidence issue, which I kind of respect him for saying. There's a hard working and winning attitude with the Pens. It could rub off on him. I dont mind the spending of a 3rd to find out because the upside could be very beneficial to the Pens.

We'll keep sully? Really now he's your ahole buddy you can't make this poop up your pathetic. Keep trucking on the Dbag train with your two pals 87/71
- Bobd62

You should go practice your trolling in a leafs blog or maybe a yotes blog. Lightning blogs are pretty dead. You've got some serious work to do. You're trolling at an echl level. Need to step your game up. It's really pathetic. You don't even make anyone mad, you just continue to embarrass yourself, much like your goalie did acting like a child last night.

l
Best players in the world? Cmon mate maybe in the reg season but come playoffs the two of them are basically no shows you keep talking about your cup in 2009 that's all you got with "some of the best players in the world" it must take a while for mediocrity to reach Australia. Like 7 years.
- Bobd62

A Rangers fan should be the last person talking about mediocrity. How many Cups has the best goalie in the world won? We can turn this into a Richard measuring contest as much as you like, but the reality is Crosby has a Cup and Hank does not. Secondly neither the Rags or the Pens will be winning the cup this year. So mediocrity again for both clubs.

Damn it

Damn it
- RAGSareDANGERus

Can't we all just get along?

The Flyers lost.

4-0

at home

to the Oilers!

That has to count for something!

The thing is, the guy does have a great skill set but openly admitted to having a big confidence issue, which I kind of respect him for saying. There's a hard working and winning attitude with the Pens. It could rub off on him. I dont mind the spending of a 3rd to find out because the upside could be very beneficial to the Pens.
- MattStrat

My opinion is he was being asked to do a lot on a bad team. Now he's being asked to do what he does best with a good team in a less stressful scenario. Could pay off big time for us.

That's what OP said, but we gave Bennett a pay cut this past summer so I'm not sure that's right. Anyways, if the minimum is 3.9 AAV, I take a hard pass
- Victoro311

I'm sure we could work around it, not qualify him and then just sign as a UFA. I mean really, another team isn't going to offer him anything crazy. Lets say the Rangers offer him .2 more per year, I think he'd still sign here. Working with Gonch may be one of his last hopes. He also loves the Pens so that's a plus.

I'm sure we could work around it, not qualify him and then just sign as a UFA. I mean really, another team isn't going to offer him anything crazy. Lets say the Rangers offer him .2 more per year, I think he'd still sign here. Working with Gonch may be one of his last hopes. He also loves the Pens so that's a plus.
- Pens_Burgh

I don't pretend to know the rules but let's say we offer him a two year deal at a reasonable rate. Would that supersede his Qualifying offer?

I don't pretend to know the rules but let's say we offer him a two year deal at a reasonable rate. Would that supersede his Qualifying offer?
- Thunderbolt

Teams very often will qualify a player (which just maintains their RFA control) that the player will not sign, and work out a multi-year contract that has a lower AAV but a higher total dollar amount. So he may get qualified at 3.9 but work out & sign a 3-4 year deal for 2.8/year or something.

I don't pretend to know the rules but let's say we offer him a two year deal at a reasonable rate. Would that supersede his Qualifying offer?
- Thunderbolt

The Pens have to either qualify him at $3.9M (his current salary) or not qualify him, which would make him a free agent. I expect the latter to happen and one of two scenario's plays out.

1. He is successful during his short time period with the Pens and gets released to FA. Pens make him a fair offer for a few years and he shows loyalty and accepts because of what he went through in Edmonton.

2. He struggles and the Pens don't qualify him and don't offer him a contract in FA.

Hoping scenario 1 plays out and they can get him for a few years at 2mil or so.

RANGERDANGER WHERE ARE YOU

The Pens have to either qualify him at $3.9M (his current salary) or not qualify him, which would make him a free agent. I expect the latter to happen and one of two scenario's plays out.

1. He is successful during his short time period with the Pens and gets released to FA. Pens make him a fair offer for a few years and he shows loyalty and accepts because of what he went through in Edmonton.

2. He struggles and the Pens don't qualify him and don't offer him a contract in FA.

Hoping scenario 1 plays out and they can get him for a few years at 2mil or so.
- MacPatty

The qualifying offer just has to be MADE. It doesn't need to be SIGNED. So technically they have 4 possible outcomes:

1) qualify him & sign him for 1 year at at-least 3.9M
2) qualify him to maintain your exclusive RFA rights over the player & work out a multi-year deal at a different AAV (higher or lower) with the 3.9M entirely irrelevant to the discussion anymore.
3) don't qualify him & negotiate with him as a UFA (dumb idea) and risk ending up in a bidding war with another team for absolutely no reason (you could have negotiated with no other competing offers except for the offer-sheet option)
4) don't qualify him & don't negotiate. He's a UFA that you have no interest in.

Teams very often will qualify a player (which just maintains their RFA control) that the player will not sign, and work out a multi-year contract that has a lower AAV but a higher total dollar amount. So he may get qualified at 3.9 but work out & sign a 3-4 year deal for 2.8/year or something.
- ScienceJesus

typically a player declines his QO if it's really low, such as 800k-1.5M. If the players QO is 3.9M and the guy is only worth 2.8, that player will obviously accept the QO and get paid that extra money. Then next year, his next QO is another 10% higher than the 3.9M, so he'll accept again. And again until he's a UFA.

Essentially, if a player's QO is well above what he is actually worth, the team will typically not tender one and let that player walk.

RANGERDANGER WHERE ARE YOU
- martox

Hello

Teams very often will qualify a player (which just maintains their RFA control) that the player will not sign, and work out a multi-year contract that has a lower AAV but a higher total dollar amount. So he may get qualified at 3.9 but work out & sign a 3-4 year deal for 2.8/year or something.
- ScienceJesus

How did the Bennett thing work then? He took a one year contract pay cut. I don't doubt you guys are right, I'm just trying to figure out the Bennett situation now. Did he go up to JR and say "Listen. I can't stay healthy. Dock me 100k?" I don't care how good of a guy or how self aware/self deprecating you are, no one would do that.

Hello
- RAGSareDANGERus

Wait is this your alt?

The Pens have to either qualify him at $3.9M (his current salary) or not qualify him, which would make him a free agent. I expect the latter to happen and one of two scenario's plays out.

1. He is successful during his short time period with the Pens and gets released to FA. Pens make him a fair offer for a few years and he shows loyalty and accepts because of what he went through in Edmonton.

2. He struggles and the Pens don't qualify him and don't offer him a contract in FA.

Hoping scenario 1 plays out and they can get him for a few years at 2mil or so.
- MacPatty

Thanks, looking at the defense situation only Ben Lovejoy is up for contract. That leaves us with six NHL contracts, so I would guess it is not imperative that we resign him.

Wait is this your alt?
- Victoro311

Alts are against the rules so...no

typically a player declines his QO if it's really low, such as 800k-1.5M. If the players QO is 3.9M and the guy is only worth 2.8, that player will obviously accept the QO and get paid that extra money. Then next year, his next QO is another 10% higher than the 3.9M, so he'll accept again. And again until he's a UFA.

Essentially, if a player's QO is well above what he is actually worth, the team will typically not tender one and let that player walk.
- RAGSareDANGERus

teams & players discuss this ahead of time & have an understanding of "we will give you a multi-year deal for less than your current deal, but we will extend the QO in the meantime to maintain our RFA control. If you sign it, we'll honor it but deal you at the first opportunity or not qualify you again. You'll be looking for work on the street & probably get low-balled by just about everyone after teams find out you pulled that crap with us with signing a deal that you knew was only made for RFA control reasons". It's an unspoken part of the negotiating process. Teams tender qualifying offers with regularity that are only for the purpose of maintaining RFA control only, with absolutely no chance of that offer being what is actually signed at the end of the day.

Most pllayers want years on their deal. They want certainty down the line. Sure, they'll take 3.9 now, but if they can get 9 for the next 3, they'll take that instead because it gives them more certainty. They realize how fragile their careers are. Especially guys that don't have a solid track record that'll give teams confidence in taking a chance if they have a bad year. They want to know that they'll still be getting paid 3 or 4 or 6 years from now. Even if they get hurt & can't play anymore. So they AAV for years all the time. (this obviously excludes the superstars that have made probably more than 20 ore 30M or so over their careers. Their priorities change)

Thanks, looking at the defense situation only Ben Lovejoy is up for contract. That leaves us with six NHL contracts, so I would guess it is not imperative that we resign him.
- Thunderbolt

I'd really like to keep everyone they have on the roster this year going forward. Khunoks can go back down, same with Porter and maybe trade Bonino (though Ive had no probs with him since he returned except totally missing an undefended slot shot vs the Caps) but everyone else I think has the potential to get better and better the longer they play together. I never talk about Bennett much because you'll probably only get a game or two out of him. If he could stay healthy he'd be a strong addition to bottom 6. Im happy Fehr is around for a another few seasons. Really like what he brings to the roster.