from Greg Wyshynski of ESPN,
"I've said it all along, and I stand by it: I really see myself as a Red Wing. [But] there's contract negotiating to be done," said the Detroit center, who was named to the Atlantic Division team for this weekend's NHL All-Star Game. "This is my first time in this position as an unrestricted free agent. But I doubt contracts really ever go smoothly until they're done."
The Detroit Free Press reported Red Wings general manager Steve Yzerman had offered Larkin an eight-year contract worth $64 million. Speculation about an impasse between the sides has grown, especially with the NHL trade deadline approaching on March 3. Larkin has a full no-trade clause this season.
"I wouldn't say that, like, the [contract news] that's been made public is really the most truthful," Larkin said. "It just seems people are fishing and speculating. I don't really want my business out there. I understand we're in the spotlight and fans want to know. They deserve to know. But I think it's not really the most truthful, you know? It's just speculation, and I don't really read into that too much."
Larkin said being able to focus on hockey has "been a blessing" as the talks have continued. He said he doesn't take his role as team captain lightly.
Pierre LeBrun with the TSN Insiders discussed Dylan Larkin. Conversation begins at the 2:15 mark.
Trade him if possible, not worth anything more than 8 Million.
Who are you replacing him with? Copp, Veleno, Kasper? Do you really want to set the rebuild back 5 years?
Chill, so what you're telling me that you want to sign a second line centre for 9 million, if that's the asking price. He's not that special of a player, he gets the first crack on the PP albeit they don't have any snipers. He turns the puck over way too many game in game out. Loosing Larkin will not set back the rebuild 5 years, McDavid yes, Larkin NO. This is about about running your team in a responsible way. Also IMHO if you're a decent player from Michigan people think he's better than he actually is.
While you were busy trying to put words in my mouth you failed to answer my question.
I don't care who they replace him with, get some picks and a top prospect, preferably a centre.
If he really wanted to be here (a Redwing) the contract negotiations would be long completed. He also would not have switched to the NHL's premier player agent at the end of last season. Larkin is only fooling himself.
That's completely unfair in my opinion. This is his career contract, the sum total reward for his entire life's work, and will cover the majority of his rest of his career.
Why should he rush to the table and take whatever is offered to him? Why should he not have the most competent representative? I do not fault him at all for hiring agents that are pushing on his behalf that is their only job, if this was easy, they wouldn't earn their spiff.
Why is the opposite not true? If the Red Wings wanted their captain, shouldn't this have been long completed? Does Yzerman not have anyone helping him, the Wings don't employ top notch lawyers and negotiators?
We also don't know if Larkin has said NO or his agent said NO and advised him to hold. We don't know if $8 for 8 is actually true.
If this settles, and he walks for $1M or less a year elsewhere, I'd agree with you.
Exactly, he switched agents because he wants to get paid not because he wants to stay in Detroit.
He was never getting shafted with his salary at any point. He's always been paid at a fair value.
I think he needs to remember who Vincent Lecav and Martin St. Louis are and what happened to them.
Does anyone in FL even remember those two anymore?
When it's time to move on, it's time to move on and SY is more than comfortable doing what is necessary.
I never thought Larkin was someone the team could be built around and was surprised and disappointed when he was named captain because it gave someone less skilled bargaining power that would help him but not the team and here we are.
We should trade Larkin+Bert in a package and offer to keep some of Bert's salary for the rest of the year and upgrade.
I think he needs to remember who Vincent Lecav and Martin St. Louis are and what happened to them.
Hmm, so Larkin should remember that...
The league offered all 32 teams compliance buyouts, and Vinnie got $32MM from a $45MM deal, and then signed for another $22MM contract, netting himself $52MM overall, with $32MM being lump sum upfront. If I'm Larkin I'm salivating on that one.
Or Martin St. Louis asking Yzerman to trade him and he did? I guess Larkin should know that if he ends up wanting to leave Stevie will move him? Unsure that = Yzerman means buisness.
I think the comparison you are looking for is on Stamkos, however, Yzerman had a SC roster and a friendly income state tax situation that may have helped a bit there.
I'll ask again: Just out of curiosity, what does that Bert and Larkin package deal for 'better players' (now considered upgrade) look like in your head? What additional assets have to go with them, and what team is taking on TWO expiring contracts and sending back a top line center and winger that are better than Larkin and Bertuzzi?
Nobody wants to overpay for either of those two, but I'm having trouble making sense of this scenario you've now suggested twice where Detroit moves both of them out and the return is two BETTER players
Bert as usual is hurt and has become ineffective and when he's in the lineup, he's not meeting the expectations of the coach and has subsequently underperformed. The idea is that moving Larkin and Bert will bring in better returns than simply trying to trade either away.
You're not nearly as opposed to a Bert trade than Larkin so I'm not sure why you're acting as if Bert being traded is some heinous crime. Bert staying is no longer guaranteed and he can/will be traded just like Mantha.
Martin got traded not because he suddenly came to this realization he wanted to play elsewhere.
SY helped him realize he's not as important to the team as he thought he was and same with Vinnie. Martin and Vinnie never in a million years thought they were going to be moved. Sure Vinnie's deal was easier to handle but just because you can get a payout doesn't mean you trade away your franchise players who helped build the team.
It's a similar situation now. Player thinks he has more value than he does. SY has played this game before.
You don't trade away franchise players on a whim and most people IE Holland would never have done what SY did in Tampa. Hence the reason Detroit is in the position it's in and we kept aging players far beyond their best years to the point they were hurting the team every time they were on the ice but Holland was "loyal".
SY knows what his job is and how/why he gets paid.
The ideal trade candidate? No idea, I'm not here going through 30+ potential outcomes and neither is anyone else.So if you want to debate what/who to trade, feel free to provide your wisdom. Otherwise, I'm not sure what you're doing other than useless anecdotes.
Maybe re-read the question and try again. YOU said twice that they should package Larkin and Bertuzzi in a trade for better players/an upgrade.
What goes with them, and what comes back? It's not a gotcha question. I'm trying to understand what you think that move looks like and how and when it makes the team better.
Agent didn’t like the trade him because he’s not worth 9M+ sportstalk cover that SY was getting from the 8 yrs by $8M rejection that leaked out.
Larkin didn’t want the distraction public.
But the Wings can’t afford to get nothing for Larkin if he walks in UFA like the NYI did with Tavares.
Make him the best offer-give him a deadline to decide and ask for him to waive his clause for a chance at a Cup.Let him take his Cup shot and get a rental return and circle back in UFA with a bonus no other team can match—be captain of your boyhood home’s team.If he signs elsewhere—so be it.
Trade and then resign in the off-season doesn't happen.
He controls his destiny, so he holds negotiation power and his agent knows this. If Yzerman trades him, he's not coming back, we couldn't offer him an 8 year deal.
I had a naive approach to this having served in the active Army for 20 years in which everyone was committed to the same bigger ideal and if we got a pay raise, so be it, if we didn’t, we kept on. I used to have this same attitude that athletes should show some loyalty and ‘how much was enough’.
That is an unrealistic approach and wrong. A professional athlete has a very limited window in his life to make real life-changing money for himself and family. The NHL hard cap pits player vs player for salary. An extra million for one player takes it away from others. How many of us would walk away from a million dollars a year for doing the same job? I suspect anyone who says “me” is lying or knows he’d never be in that position. I don’t fault Larkin for having his agent negotiate for the best terms. He’s one shift away from never playing professional hockey again.
The owners aren’t loyal to the players unless it’s convenient or economical to them, we shouldn’t expect the players to give up millions of dollars (whatever that would be like!).
-----How many of us would walk away from a million dollars a year for doing the same job?
----I would not make this comparison. If the numbers are true and Larkin was offered 8x8, but wants Barzal money, which is 7x9 (other teams cannot offer 8 years), Larkin will not be losing "millions".
And also to compare professional athletes with us, regular people, is not fair imo. NHL players on average make 100 times more than regular people, so 1 million difference for them is like 10,000 for us. If a person is happy where I work and need to sign a contract that within 8 years will pay $10,000 less (total) than in an unknown place somewhere else, many people would sign that contract.
Let me also say this, $7 or $9 mil per year should really not make a difference in Larkin's lifestyle, but for a GM, every dollar is important in salary cap era.
Last thought, Larkin said the rumors might not be true, so it's quite possible 8x8 and 7x9 numbers are simply not true.
I disagree here. It doesn’t matter whether you make $10000 or $1000000, a million dollars is still a million dollars. And no one here would walk away from that.
Create an Account
In order to leave a comment, please create an account.