Joined: May 2015
Posts: 19,601
Likes: 6,738
I'm just gonna say what a lot of ppl who probably voted no are thinking. I don't like when players already making generational wealth, act like they need to be pushing for that little extra more generational wealth as if that's similar to the former 1M guy taking the 3M legacy deal opposed to the team friendly one.
Honestly, I'm not even that mad at the 4 years thing.
The writing was there for Matthew to slightly redeem his perceived ego and play the little game all the top guys in the NHL are doing and take the 12.7M contract. Which would have given him exactly what he was he is after. Then after the 4 years he could reevaluate knowing McDavid's new number and adjust to that again. Boom, everyone is happy.
I know, we're talking about 600K diff right but he could have accomplished exactly what he really wanted (The clout of being the highest paid player), endeared himself a little to the fan base and set a good precedent for his teammates future contracts. Instead he just had to do the thing that we all hate.
He's a great player and frankly keeping him at this high cap for 4 more years still beats out losing him for nothing in free agency but I think he missed out on an perfect opportunity to kick the "selfish entitlement" tag to the curb a little and chose not to, while still making it seem like "I'm taking a discount, guys".