Jump to content
  • Join us — it's free!

    We are the premiere internet community for New York Rangers news and fan discussion. Don't wait — join the forum today!

IGNORED

Lightning Sign Tyler Motte to 1-year/$800k Deal


Recommended Posts

  • RichieNextel305 changed the title to Lightning Sign Tyler Motte to 1-year/$800k Deal
9 hours ago, Pete said:

Seems like a miss to sign a guy like Pitlick over Motte... 

to be honest before putting up the clapping emoji and then adding this comment  I had to look up what a Pitlick was.

 

He can't be a guy who's regularly in the lineup, can he be?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, BrooksBurner said:


Only you would think 1 yr $800K is a good contract for someone wanting $2 million. Lol.

It's a good contract for the team. I didn't think that needed to be said, but I guess only you would require additional explanation for something so obvious. 

Edited by Pete
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, The Dude said:

Probably banking on the fact that guys like Coleman and Goodrow cashed in on being overvalued role players on a well run machine by an actual coach. He'll probably have a decent season and get a 4 year deal at 2- 3 mill. 

Motte deserves a multi-year deal from someone. Hopefully next season when the cap goes up he can finally get the contract he’s been hunting. 

  • Believe 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Pete said:

How would they get rid of Pitlick? They just signed him and he hasn't even played a game yet. 

I can’t say I fully understand how the nhl cap works and their contracts.  Thought a team can be over the cap until the start of the season?  So why not sign Motte and then figure a way to get rid of  a $775,000 contract or whatever they would be over by?   I probably shouldn’t have singled out Pitlick.  Could really be anyone except Bonino, Wheeler or Quick.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, RJWantsTheCup said:

I can’t say I fully understand how the nhl cap works and their contracts.  Thought a team can be over the cap until the start of the season?  So why not sign Motte and then figure a way to get rid of  a $775,000 contract or whatever they would be over by?   I probably shouldn’t have singled out Pitlick.  Could really be anyone except Bonino, Wheeler or Quick.   

There's no one on the roster who's that cheap and disposable. 

 

Motte priced himself out, but not sure about Pitlick... Motte was fine here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, RJWantsTheCup said:

According to capfriendly Pitlick, Belzile, Jones and Mackey all are $812,500 or lower.  

The only ones who are going to play in the NHL are possibly Pitlick and Jones. They're not going to move Jones to keep Motte. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Pete said:

It's a good contract for the team. I didn't think that needed to be said, but I guess only you would require additional explanation for something so obvious. 


I said he stinks and you responded to me saying he got signed to a pretty good contract. That implies you think he got paid well, not the other way around. So your initial retort is what makes zero sense, but that’s the standard for most of your posts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RJWantsTheCup said:

Then wouldn’t the others not count against the cap making it possible to have signed Motte?

What would be the point of signing him now? They're already at 46 contracts, why burn one just to add a guy like him? 

 

Once his contract demands came out, it was easy to see why they walked away, once Bonino and Pitlick signed, his fate in NY was sealed. 

Edited by Pete
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BrooksBurner said:


I said he stinks and you responded to me saying he got signed to a pretty good contract. That implies you think he got paid well, not the other way around. So your initial retort is what makes zero sense, but that’s the standard for most of your posts. 

The issue isn't my post, it's your reading comprehension. I said a good GM of a good team signed him to a good deal... It can be implied since I was talking about the GM and the team, that the team got him on a good deal. 

 

If my posts are beyond your comprehension, then maybe you should stop answering them?

 

Or you could just admit that you don't even read half of the post and you're just looking for a fight? You misread the post, and you made a poor assumption. You don't have to be an ass about it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pete said:

The issue isn't my post, it's your reading comprehension. I said a good GM of a good team signed him to a good deal... It can be implied since I was talking about the GM and the team, that the team got him on a good deal. 

 

If my posts are beyond your comprehension, then maybe you should stop answering them?

 

Or you could just admit that you don't even read half of the post and you're just looking for a fight? You misread the post, and you made a poor assumption. You don't have to be an ass about it. 


I read your post. You wrote it as a retort to mine, yet apparently had nothing to do with what I said in my post at all. Draw the line of logic from “Motte stinks” to “yet Tampa gave nothing for him”. I’ll wait.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BrooksBurner said:


I read your post. You wrote it as a retort to mine, yet apparently had nothing to do with what I said in my post at all. Draw the line of logic from “Motte stinks” to “yet Tampa gave nothing for him”. I’ll wait.

Well if he stinks, then why would a good team with a good GM want him? 

 

Hint: It's because he doesn't stink.

 

Edited by Pete
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...