Skip to content
Your daily dose of hockey
Jonathan Marchessault: the Golden Knights and their (dishonest) four-year offer
Credit: Getty Images

Let’s return to the case of Jonathan Marchessault.

Jonathan Marchessault wanted to stay in Vegas. He tried to negotiate with the club’s bosses, but quickly realized that he couldn’t finish his career in Nevada.

He therefore decided to play in Nashville with his former teammate Steven Stamkos.

What’s important to know is that the Québécois has never been afraid to speak publicly. He was the first to say he spoke to the Habs during the free agent process, for example.

And recently, he talked about the Vegas offers. On the Cam & Strick Podcast, he (notably) said this:

They didn’t want to go long term, they were in the three-year waters. I wanted four years. – Jonathan Marchessault on the Golden Knights

But what you need to know is that Knights GM Kelly McCrimmon said something else. In an interview with SiriusXM, he made it very clear that he had offered his former player four years.

So, on paper, it looks like someone’s lying.

However, I get the feeling that it’s not all black and white. Listening to Marchessault’s full statement, and making links, one realizes that the truth may be different. A little different, at the very least.

From what we understand, the Golden Knights GM isn’t lying when he says he’s offered a four-year contract. Renaud Lavoie recently mentioned that the contract was deferred until 2042.

So, if he’s telling the truth, he did offer a four-year contract, but let’s just say it wasn’t an attractive one.

And from the player’s side, we can continue his quote by mentioning that a little later in the Cam & Strick podcast, he said “he had received offers, but nothing to consider” before ending the process. Were they four-year offers?

Is it possible that Marchessault meant that he didn’t get a good four-year offer and that the GM failed to mention that his four-year offer wasn’t very attractive? Is it possible that “in the waters” of three years is… four years?

Is it possible that this situation is the result of a dispute following negotiations? I think there was a bit of all that in what everyone said, and that the squabble is over.


Overtime

– Artturi Lehkonen won’t start the season on time.

More Content