"Holdout"

[rataylor22]

Any player who rejected their qualifying offer is, by definition, a holdout. Whether someone associates negative connotations with the word or not is irrelevant.

As for this, it implies the only one who has rejected a contract offer is Barzal. I'm sure the Barzal camp has proposed a contract that the Islanders have rejected.

As it stands, there is no contract in place and that is the fault/doing of both parties. Barzal is not holding out any more than the Islanders are refusing to allow Barzal in camp. Unless you think Sami Vatanen is a holdout as well.

[tweetdrivr]

Yep - still stupid and tiresome.

[butch]

As for this, it implies the only one who has rejected a contract offer is Barzal. I'm sure the Barzal camp has proposed a contract that the Islanders have rejected.

As it stands, there is no contract in place and that is the fault/doing of both parties. Barzal is not holding out any more than the Islanders are refusing to allow Barzal in camp. Unless you think Sami Vatanen is a holdout as well.

I wouldnt trust vatanen holding a glass vase , the poor bastard is out shopping for bandaids but the stores are all closed

[rataylor22]

Yep - still stupid and tiresome.

I believe there's lots of threads other people called tiresome and your response was you don't have to click? I would presume that still applies.

[tweetdrivr]

I believe there's lots of threads other people called tiresome and your response was you don't have to click? I would presume that still applies.

Nah I'm not a big "if you don't like it, don't click on it" guy. Maybe you can find some quotes to the contrary but I don't recall any. I'm more of a "this thread is stupid and tiresome in my opinion" guy.

[2014olympicgold]

Both sides haven't found a contract that works for both sides. Ergo, both sides are equally at fault.

It's anti-player language that is part of the reason fans consistently side with the team over the player, when they should side with the player over the team. CC is correct here.

Well ya, but also no unless NYI hasn't offered anything, which I would think would be a massive leaked piece of info.

It's not a holdout (in my mind) if the team low balls the heck of an offer. It's still an offer. The player is holding out because the team proposed an insultingly low offer.

Equally at fault, to me, is different than a holdout. And by definition Barzal is holding out because NYI gave a too low of an offer. Now until we know what the offer is we don't know who's at fault.

[Dennis]

As for this, it implies the only one who has rejected a contract offer is Barzal. I'm sure the Barzal camp has proposed a contract that the Islanders have rejected.

As it stands, there is no contract in place and that is the fault/doing of both parties. Barzal is not holding out any more than the Islanders are refusing to allow Barzal in camp. Unless you think Sami Vatanen is a holdout as well.

Disagree, it implies no such thing. We know Barzal was offered a contract and he is holding out for a better deal. It's safe to assume Barzal's agent submitted a counter-offer and Lou is holding out for a better deal. Both can be defined as holdouts and calling one a holdout without acknowledging the other party in no way, shape, or form implies the other party is the opposite. A person's immediate association with a word does not a word's definition make.

Saying the Artic is cold is not implying the Antarctic is hot. Saying "I love waffles" does not imply that one hates pancakes.