ShareThis Page
Penguins

Notebook: Orpik doesn't have contract demands

| Thursday, Aug. 25, 2005

Restricted free agent Brooks Orpik said when it comes to contract demands, he really doesn't have any.

"I told (agent Lewis Gross), 'You'll know what's fair, just let me know when you work something out and that'll be fine with me,¡'" the defenseman said on Wednesday. "As far as a number, I have no idea. I told my agent do whatever he has to do. I didn't really want to get involved. That's what I pay him for."

Orpik said he's open-minded as far as the length of the contract, but believes Penguins general manager Craig Patrick would like him to sign a multi-year deal. He also said that his qualifying offer was much lower than previously reported, falling just below $700,000. Although his agent and Patrick haven't had any serious discussions yet, Orpik hopes to have a contract in place by Labor Day weekend, when he plans to return to Pittsburgh.

  • The Penguins signed 6-4, 218 pound defenseman Daniel Fernholm, their fourth-round draft pick (101st overall) in 2002. The 21-year-old totaled three goals, two points and 22 penalty minutes in 31 games playing for Djurgardens of the Swedish league in 2004-05.

  • Mark Stowe, agent for restricted free agent defenseman Dick Tarnstrom, was en route to Toronto on Wednesday afternoon for Tarnstrom's hearing on Friday and said there were no new developments to report. Tarnstrom, 30, is the only Penguins player scheduled for arbitration.

  • Sidney Crosby will be featured in a Conversation with Sidney on FSN Pittsburgh tonight at 9:30 p.m.

  • TribLIVE commenting policy

    You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

    We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

    While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

    We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

    We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

    We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

    We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

    We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

    click me