Page 54 of Offside

I read it with the cabin lights low and Garrett asleep against the window beside me. In August, the club had put four years at three-point-four in front of us. Marchetti and I had let it lapse because we thought another full season would buy more term and more money.

But the shoulder had changed. I'd lost active strength, minutes, and some of the game I used to play by force. I'd also kept playing. I'd changed my feet, moved the puck earlier, and killed penalties without reaching for lanes I couldn't safely hold. The club's own coaches kept putting me over the boards late in close games.

One-point-seven wasn't an assessment of that player. They were betting I'd accept it out of fear.

I texted Marchetti that I would call from Buffalo.

Marchetti called my hotel room at six-twenty. "The offer. It's lower than the risk justifies," he said.

"Yeah," I said. "That's why I called."

"Some of it is legitimate risk. Two-year term isn't surprising after the new strength loss. One-seven is a discount well beyond the risk."

I stood at the window. Snow moved sideways across the street below. "Counter."

"I have two tracks. The first is clean. Independent orthopedic assessment, complete performance package, usage and role, the adapted game on tape, and comparables. We counter on the player you are now, not the shoulder you had in August."

"Do it," I said.

"The second is leverage. Private letter to Park and club counsel, backed by a public response if they refuse to correct the process."

My hand tightened around the phone. "What process?"

"October twenty-ninth. Medical operations routes a load-management concern into contract evaluation. Your extension meeting is postponed that same morning. Then you disclose a conflict involving the treating PT, he recuses, and the club continues relying on his pre-recusal clinical record while cutting its offer nearly in half."

"His record is accurate. The transfer didn't change that," I said.

"I know. That's part of the argument. They can't rely on Pryce's work as sound while using his clean recusal to create a cloud around you. The sequence creates the appearance of retaliation after a protected internal disclosure or, at minimum, a conflicted process contaminating the valuation."

The phrase sounded built for a conference room. It also sounded like pressure.

"What would the public response say?" I asked.

"If they won't move privately, we say the club sharply reduced its valuation after a medical provider disclosed a conflict and was removed, even while the club continued to rely on that provider's prior notes. We demand independent review of both the medical and contract process. No intimate details."

"Would you use his name in public?" I asked.

"The private letter should name him and attach the recusal date," Marchetti said. "A public response can be prepared with or without his name, but the threat has more force if the club knows we're willing to connect the record."

Marchetti knew only what Declan had agreed to on November thirtieth. He knew Declan had been my treating PT, had made a clean disclosure and recusal, and had completed an uninterrupted transfer before any potential personal relationship.

He knew nothing about Rochester or Marguerite, those eleven weeks in conference rooms, or the sealed letter in Declan's desk.

"Draft it," I said. "Send me both tracks."

"You want both tracks drafted?" he asked.

"Yeah. Use Pryce's name in the private letter. Say the notes are accurate. He did the recusal properly. If the club thinks we're ready to put the sequence in public, they can't turn around and blame him for it."

Marchetti was quiet before he answered.

"I need you to be clear," he said. "You're authorizing the use of his name, the recusal, and the potential relationship fact he consented to disclose to me."

"Yes," I said. "That's what I'm authorizing."

"And a threatened public response based on the timing."

"Yes," I said again. "Put it in the draft."