*********** 2011 Free Agency **********

MatthewFlames

Registered User
Jul 21, 2003
4,678
812
'Murica
I have a question. Why do we allow players after a certain age to sign max contracts? Anyone can just offer a player at say age 39 (I chose my age since I'd be retiring soon after a long hall of fame career) a max 4 year / 32 million salary then be awarded the player and then walk away after said player retires the next season. That team now has no obligation to pay any salary and probably just stole a player by offering a longer contract that they knew they would most likely not have to fullfil.

I say once a certain age is reached and a player is a UFA only 1 year contracts be allowed. Just a thought.

You should bug the NHLPA about that one. ;)
 

kasper11

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
7,674
13
New York
Visit site
I have a question. Why do we allow players after a certain age to sign max contracts? Anyone can just offer a player at say age 39 (I chose my age since I'd be retiring soon after a long hall of fame career) a max 4 year / 32 million salary then be awarded the player and then walk away after said player retires the next season. That team now has no obligation to pay any salary and probably just stole a player by offering a longer contract that they knew they would most likely not have to fullfil.

I say once a certain age is reached and a player is a UFA only 1 year contracts be allowed. Just a thought.

I know in some past years, the agents considered contracts of all lengths equally for players that obviously wouldn't still be playing to finish them out.

Guess we aren't doing that anymore.
 
Last edited:

Wildman

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
1,942
35
Toronto
You should bug the NHLPA about that one. ;)

It is always in the best interest for an agent to take the longest contract especially if the player is declining in value. Also, we don't know when a player is going to retire so it makes sense to take the longer contract.

The team is also gambling on the length as they don't know if the player is going to continue at the highest level. A good example would be Gomez and Drury as both were gem 2 years ago and now are stuck with a huge contract and no takers.
 

kasper11

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
7,674
13
New York
Visit site
It is always in the best interest for an agent to take the longest contract especially if the player is declining in value. Also, we don't know when a player is going to retire so it makes sense to take the longer contract.

The team is also gambling on the length as they don't know if the player is going to continue at the highest level. A good example would be Gomez and Drury as both were gem 2 years ago and now are stuck with a huge contract and no takers.

I am really really hoping that whoever was willing to give out max-money deals this year gets stuck with declining players that refuse to retire.
 

Dempsey

Mark it zero
Mar 1, 2002
3,298
1,700
Ladner, BC
Selanne is 40, doubt that someone offered 32M$ for a player that might even not play at all this autumn. Selanne will be the highest paid with Brodeur. Who will get 3rd most money?

Isn't there no financial penalty when a player retires and still has years left on their contract? So teams will offer a player with one year of playing left a 4 year deal to make it a better offer, knowing full well the player will retire before then.

For the record, I am not one of these teams :)

edit: I see we're already talking about this
 
Last edited:

Wildman

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
1,942
35
Toronto
Isn't there no financial penalty when a player retires and still has years left on their contract? So teams will offer a player with one year of playing left a 4 year deal to make it a better offer, knowing full well the player will retire before then.

For the record, I am not one of these teams :)

edit: I see we're already talking about this

Well one could argue that the other way as well. What if the player is signed and skip over to KHL or other league and does not fulfill the contract. ahem Radulov
 

Ville Isopaa

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
2,253
10
Helsinki, Finland
Visit site
Would implementing the NHL rule of +35y multi-year contracts be something to consider from now on? That is, that multi-year contracts count towards the cap even if the player retires or is sent to the farm team (in our case doesn't make the top 21 OV-players).
 

Dr.Sens(e)

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
7,014
1
Ottawa
Visit site
As noted, the disadvantage to offering guys long-term deals at the twilight of their career is that they might not retire at the peak of their game, and might just hang in there for a few years. That is the worst case scenario for a team, really, as you are stuck with an underpeforming, maximum earning player who no longer has elite ratings. There have been a ton of examples of this. Trading ANY $8M player is tough - trading one that has an average rating is impossible and essentially hamstrings any team from ever becoming elite when they have that player on their roster. Also sucks to try to rebuild with a guy like that, too.

Most importantly, everyone plays by the same rules, so everyone can guage the risks equally as to offering the likes of Brodeur a 4 x $8M contract. No need to penalize someone in this case, given any team could have made the same move / offer.
 

Dryden

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
1,920
14
Toronto
Would implementing the NHL rule of +35y multi-year contracts be something to consider from now on? That is, that multi-year contracts count towards the cap even if the player retires or is sent to the farm team (in our case doesn't make the top 21 OV-players).

I second this
 

kasper11

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
7,674
13
New York
Visit site
As noted, the disadvantage to offering guys long-term deals at the twilight of their career is that they might not retire at the peak of their game, and might just hang in there for a few years. That is the worst case scenario for a team, really, as you are stuck with an underpeforming, maximum earning player who no longer has elite ratings. There have been a ton of examples of this. Trading ANY $8M player is tough - trading one that has an average rating is impossible and essentially hamstrings any team from ever becoming elite when they have that player on their roster. Also sucks to try to rebuild with a guy like that, too.

Most importantly, everyone plays by the same rules, so everyone can guage the risks equally as to offering the likes of Brodeur a 4 x $8M contract. No need to penalize someone in this case, given any team could have made the same move / offer.

Then again, seeing as how you can buyout a player without a cap penalty, rich teams don't need to worry about the risk.
 

Tampa GM

Registered User
Mar 1, 2002
1,674
0
Visit site
When is the deadline for round2 bids? I am leaving home early tomorrow morning and will not be able to reply in the correct format for the next 50 hours, will only have my cellphone with me.
 

HFNHL Commish

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
1,355
8
When is the deadline for round2 bids? I am leaving home early tomorrow morning and will not be able to reply in the correct format for the next 50 hours, will only have my cellphone with me.

I have no doubt the deadline will be after two days from now. You're fine.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->