A releasing rule(NOT rumor, my suggestion)

Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by C-Saku Koivu MTL, Apr 9, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. C-Saku Koivu MTL

    C-Saku Koivu MTL Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Messages:
    7,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Montreal
    Like I tryed to highlight in my title, this is not anything I heard but just my own suggestion.

    Would you guys like to see a rule that would aloud teams to release 1 or 2 players from their team with contract that they would not like anymore. They would have nothing to give to the players, no buyout, just release.

    That would help some teams that have some very bad contracts to get under the cap. It would only be an exeption for this year, not every year. Like MTL could release Craig Rivet who has 3 mil$ for next year and 3.5 mil$ the other. A team like TOR to release Nolan and maybe Belfour, NYI-Yashin, NYR-Holik etc...
    These players would become UFA(they like that don't they ;) )

    It could count against the cap in some way or for others years to come. a little like the NFL does when a team release a player.

    Now, that would be another BIG gave by the players to aloud this. What would it cost to the owners to get something like this from the players and Do you guys like the idea or would it be completly stupid.
     
  2. Twist and Shout

    Twist and Shout Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Messages:
    12,538
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Calgary, Alberta
    Toronto won't be releasing Nolan or Belfour.
     
  3. C-Saku Koivu MTL

    C-Saku Koivu MTL Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Messages:
    7,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Montreal
    To get under the cap if needed, they won't have a choice, but if they want to keep them, sure they don't have to release anyone if they don't want to.
     
  4. Shy Cheetah

    Shy Cheetah Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2002
    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Comunity Newspaper Owner.
    Location:
    Caprica City
    Home Page:
    With Gurenteed contracts and a salery cap then movment of players between teams will almost stop. There has to be a system in place to be able to cut players to get under a cap. In the NFL contracts are not gurenteed so as I understand how it works is the cap hit is the players upcoming salery for the year and the rest of his signing bonus excelerated to this year. I don't know an easy way around this. The NHLPA will never agree to unguarenteed salleries. This is the real reason I thought the NHL was trying to declare impass. Shy.
     
  5. mattihp

    mattihp Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Messages:
    16,196
    Likes Received:
    35
    Trophy Points:
    131
    Location:
    Uppsala
    I don't think there is any union in the world that would let such a cruel thing like that to be done...
     
  6. FLYLine27*

    FLYLine27* BUCH

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2004
    Messages:
    42,410
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    PO
    Location:
    NY
    Thats what I was going to say.
     
  7. C-Saku Koivu MTL

    C-Saku Koivu MTL Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Messages:
    7,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Montreal
    It's just like if you get fire. People get fire every day. Why should it be different to hockey players, it's call being in the same world.
     
  8. mattihp

    mattihp Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Messages:
    16,196
    Likes Received:
    35
    Trophy Points:
    131
    Location:
    Uppsala
    Athletes get time-set contracts. Most people hired otherwise, don't have the security of having a time set, and can be fired.
     
  9. PecaFan

    PecaFan Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2002
    Messages:
    8,938
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    141
    Location:
    Ottawa (Go 'Nucks)
    Home Page:
    Nope. While I'm pro-management, this rule would totally suck. First of all, for the players involved. They signed the contract (assuming they've done their best to live up to the contract), they deserve the full term. I've always denounced players who asked to re-negotiate mid-term, it'd be hypocritical of me to support this.

    Secondly, it sucks for the league. Allowing "escape" clauses like this just allows a team to go off, make terrible decisions, raise salaries along the way, then say "oops", and drop them. Teams knew the "new NHL" was coming, *TOUGH* if the contracts you signed put you in a bad spot. You shouldn't have signed them.
     
  10. Why? Horrible idea.
     
  11. Kodiak

    Kodiak Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    2,185
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Ranger fan in Philly
    Home Page:
    People can also quit their jobs. Hockey players don't have that luxury.

    The idea of a non-guaranteed contract is so grossly inequitable that without a CBA, any court in the country would throw it out in a second.
     
  12. Guest

    Guest Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2003
    Messages:
    5,564
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    131
    It's a nice theory if you take the humanity and reality out of the discussion.

    I think it would be very likely that there would be a waiver draft of sorts that would result from the salary cap casualties. For example, everyone would name their protected players under the cap, and everyone else would be exposed to a waiver style draft. Teams could claims players if they are under cap, including the exposing of a player to help them remain under cap with a signing. This would shakeup the league in many respects as you could see some of the low payroll teams pick up solid players, even though they may be above average contracts.

    Maybe all players that are not claimed can remain with their existing teams, but there will be a luxury tax to phase in the hard cap. That way the rest of the league has a crack at the surplus of players on the high payroll teams, and if they want to pass, the top payroll teams can keep their roster at a higher rate. I'd only be worried about informal collusion among GM's as to who is truely "available".

    Of course a major issue that still needs to be addressed is that there is a large majority of players that would play in the NHL that have no existing contract.
     
  13. Drury_Sakic

    Drury_Sakic Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2003
    Messages:
    4,056
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    91
    Home Page:
    I think it could be done...


    Just grandfather it in....

    all current contracts are to be honored.. but in future contracts make it an option for owners to offer contracts that can be terminated over the off season without having to pay a player or count it against the cap....

    A team may only terminate one contract per off-season...


    Kinda like a no-trade clause.. you get a cannot be cut clause..
     
  14. PeterSidorkiewicz

    PeterSidorkiewicz Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Messages:
    25,409
    Likes Received:
    1,382
    Trophy Points:
    169
    Location:
    Lansing, MI
    I would have to say this is asking way too much, first linkage now non-guarenteed contracts? The Maple Leafs were told by Bettman along with other teams to GET under the suggested salary or get close to it because its coming. If the teams didn't listen then thats their own problem. If I was a player I would basically say F that, especially when both sides are starting to get some negotiations going. People talk of how the players are trying to get loopholes out of this CBA, well this is a giant loophole for owners to get out of stupid contracts they give out. You gave out the contract you deal with it or BUY it out like you can do now. I think this idea is awful, no offense.
     
  15. C-Saku Koivu MTL

    C-Saku Koivu MTL Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Messages:
    7,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Montreal
    I never said non-garanty contract. Just an exeption for this season and this season only, not every year. But I agree, it would be huge from a players perspective. Some players will probably be ask to reconstruct their contract. That should be interresting to see the respond from the players involved.
     
  16. Kestrel

    Kestrel Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2005
    Messages:
    7,276
    Likes Received:
    841
    Trophy Points:
    139
    If the PA is foolish enough to give on this when they took so long to cave on a cap... so be it. But no, I'm not really for it. I'm fairly pro-management - but like Peca Fan, I think this is excessive. Players shouldn't be able to hold out during a current contract, and teams shouldn't be able to terminate current contracts.
     
  17. Phanuthier*

    Phanuthier* Guest

    Exactly

    There's enough trouble with the cap, now start taking away guerenteed contracts (2 a year) ?
     
  18. WHARF1940

    WHARF1940 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Messages:
    832
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    down in a hole
    It's a nice idea on paper and would allow some teams an out, But.....

    I agree that if the team made the stupid decision, and keep in mind that my Isles would benefit greatly from this, (bye peca and Yash!!!!) they should have to live with it. It is totally unfair to the players, they will have to take a bigger cut in pay than even if 24 was still on the table. Most of the players we are talking about wouldn't get signed for half of what their current contracts are worth....Would you give Yashin 5 mil per right now?
     
  19. Mess

    Mess Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    74,402
    Likes Received:
    573
    Trophy Points:
    214
    Home Page:
    Nice Idea ??

    If I am a NHL owner I would offer some big Star $ 1 mil the first season and $ 29 mil in the second to get under a hard cap.. and then after the first year was over simply release him and ... " NO HARM NO FOUL "" .

    This idea should go right back on the cutting room floor .. IMO ..
     
  20. Jester

    Jester Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    34,075
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    St. Andrews
    sure there is... it's called the NFLPA.
     
  21. kdb209

    kdb209 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    16,272
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    126
    Howabout - the NFLPA.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"