Mighty Duck said:
Maybe we should get specific. Lets start with the worst offender, our beloved NYR. Now did anyone hold a gun to their head on some of their irresponsible signings. Noted: Holik, Messier, Lindros, shall I go on. Please debate!!! Next up: Toronto
After a Pejorative Slured signing by NYR, the other 29 teams either have a gun put to their head by a player whose contract is up for renewal, or the Pejorative Slured contract is used in the arbitration hearing for comparative purposes.
The NHLPA coordinated with the agents to continue to move the benchmark upwards in the last ten years. If the owners worked with each other to try to move the benchmark down by not signing UFAs or making qualifying offers to RFAs, or walking away from arbitration decisions en masse, there'd be court orders for their phone records to prove collusion.
People like Strachan calling owners "cheap" who pay players "woefully undermarket salaries" are another major factor, as fans listen to these guys and vote with their feet.
Owners can't risk pissing off a niche market of fans, so an economic gun is held to their head every time a player's contract is up for renewal or they walk into an arbitration.
And if they walk away from an arbitration decision, the player becomes a UFA and the team gets no value back in the form of a trade.
Please don't tell me that the majority of owners don't have a gun to their head when it comes to re-signing their players. The media and fans hold them accountable, as do the other players on a team.
If a team doesn't re-sign a couple of players because it's "not within their budget", then maybe Pronger pipes up and says, if STL doesn't get serious about making a cup contender, I want a trade."
No guns to their head? Risk losing more and more players because of a few GMs?
Lose your fan base because you're portrayed as an owner willing to accept failure as an option on the altar of a proper "budget"?
How do you think the NHLPA reacted when Kariya signed his last deal?
So the fiscally responsible owners are "cheap" under a CBA, and "foolish spenders who can't stick to a budget" when the CBA expires.
Put another way, they're good owners for having a player under contract, but then suddenly become cheap when the contract expires or they refuse to extend/renogotiate the contract.