Licentia said:
They are willing to pay it so that the player plays for them and not someone else. You can't win hockey games without good players. You can't have good players if you don't outbid the opposition for that player's services.
Teams like Edmonton can't get into bidding wars cause they will lose to teams like the New York Rangers who will offer more. Of course New York is going to offer more money to a given player, because that extra cash will make that player want to play for them instead of a team like Edmonton. Whether a player is only worth 2 million a year or not is pointless. If paying him 2.5 million will encourage the player to leave Edmonton (who can't offer more than 2 million) and join New York, then that is what New York will do. They would be stupid not to, because they would have failed to improve their team. When they sign the player, then New York is a better team for it, and they don't care cause they got the cash. However now the small market Edmonton Oilers are a worse team because of it. Then another player somewhere else expects more money because the player who signed with New York is earning 2.5 million so he thinks he should too. So player salaries go up. Is New York's GM the one to blame? No! He has to improve his team or he gets fired. He just happens to have a bigger cash reserve to draw on than Edmonton. He did what he had to do, but player's salaries around the league will go up because of it.
It's clearly not about "wanting or not wanting" to pay a player a certain amount. New York's GM doesn't "want" to pay the player 2.5 million. But if that's what it will take to improve his team then he will "HAVE" to do it, or else his job will be on the line. Edmonton's GM in this case would kind of "want" to pay 2.5 million to keep the player. But it's just not in the budget. So the small market teams suffer again, and the salaries go higher. It's a never ending cycle.
what players have EDM lost by being outbid for by a team like NYR, TOR, DET or PHI (or other big spender) ?
Petr Nedved ? Surely you arent saying a team in the desert has the resources to pay hockey players that a team in the heartland of hockey doesnt ?
Doug Weight ? Surely you arent saying that STL is any better off or that EDM is any worse off because they couldnt afford to pay him 8m ?
MA Bergeron ? Oh wait, didnt they just sign him yesterday to a long term deal that escalates to almost 2m in the last year of the deal. If EDM is so *poor* why are they giving losers like Bergeron huge deals. Why should I feel sorry for their poor managment decisions.
So anyhow, instead of giving us the cliche "NYR can pay more than EDM", why dont you actually show us even ONE example of where EDM lost a player and was worse off for it.
Why dont you show us where the ability to pay players has helped anyone win a cup. DET can pay its players, but the core of that team was drafted. COL can pay its players, but the core of that team was drafted. TBY, nope. NJD, nope. The big spenders, PHI, TOR, and NYR havent one anything in decades. Big markets like BOS, CHI and LAK havent won anything in decades.
Small markets like MIN, CRL, ANA, BUF, WSH, CGY, TBY & OTT have more collective playoff success than any of the big spenders.
So what is it ? I dont see how money has helped anyone win.
DR