Small markets face big trouble

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mess

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
86,912
11,862
Leafs Home Board
Gary said:
Joe Thornton is an Ontario boy not a Mass. How much will that influence decisions no ones knows as of yet ...

In the past, most of the elite players who take less $$$ to play for a team seem to be for 1 of 2 different reasons. 1) The player feels that he has a REAL good chance at a stanley cup 2) To finish their careers there (even if the team is'nt a contender). Roberts/Newy/Nolan all talk about how great the Leafs are-But they still wanted damn good coin. To insinuate they'd play for peanuts just to be in a Leafs uniform and to help the team get under a cap seems somewhere inbetween extremely unlikely, and nearly impossible. Sure Kariya and Selanne took big cuts to play for Anaheim because they liked the environment but when they're washed up. I venture to say there will be hockey in hell before guys like Heatley/Thornton/etc. play for 1/2 of what they could at a early age just to be in a city they like more. Atleast not when they're 27-28 years old. Maybe you'll get to see a 38 and 37 year old Heatley and Thornton on your team though. Look at all the oldies on T.O. and tell me honestly that you don't think I'm right.
The point you make is that we don't know as of yet what may happen in the new NHL world ..

Time will tell if its going to be a factor .. This is not theory though ..

RicK Curran player agent was on the Radio a few days ago The Fan 590 and he said that new currancy under a cap will not be money alone and that players may chose destinations now for all sorts of reasons and the desire to play at home is certainly a big one of the players he has ..

Well I can't tell you if you are right because the UFA was 31 under the old CBA and many players contracts didn't end until much after that. Roberts and Corson came as UFA to Toronto because it was home .. Roberts said he loved his time in Carolina but the lure of playing at home was too great .. Joe Nieuwendyk player for 2 mil last season, but chose Toronto .. At the rate he produced he was worth far more then he was paid ..

Shortly we will see how this theory plays out .. Adam Foote a Toronto boy could be unable to return to Colorado .. If he picks Toronto then that might be the first sign of the market working for a team .. If we then see that he took less then market (ie his former less 24% correction) then that might suggest he offered a discount ..

You would be last one I would expect to be surprised if Thornton once UFA left Boston .. Toronto would certainly be interested in his services so again we will see if he leaves for Toronto or Phoenix or Nashville ..

Only time will tell .. Before it was about the money now with that not being such a great difference between cities other intangibles will come into play ..

Just like it would surprise no one if Lindros joined the leafs and took a small contract to do it ..
 

shveik

Registered User
Jul 6, 2002
2,852
0
Visit site
OTTSENS said:
You guys make me laugh!!! There'e no way in hell that this deal will

not work. This new cba between the players and the owners will

save the NHL. You can talk about the big market clubs signing all

the UFA until your faces turn blue it ain't gonna happen. Because

whit this new deal there is no more big or small market teams in

the NHL. You tell me what is the difference between Toronto and

Ottawa both team can't spend more than $39M so why do you think

that Ottawa would loose all their UFA to Toronto. No this is a new

era where all 30 teams will be able to ice a competitive team year

in year out and that's a very good thing. This new partnership

between tha players and the owners will be the best thing that ever

happend to the NHL. Now the NHL is a 30 team league not just

big market league. GO SENS GO


No, I am saying that the teams that were on a verge of greatness will get dismantled. The new CBA is all about parity (well, there still will be have's who can get close to the cap, and havenots, who lurk at the cap floor, but the ratio is way bigger than before). In the end, it won't matter how you draft, what you do, you get your talent one way or the other. And teams that currently have more talent, will be hurt as it gets spread around.
 

quat

Faking Life
Apr 4, 2003
14,966
2,059
Duncan
If GM's are stupid enough at this point in time to offer any of their players 7 million dollar contracts, they deserve the failure they will surely reap. Dam.

I've never understood why everyone is so certain that the "best" players will continue to earn pretty much their present salaries, while everyone elses will drop significantly.

Doesn't make any sense at all. Having such a huge discrepancy in salaries in Hockey (not other sports necessarily), would work against the whole idea of team IMO.

Top guys should earn maybe 4 mill at best. That way they know the team has enough cash available to build a strong deep team. The cap is going to make a huge difference in negotiations all across the league.

Of course no one knows at this point how things will work out, but I'll bet we see a whole bunch of single year contracts that basically begin dropping in $ size over then next few years. A team with depth beats a team with one or two "stars" everytime... and the players probably know this as well as anyone. If they want to be on a winning team, they'll have to take lower salaries... and I'm betting the majority will do just this.

The idea that every Sens player is suddenly going to up and leave because of the cap is extremely unlikely. Share a bit of the wealth with your teamates, and be a contendor or a winner for years.

It will take a few years for this to sort it self out, but I'll bet that will be how it goes.
 

Mr Jiggyfly

Registered User
Jan 29, 2004
34,238
19,325
Kritter471 said:
It's a little more complicated than that.

It's about having a good, young (read: affordable) team and getting hot at the right time. And, what I hate about it, is there's a huge amount of player turnover. I'd guess 40 percent of a roster turns over each year.

That's fine for fans in football, as it means losing 3-4 starters at most (or 20ish percent) on a hockey team, losing 40 percent on average is 8 new players on the ice each year. That's a lot.

Finally, the NFL teams don't have to live with their high-salary mistakes, as they have non-guaranteed contracts. Therefore, they can go out and sign a quarterback to $40 million over three years with a $2 million signing bonus, a salary that should seriously impair their team in terms of other signings. But if he's a bust, they can just cut him and not have to deal with it. Hockey teams won't have that luxury, and every team will run into that problem.

I don't think you understand how the NFL cap works..that's ok because most people don't.

Lets say for example, an NFL teams signs a player to a $50 million dollar deal over 5 years with a $15 million dollar bonus.

The $15 million dollars is given to the player right away.

The $50 million is not guaranteed. You are right about that. However, the signing bonus is spread out over the life of the contract. (3 million a year)

So if this player is cut three years into his contract, he will not get the final $20m remaining on his contract. But the signing bonus still counts agt. that teams cap.

So they will have to carry the final $6m agt. their cap for 2 years.

The NFL calls this "dead cap money"

So if you make a mistake and sign a player who gets injured or doesn't pan out, your cap is going to to take a huge hit.

It is all about the signing bonus in the NFL when a player wants a new contract.

This is why NFL teams have to build through the draft and make good decisions not only in FA, but who they resign.

As I said in my previous post, it is all about how a team learns how to manage the system Ie NE, Philly of the NFL.

Then you have teams who don't know what they are doing ie Was, Pho, etc.

You have teams like Ten. who gambled and pushed too many contracts into the future by re-negotiating contracts. Then they had to cut close to 8 starters this offseason.

The NHL will have teams who learn how to manage the cap well, and teams who don't.

The sky isn't falling, everyone needs to just relax.
 

Lanny MacDonald*

Guest
The Messenger said:
The point you make is that we don't know as of yet what may happen in the new NHL world ..

Time will tell if its going to be a factor .. This is not theory though ..

RicK Curran player agent was on the Radio a few days ago The Fan 590 and he said that new currancy under a cap will not be money alone and that players may chose destinations now for all sorts of reasons and the desire to play at home is certainly a big one of the players he has ..

Well I can't tell you if you are right because the UFA was 31 under the old CBA and many players contracts didn't end until much after that. Roberts and Corson came as UFA to Toronto because it was home .. Roberts said he loved his time in Carolina but the lure of playing at home was too great .. Joe Nieuwendyk player for 2 mil last season, but chose Toronto .. At the rate he produced he was worth far more then he was paid ..

Shortly we will see how this theory plays out .. Adam Foote a Toronto boy could be unable to return to Colorado .. If he picks Toronto then that might be the first sign of the market working for a team .. If we then see that he took less then market (ie his former less 24% correction) then that might suggest he offered a discount ..

You would be last one I would expect to be surprised if Thornton once UFA left Boston .. Toronto would certainly be interested in his services so again we will see if he leaves for Toronto or Phoenix or Nashville ..

Only time will tell .. Before it was about the money now with that not being such a great difference between cities other intangibles will come into play ..

Just like it would surprise no one if Lindros joined the leafs and took a small contract to do it ..

Brilliant! So the sting of losing Iginla to Edmonton (his home town), where he signs for $5 million less than he could have made in Calgary (a short 2 1/2 hour drive to his off season home in St. Albert, which is a daily commute in Toronto) for the honor of playing near his home town will be lessened when the Flames sign Heatley for $5 million less than he would get anywhere else, just because he's playing at home. Okay, spin your way out of this one. I know, it only works for the Leafs, because they are the Leafs and have just so much more to offer players, like big endorsement deals and quality of life.

:shakehead
 

labatt50

Registered User
Feb 26, 2005
52
0
If players are not going to sign with teams because of the money, I can't imagine it will only be about being close to home. I would think if it is not about the money, they would want to sign with a team that wins and that may not be a team near their home town.
 

Mess

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
86,912
11,862
Leafs Home Board
labatt50 said:
If players are not going to sign with teams because of the money, I can't imagine it will only be about being close to home. I would think if it is not about the money, they would want to sign with a team that wins and that may not be a team near their home town.
Player agent Rick Curran listed the following items that would be considered instead of $$$ ..

In no specific order

  • Birth place
  • Favourite Team ..often what you cheered for growing up.
  • Lifestyle .. Big City or Climate, personal preference where to raise your kids.
  • Joining a Contender for your best chance at a Cup
  • Role on that team .. ie. Depth chart of the team in question and your role and icetime expected.
  • Personal Privacy or Hockey crazed town
  • Joining a team where a close friend plays or your brother, countryman etc.
  • Owners attitude and treatment of players in contracts and respect
  • Long term or short term expectancy with a team.
  • Cap space availabilty
 

Kritter471

Registered User
Feb 17, 2005
7,714
0
Dallas
<Mr Jiggyfly> said:
I don't think you understand how the NFL cap works..that's ok because most people don't.

Lets say for example, an NFL teams signs a player to a $50 million dollar deal over 5 years with a $15 million dollar bonus.

The $15 million dollars is given to the player right away.

The $50 million is not guaranteed. You are right about that. However, the signing bonus is spread out over the life of the contract. (3 million a year)

So if this player is cut three years into his contract, he will not get the final $20m remaining on his contract. But the signing bonus still counts agt. that teams cap.

So they will have to carry the final $6m agt. their cap for 2 years.

The NFL calls this "dead cap money"

So if you make a mistake and sign a player who gets injured or doesn't pan out, your cap is going to to take a huge hit.

It is all about the signing bonus in the NFL when a player wants a new contract.

This is why NFL teams have to build through the draft and make good decisions not only in FA, but who they resign.

As I said in my previous post, it is all about how a team learns how to manage the system Ie NE, Philly of the NFL.

Then you have teams who don't know what they are doing ie Was, Pho, etc.

You have teams like Ten. who gambled and pushed too many contracts into the future by re-negotiating contracts. Then they had to cut close to 8 starters this offseason.

The NHL will have teams who learn how to manage the cap well, and teams who don't.

The sky isn't falling, everyone needs to just relax.
I know very well how the NFL cap works - I intern for one of the NFL teams. That's why my example had a very small signing bonus.

But you're example is very clearly stated.

The other things I wish the NHL would allow that the NFL already has (now with a hard cap world) is the re-negotiation of contracts. I want that from a team standpoint (like the Stars now - I'ld love to keep Guerin but he'd make so much money for not being a top-10 scorer or the franchise player), but I understand why players hate it and feel strong-armed by it.
 

Mr Jiggyfly

Registered User
Jan 29, 2004
34,238
19,325
Kritter471 said:
I know very well how the NFL cap works - I intern for one of the NFL teams. That's why my example had a very small signing bonus.

But you're example is very clearly stated.

The other things I wish the NHL would allow that the NFL already has (now with a hard cap world) is the re-negotiation of contracts. I want that from a team standpoint (like the Stars now - I'ld love to keep Guerin but he'd make so much money for not being a top-10 scorer or the franchise player), but I understand why players hate it and feel strong-armed by it.

Personally, I am hoping the CBA has a franchise tag similar to the NFL.

I hear you on re-negotiations of contracts...but a team can push all of that money to the backend and get themselves into trouble.

However, it can give you wiggle room to sign a big FA or two if you think you are close to winning a cup.

Which brings us back to my original point...some teams will do this well..some won't.

We aren't even sure how this system will work. Ie what if the Stars sign a big time FA to a 5 year deal. But he doesn't work out.

If they cut him, will they still owe him the balance on his contract? Willa portion of that go agt the cap?

These are the answers I'm waiting for.
 
Last edited:

Beukeboom Fan

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
15,391
1,189
Chicago, IL
Visit site
The Messenger said:
Player agent Rick Curran listed the following items that would be considered instead of $$$ ..

In no specific order

  • Joining a Contender for your best chance at a Cup
  • Cap space availabilty

Isn't it ironic that these items appear to be contradictory.

IMO, hockey is the ultimate team sport. Everyone would rather play for a winner. The issue is going to come down that if I'm an elite player, I either have to accept less than the max, or carry a team almost all on my own. If I'm an elite player, I wouldn't sign with a team that has another expensive player unless he's a horse.

Example: If I'm a upper tier UFA, I likely wouldn't sign with the Islanders, because Yashin's likely won't carry his "cap weight", and the rest of the team is going to be light on talent to compensate.

I just wonder how many players will accept less than "market value" to go to a contender instead of a developing team.
 

Digger12

Gold Fever
Feb 27, 2002
18,313
990
Back o' beyond
The Messenger said:
Player agent Rick Curran listed the following items that would be considered instead of $$$ ..

In no specific order

  • Birth place
  • Favourite Team ..often what you cheered for growing up.
  • Lifestyle .. Big City or Climate, personal preference where to raise your kids.
  • Joining a Contender for your best chance at a Cup
  • Role on that team .. ie. Depth chart of the team in question and your role and icetime expected.
  • Personal Privacy or Hockey crazed town
  • Joining a team where a close friend plays or your brother, countryman etc.
  • Owners attitude and treatment of players in contracts and respect
  • Long term or short term expectancy with a team.
  • Cap space availabilty

So in other words, 2 + 2 = 4? Glad that mystery's been solved by the Scooby Gang.

Other than the new kid on the block (cap space availability), most if not all of these points come up in every contract negotiation, new CBA or not.

What's changed is the level of importance, obviously.
 

txomisc

Registered User
Mar 18, 2002
8,348
62
California
Visit site
quat said:
If GM's are stupid enough at this point in time to offer any of their players 7 million dollar contracts, they deserve the failure they will surely reap. Dam.

I've never understood why everyone is so certain that the "best" players will continue to earn pretty much their present salaries, while everyone elses will drop significantly.

Doesn't make any sense at all. Having such a huge discrepancy in salaries in Hockey (not other sports necessarily), would work against the whole idea of team IMO.

Top guys should earn maybe 4 mill at best. That way they know the team has enough cash available to build a strong deep team. The cap is going to make a huge difference in negotiations all across the league.

Of course no one knows at this point how things will work out, but I'll bet we see a whole bunch of single year contracts that basically begin dropping in $ size over then next few years. A team with depth beats a team with one or two "stars" everytime... and the players probably know this as well as anyone. If they want to be on a winning team, they'll have to take lower salaries... and I'm betting the majority will do just this.

The idea that every Sens player is suddenly going to up and leave because of the cap is extremely unlikely. Share a bit of the wealth with your teamates, and be a contendor or a winner for years.

It will take a few years for this to sort it self out, but I'll bet that will be how it goes.
I agree. Theres been an perception for years that hockey players are the most loyal, team oriented guys. We havent been seeing that as much which the huge difference in $ certain teams can offer. Now that that difference is about as small as it can get, we will really see how much loyalty these guys have. My guess is we wont see nearly as much movement from younger players that many think
 

Digger12

Gold Fever
Feb 27, 2002
18,313
990
Back o' beyond
txomisc said:
My guess is we wont see nearly as much movement from younger players that many think

That's my suspicion as well...

Just because a Rick Nash can leave at 25 or 27, it's not a fait accompli that he will.

If C-Bus builds a solid program and brings in quality talent, plus plans in advance to provide the cap space where they can offer him as much $$ as anyone else...who's to say he wouldn't stay?
 

GSC2k2*

Guest
Beukeboom Fan said:
Isn't it ironic that these items appear to be contradictory.

IMO, hockey is the ultimate team sport. Everyone would rather play for a winner. The issue is going to come down that if I'm an elite player, I either have to accept less than the max, or carry a team almost all on my own. If I'm an elite player, I wouldn't sign with a team that has another expensive player unless he's a horse.

Example: If I'm a upper tier UFA, I likely wouldn't sign with the Islanders, because Yashin's likely won't carry his "cap weight", and the rest of the team is going to be light on talent to compensate.

I just wonder how many players will accept less than "market value" to go to a contender instead of a developing team.

Not to get off track, but I have kind of had enough of this little myth that seems to have gained the status of received wisdom around these parts.

Hockey is not the "ultimate team sport" IMO. It is no more so than a half dozen other sports that I can name, and in fact far less of a team sport than others.

While a team game, hockey has always also had its own little star system. Always will. Success is dependent on having a stud or two to carry the load.
 

quat

Faking Life
Apr 4, 2003
14,966
2,059
Duncan
gscarpenter2002 said:
Not to get off track, but I have kind of had enough of this little myth that seems to have gained the status of received wisdom around these parts.

Hockey is not the "ultimate team sport" IMO. It is no more so than a half dozen other sports that I can name, and in fact far less of a team sport than others.

While a team game, hockey has always also had its own little star system. Always will. Success is dependent on having a stud or two to carry the load.


It's not that hockey is the "ultimate team sport", but it does function differently than other sports, as they differ from each other. I agree it makes no sense to call one team sport more of a team sport... er... so to speak.

That said, I don't believe that "a stud or two" can carry the load... at least not in the playoffs. You simply have to have at least a half dozen guys in your roster who are close to the stud level as well. Of course some of these guys will be young, and therefore lower on the pay scale, but if you want success built over years, it defeats you to spend the majority of your money on a couple of players.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->