The worst contracts in Today's NHL

Status
Not open for further replies.

SuperUnknown

Registered User
Mar 14, 2002
4,890
0
Visit site
futurcorerock said:
There's been no proof that the Nash contract was a bad one, he's been on the shelf most of this season.

Those three are among the best in the league, they earned their paycheck. Iginla set their benchmark, not Nash

It was a bad contract to most people because they felt a better contract could have been negociated instead.
 

GSC2k2*

Guest
Smail said:
I can't agree with this. Being a lawyer certainly doesn't make you a great negociator by any stretch. As well, not being a lawyer doesn't make you a bad negociator either.

This is true, Smail. I am going by the lawyers I have dealt with, and that is a ton of 'em. Many of those lawyers I would not classify as great lawyers, either, but i would take the worst of them over any - ANY - NHL GM. this is not so much as a snobbish lawyer comment as an indictment of NHL GMs.

As well, it's not always the GMs that negociate contracts. For example, in Montreal, it's a lawyer that negociates the contracts for the GM.

That is the smart way. Mind you, I would hope you are meaning that the lawyer is negotiating the actual deal rather than simply documenting the deal struck between the GM and the agent. Papering a deal is not negotiating, as we both know.

Finally, negociating a hockey contract requires hockey knowledge, something which not all negociators have. You don't pay all 60 points players the same amount, as points can be somewhat situational.

I disagree entirely. I have negotiated billions of dollars worth of infrastructure projects in the power, chemical and other businesses, and very successfully, i might add. However, I am not an engineer. I negotiated billions of dollars of power plants in and of themselves without even setting foot on a site. Any lawyer worth his salt becomes a very quick study in whatever he is negotating. The same thing applies for hockey. Most of the agents are lawyers themselves, and they seem to be able to do it, as i would expect they would. It is more a function of experience, training, technique and the feel that any experienced lawyer gets by actually negotiating. GMs, who are mostly former players, go into their job with zero training in those critical skills. Add that to the fact that a few of them - Milbury, etc. - don't seem to even have the raw building blocks of basic intelligence.

All that said, many lawyers are great negociators and in the NHL business I'm sure they negociate a fair part of the contracts (ie: in Montreal, a lawyer negociates the contracts, not Bob Gainey).

Where that is true, those teams are doing the right thing. Most of them have inhouse counsel who advise them on a variety of things. An NHL team that has an in-house counsel and yet lets the Gms do the deals is like having a dog and then barking for yourself.
 

jamiebez

Registered User
Apr 5, 2005
4,025
327
Ottawa
gscarpenter2002 said:
Where that is true, those teams are doing the right thing. Most of them have inhouse counsel who advise them on a variety of things. An NHL team that has an in-house counsel and yet lets the Gms do the deals is like having a dog and then barking for yourself.
I believe this is the case in Ottawa... Peter Chiarelli does the contract negotiations (not sure as to his background, though).

I'm surprised no one has mentioned this yet, but isn't Brian Burke a lawyer? Two birds, one stone. ;)
 

GSC2k2*

Guest
jamiebez said:
I believe this is the case in Ottawa... Peter Chiarelli does the contract negotiations (not sure as to his background, though).

I'm surprised no one has mentioned this yet, but isn't Brian Burke a lawyer? Two birds, one stone. ;)
I believe he is, as is Jay Feaster.
 

SuperUnknown

Registered User
Mar 14, 2002
4,890
0
Visit site
gscarpenter2002 said:
I disagree entirely. I have negotiated billions of dollars worth of infrastructure projects in the power, chemical and other businesses, and very successfully, i might add. However, I am not an engineer. I negotiated billions of dollars of power plants in and of themselves without even setting foot on a site. Any lawyer worth his salt becomes a very quick study in whatever he is negotating. The same thing applies for hockey. Most of the agents are lawyers themselves, and they seem to be able to do it, as i would expect they would. It is more a function of experience, training, technique and the feel that any experienced lawyer gets by actually negotiating. GMs, who are mostly former players, go into their job with zero training in those critical skills. Add that to the fact that a few of them - Milbury, etc. - don't seem to even have the raw building blocks of basic intelligence.

I think there's a difference between a hockey deal and a business deal. Business deals are based on value, which is fairly easy to determine (fairly means that with adequate ressources you can get close value). In a hockey deal with a player, the player's value might not be the same for everyone. Let's say I'm the GM, and you're the negociator. You have to negociate a contract for a 60 points player. I don't feel the player is really important to the team, and that his stats are padded. I think the player will only go downwards, regardless of what he has done in the past. I feel that he can easily be replaced. The "fair value" using comparatives is $2.5M (business value). However, when looking around the league, I think the team could do just as good with a $2M player. If you negociate the best deal you can and sign him to a $2.5M, then imo it will be a wasted $.5M. On the other hand, a player with a fair value (business value) of $2M could be paid higher if you believe the future advantages you're going to get from him will compensate for the extra pay. Then you could sign a $2.5M contract and be very happy about it.

That's what I mean by saying you need to know hockey. Take Mathieu Dandenault's example (negociated by a lawyer...): He signed for about $1.75M while other teams offered him more. I said at the time of the signature that it was a bad signing, because he wasn't worth that to the Habs. According to what he's done, he was a "bargain", signing for less. However, if you looked at what he could achieve hockey wise, he wasn't a bargain at all. This is where hockey knowledge comes in.

Plus, there are some deals around the league that were well negociated like Hejduk's and CuJo's contracts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->