Doug McLean fails to consider 24% rollback in Rick Nash offer - bad RFA precendent

[CrAzYNiNe]

It's the 20% thta hurts the league
if 7.8 is the highest you can pay a player then 15% is 5% lower
No one cares about the 24% rollback, they just want to sign all players they can to make a lineup.

 

[Dave is a killer]

let me leave you with this ... Doug MacLean is a TFM, there are no ifs, ands or buts about it CBJ fans, just look at the UFA's your incompetent GM has signed over the last couple of years that were released this offseason

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

What if the puck doesn't go in as often for the somewhat one dimensional Rick Nash?

Rick Nash is not one dimensional.

He's just a guy who, at this age, is getting a Rocket Richard while others are pushing pucks around in the CHL while fans say "be patient, power forward take time".

People fail to realize how far along he is in the learning curve and are far too tough on the guy. But that's ok. Not the first time this happens.

I personally get a wild kick out of HFers who like to sing the praises of Phaneuf and Carter and the like because of what they do against children from third world hockey country and knock Rick Nash like crazy when he's already a rising star against men.

It's entertaining

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

that right there is the key... personally I've lost faith in this, and expect other GM's to be following similar paths.

do you think this was inevitable?

maclean pulled the trigger, so he's the one taking the heat, but if it wasn't him, do you think someone else would've done this?
i do.

that doesn't excuse the maclean bashing, but i'm not sure if he's out on as much of an island that some think.
many gm's have come out of the lockout saying the key is to draft well and protect assets. that's what maclean is doing.

that isn't a justification. it is what it is. and its also something i think someone else would've eventually done too.

 

[Troy McClure]

so much for controlling salaries, when you can't control the contracts you should have most leverage in - a 21 yo coming off his rookie contract.

Yeah, the RFAs are not supposed to have much leverage. They're supposed to be playing for depressed salaries until they hit the UFA market, yet contracts like this throw that away. It really reminds me of Kariya getting that $10 million a year contract from the Ducks right after his rookie contract ran out.

No doubt that Nash is great, but GMs should use what restraints they have to keep individual salaries as low as possible. Cap room is everything, and the Jackets gave some away.

 

[NFITO]

do you think this was inevitable?

maclean pulled the trigger, so he's the one taking the heat, but if it wasn't him, do you think someone else would've done this?
i do.

that doesn't excuse the maclean bashing, but i'm not sure if he's out on as much of an island that some think.
many gm's have come out of the lockout saying the key is to draft well and protect assets. that's what maclean is doing.

that isn't a justification. it is what it is. and its also something i think someone else would've eventually done too.

I never said that MacLean was alone on an island... he's joined there with any other GM that is willing to dish over over $4mill for a 2nd line center (and a 35 YO Zhamnov at that)... he's right there with the GM that decided to give a 5th dman $2.5mill (will Sather learn??)... and there are others as well.

MacLean's mistake was with how he's handling his RFA.... the others were with how they're paying 1st line money to 2nd liners, and 2nd pairing money to 3rd pairing defensemen.

It's especially disappointing when Nash is the type of player and contract that would impact the rest of the league. A player of his calibre making a lot less affects the negotiating leverage of a lot of other players... he's also not in the same category as a guy like Hejduk who has the option there to take his qualifier and be a UFA in one season.

but, what's done is done... I'm not happy about it, because I see an impact of this not only on my team's RFAs, but future negotations in the league.

The last CBA proved it was all a trickle down... it started off great in 95, and the problems kept compounding and things got worse - because precedent is always set.

 

[Timmy]

The last CBA proved it was all a trickle down... it started off great in 95, and the problems kept compounding and things got worse - because precedent is always set.

54%.

Eventually, that trickle comes to a stop...

 

[kdb209]

Anyone who thinks Nash could not walk into arbitration and obtain $5 million is either an astonishingly bad evaluator of comparables, a complete novice in evaluating hockey talent, a comeplte washout when it comes to evaluating negotiating leverage, or all three.

Another point about arbitration. Assuming that the new arbitration terms are similar to the old expired CBA, the arbiter can only look at Nash's past performance and the salaries of players with alleged similar performance. He cannot take into account any projections of future performance.

So he has to determine the salary for a player with only 2 years experience and stats of 74gp-17g-22a-39pts and 80gp-41g-16a-57pts, not some potential future 50 goal scorer, point-per-game, superstar.

 

[NFITO]

54%.

Eventually, that trickle comes to a stop...

yea... eventually...

so that's what - 2-3 seasons of this... the trickle comes to a stop, and we're another 3-4 seasons for another lockout? and then we're going to have another 24% rollback in salaries to again "correct" the market?

 

[NFITO]

Another point about arbitration. Assuming that the new arbitration terms are similar to the old expired CBA, the arbiter can only look at Nash's past performance and the salaries of players with alleged similar performance. He cannot take into account any projections of future performance.

So he has to determine the salary for a player with only 2 years experience and stats of 74gp-17g-22a-39pts and 80gp-41g-16a-57pts, not some potential future 50 goal scorer, point-per-game, superstar.

I've heard there are changes in the arbitration process...

one is that the arbitrator gets two offers - team and player - and picks one instead of ruling on a salary themselves... I hope someone can confirm this, because I've heard a lot of talk about this, but don't have CBA access yet.

another change, that I know is confirmed is that players are only eligible for arbitration after 4 yrs (3 yrs in the last CBA), and unlike the last CBA - teams can now take players to arbitration (thought this was interesting as usually the arbitration process is something that players use as leverage).

Players that are making $1.5mill or more on their last contract can be taken to arbitration by the team instead of having to qualify the player. Players that have arbitration rights that choose not to go to arbitration, can also be taken to arbitration by the team.

 

[kdb209]

yea... eventually...

so that's what - 2-3 seasons of this... the trickle comes to a stop, and we're another 3-4 seasons for another lockout? and then we're going to have another 24% rollback in salaries to again "correct" the market?

There is no need to correct the market. The market will correct itself at the end of the year. Despite all these outlandish (according to some) offers, the players will still get no more than 54% of league revenues. Yes some individual teams MIGHT be forced to sign contracts for more than they originally planned, but they will likely be getting a big rebate check at the end of the year.

I've said it before - it's a zero sum game. Bigger salaries to some players means smaller ones to others. Bigger salaries to lots of players means across the board pay cuts for players.

 

[kdb209]

I've heard there are changes in the arbitration process...

one is that the arbitrator gets two offers - team and player - and picks one instead of ruling on a salary themselves... I hope someone can confirm this, because I've heard a lot of talk about this, but don't have CBA access yet.

another change, that I know is confirmed is that players are only eligible for arbitration after 4 yrs (3 yrs in the last CBA), and unlike the last CBA - teams can now take players to arbitration (thought this was interesting as usually the arbitration process is something that players use as leverage).

Players that are making $1.5mill or more on their last contract can be taken to arbitration by the team instead of having to qualify the player. Players that have arbitration rights that choose not to go to arbitration, can also be taken to arbitration by the team.

There was speculation that they would adopt baseball style arbitration (pick one or the other, nothing in-between), but that does not seem to have been the case.

The other changes are correct - 4 yrs for eligibility (vs 1-5 yrs in the old CBA depending upon first contract age) and two-way arbitration.

It remains to be seen what the limits are on team initiated arbitration and walk away rights. Under the old CBA, teams could walk away from up to two awards per year (three in two years max).

The reason that teams may want to take a player to arbitration is that it prevents a hold out, and in many cases the award will be lower than what a player (and his agent) were demanding using a hold out as leverage.

 

[Hold the Pickles]

Judging from reaction in this thread alone, Nash wasn't "high-balled".

No, but MacLean may have been drinking too many highballs

 

[GSC2k2*]

Pot calling kettle black alert. I suggest you do some reading up on the CBA before making such an astute statemen

Read Pepper's post for a pretty good synopsis of negotiation leverage. Nobody is suggesting Nash be lowballed, but considering his leverage, it's pretty obvious he was significantly highballed. Good for Nash. He's a good kid, and I don't begrudge him at all for landing this deal. But it is a pretty bad business on the part of Mclean. No way you can spin it otherwise.

Champ, I will put up my CBA knowledge against you or anyone else on this board any day. A-N-Y day. As for negotiation leverage? I don't want to get too snooty here, but you might want to think a bit about things before you use sarcasm. You might be talking to someone with a "little" more knowledge about negotiating leverage than yourself. What deals have you negotiated? Hmmm? If you haven't done deals with ten figures on the left side of the decimal point, go sit down in the corner, please, while the adults talk.

As far as comparables? do you know what about $4 mil gets you? Here are a few names:

Bobby Holik
Glen Murray
Rod Brind'Amour
Alexei Freakin' Kovalev
Miro Satan
Mike Peca
JR Roenick (closer to $5, actually)

Offer me any two of those guys for Nash. I will own you (or pwn you, as the kids say these days apparently).

Incidentally, of course we are all talking about the fact that Nash is going to receive $3.5 mil this year. Less than Hejduk.

To me, Hejduk is a comparable I could easily overcome. He lowballed himself badly. Him not making a shade under $5 mil is a failure of his agent. Put him in the above pile, and his salary is the odd one out.

The main premise seems to be that Rick Nash, the top goal scorer in the league (and the only teenager to ever do so, I believe), sucks. He plays a one-dimensional game. That is like saying Beethoven was a decent composer but his vision was for s**t. Or that Albert Einstein really sucked at grooming his hair.

As far as using up cap room. That would be a worthwhile issue for McLean - if he planned on using it all.

Think a little bit in the future. The NHL has recouped its revenue, say 4 years from now. Revenues are at $2.2 bil. The cap is $47.6 mil. Max players are then earning $9.52 million. Nash has rung up about 200 or 225 goals in those four years and is a perennial all-star. What do you think Nash is going to ask for on the RFA market? How about the year after that? Does a small market like Columbus hold him then?

By the way, I could care less about the Columbus team or Nash. I am a lifelong Habs fan. No axe to grind (except perhaps with would-be GM's who pontificate about what players are worth, as opposed to what they are going for, and who believe they could actually be a GM and wouldn't be eaten alive in a negotiation opposite your average articling student, much less a savvy agent/shark).

 

[thinkwild]

Columbus will never have to worry that someone might try and tender an RFA offer sheet to Nash, because Nash will never be an RFA. I dont think this is that bad a contract. In 5 years, Nash playing for a $5mil cap hit is going to make Maclean look like a genius. Especially if revenues return where they were, the team cap is $50mil, and the max player sal is $10mil. There's not many that will use him as a comparable. And those few as elite as Nash that do, will not be 20%'ers if they use him as a comparable. And when Columbus try's to extend his contract in his lat year, they will get even more cap savings if he signs another 5 year deal then. I dont see anything wrong with this from Columbus point of view. This is what we all hope we can lock up our young stars like.

I bet 3 years from now, we will look back at this thread and realize it was a good move. Just like we were wrong about Feaster signing Richards last year.

 

[ClosetOilersFan]

kdb209 - It's reassuring to see there are a few others who get that.

In regards to arbitration, it's a mute point with the cap. It will obviously cause the odd player to leave his team or result in a cut in another player's pay, but logically, it wont turn into anything significant.

 

[SENATOR]

Rick Nash is not one dimensional.

He's just a guy who, at this age, is getting a Rocket Richard while others are pushing pucks around in the CHL while fans say "be patient, power forward take time".

People fail to realize how far along he is in the learning curve and are far too tough on the guy. But that's ok. Not the first time this happens.

I personally get a wild kick out of HFers who like to sing the praises of Phaneuf and Carter and the like because of what they do against children from third world hockey country and knock Rick Nash like crazy when he's already a rising star against men.

It's entertaining

In two years Ovechkin will ask for 6 mill. I can not wait to hear you whining that he doesn't deserve all this money. And what this crap about the third world hockey country? What an idiotic thing to say. Playing Phil Esposito tune? But he was a moron. Just not so long ago Zherdev, Ovechkin, Malkin and company were making a shishkebab out of Canadian juniors.

 

[SENATOR]

And how much Kovalchuk should ask? He is more entertaining to watch. I would say 6.5 mil a year should be enough.

 

[kdb209]

Champ, I will put up my CBA knowledge against you or anyone else on this board any day. A-N-Y day.

...

As far as comparables? do you know what about $4 mil gets you? Here are a few names:

Bobby Holik
Glen Murray
Rod Brind'Amour
Alexei Freakin' Kovalev
Miro Satan
Mike Peca
JR Roenick (closer to $5, actually)

Hate to call you on the carpet, but Holik, Murray, Kovalev, and Satan were all UFA signings, and JR's current deal was also as a UFA. I'm not sure about Brindy, but given his age, it's likely he is on a UFA deal also. Those deals are not eligible as arbitration comps (as I'm sure you know).

I'll give you Peca though.

 

[Resolute]

In two years Ovechkin will ask for 6 mill. I can not wait to hear you crapping that he doesn't deserve all this money.

And if Ovechkin scores 40+ goals and wins the Richard trophy in his second year, he will probably deserve it.

He has to accomplish that first, however.

 

[SENATOR]

And if Ovechkin scores 40+ goals and wins the Richard trophy in his second year, he will probably deserve it.

He has to accomplish that first, however.

Scoring 41 goal by Nash was a sheer luck. Iginla along should win it. Because his goals actually reserved Calgary a playoff spot.

 

[Resolute]

I'm curious...

Why is it assumed that Ovechkin will be a superstar within two years, before he has played a single shift in the NHL, but Nash simply got lucky?

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Scoring 41 goal by Nash was a sheer luck. Iginla along should win it. Because his goals actually reserved Calgary a playoff spot.

Iggy had a heck of a lot more help to make the playoffs than Nash did. That isn't a knock on Iggy at all, but rather a compliment to Kipper and the awesome defense the Flames have.

Do you realize the Blue Jackets last blue line actually included Jamie Pushor, Derek Walser and Todd Rolhoff for extended periods of time?

And I'll second the previous thought on Ovechkin. When he leads the league in goals, he can have that discussion. Until then, bad example.
Kovalchuk, on the other hand, is the better example. And you know what? He should get paid. He's freaking sick.

 

[futurcorerock]

Scoring 41 goal by Nash was a sheer luck. Iginla along should win it. Because his goals actually reserved Calgary a playoff spot.

Sheer luck?

No wonder you're a Senators fan.

Rick Nash had no help in achieving the feat he had... did you see his plus/minus last year? For a guy who lead the league in goals it sure didn't look too good with over -30

What's up with all the Nash hating lately, too? When he's on Team Canada leading the team in points he's your poster child, but when he's not playing for Toronto, he's just another overrated and overpaid player.

The Blue Jackets were nothing before Rick Nash... like Kallio said, we had some pretty crap players on the roster. Our best players were Mike Stillinger, Ray Whitney, Ron Tugnutt. Our NHL ALL STAR was Espen Knutsen.

Give me a break guys, this is ridiculous.

 

[futurcorerock]

Just to further point out...

How many UFA's or RFA's have won a Euro league championship? How many won a silver medal and proved they were a vital cog of their international teams?

Nash justified his worth last year, but a lot of you must've been trolling the Biz boards looking for the next Bettman/Goodenow bashing point to even recognize