IIHF and NHL reach deal, Russia stays out

[BrokenStick]

For example, its been said that Kaigorodov is making $1 million and, under the new agreement, could be bought out for $200 thousand. That's 1/5 his yearly salary. That's highway robbery.

You know, one thing has bothered me about this argument. The transfer fee would be paid to the team, and the salary mentioned is paid to the player. We're talking about two completely different payments here. In theory, Kaigorodov's team would be receiving $200 thousand and being relieved of having to pay $1 million. This ratio argument that keeps getting put forth makes it sounds like the team is receiving only 1/5 of what they already are.

Also, the current NHL CBA was made under an assumption that the IIHF transfer agreement would soon exist. If the Russians do not agree to it, then how does this change the CBA? For example, the fact that teams only own the rights to a European player for 2 years after the draft as opposed to indefinitely. Would this not apply to Russian drafted players then?

I think the biggest problem with all of this is that Russian players are being treated only as property, not as people. The RSL teams are demanding "compensation" for their training either in years of service or in money from other teams. By that same reasoning, should Pittsburgh have to give some random transfer money to Rimouski for Crosby? This all just seems too much an issue of egos to me.

 

[Wetcoaster]

You know, one thing has bothered me about this argument. The transfer fee would be paid to the team, and the salary mentioned is paid to the player. We're talking about two completely different payments here. In theory, Kaigorodov's team would be receiving $200 thousand and being relieved of having to pay $1 million. This ratio argument that keeps getting put forth makes it sounds like the team is receiving only 1/5 of what they already are.

Also, the current NHL CBA was made under an assumption that the IIHF transfer agreement would soon exist. If the Russians do not agree to it, then how does this change the CBA? For example, the fact that teams only own the rights to a European player for 2 years after the draft as opposed to indefinitely. Would this not apply to Russian drafted players then?

I think the biggest problem with all of this is that Russian players are being treated only as property, not as people. The RSL teams are demanding "compensation" for their training either in years of service or in money from other teams. By that same reasoning, should Pittsburgh have to give some random transfer money to Rimouski for Crosby? This all just seems too much an issue of egos to me.

Professional hockey players are property when they are under contract. That is the whole point of reserve clauses, restricted free agents, signing rights being held for drafted players, etc.

The NHL pays the CHL development fees after each entry draft pursuant to the NHL/CHL agreement. The last agreement expired at the time of the previous CBA. The money is then split between the three major junior leagues who then have an arrangement to disburse money to the various teams . It differs depending upon the league. Here is how it has worked in the past in the WHL which is the league with which I am most familiar.

Each team receives a $50,000 base grant and then additional money based on the number of its players drafted and in which round. A first-round draft pick, for example, was worth between $15,000 and $17,000 in the past.

Because of the expiry of the agreement the CHL has not received its money from the 2004 draft class and that is expected to be paid as back fees when the new agreement is signed. The 2005 development fees will also be negotiated and included in the new agreement.

NHL/CHL Agreement

Has the League begun negotiating a new agreement with the Canadian Hockey League?

We have begun negotiations with the CHL on a new agreement, and we hope to conclude a new agreement in the near future.

http://www.nhl.com/nhlhq/cba/relaunch_faqs072205.html

 

[Ola]

Some of this has allready been clarified to you, but I'll try to give my own opinion also.
----------------------------------------
I dont know you, but I can tell you that you have been pissed.

There is no such rule in EU or in Scandinavia. For example, in Kärpät (Oulu), players have contracts from 1 to 4 years. Sometimes they make contracts, that can be ended if other part wants that. That can be done, either that player wants to end it or the team wants to end it. But there is no such Rule. For example, Kärpät has 1 this kind of contract. Normally those are players, that are not 100% sure, can they play in the Finnish league. For players that have possibility to develope to NHL-player, they create longer contracts.

Unlike in Russia, here players and teams really stick in the contracts. There, teams can dumb a player, even that he is under contract. I remember one player, who was dumbed in the Swedish Airport, because team did'nt need that player. They just told that we dont need you. Offcourse, there is propably teams, that does things correct, but there is also teams that does'nt care a bit. Also some players leaves the team, without warnings (also European and American players) and I dont respect that either, if there is no good reason for that (payments etc.).

Also some Russian teams have contacted players from Finland, even that they have been under contract here and have promised moon from the sky to those guys. Not very easy to concentrate on the game, if someone has promised you 1000% raise to your salary. For example Andreij Potaitshuk left Kärpät even that he was under contract.

I also understand that there is big cultural differencies, but you have to respect other teams, leagues and players. I have been talking to at least 3 different players who have been in Russia, playing in the highest level. All of those told me that they wont go back there ever again. There is also players that likes to be there. Teams have fullfilled everything needed, but what I have heard here, it's pretty rare, at least for European players.

For this IIHF-deal. You have to understand that teams here and in other EU countries does'nt have that much money than in Russian league or in NHL. For Russian team, 200K$ is not so big money but for Finnish or Swedish team, that can put your balance from negative side to positive side. If there would be no deal, players would create 1-2 year contracts and would leave to NHL after it has been expired. And you can be sure that this will happen also in Russia. If those stories about Pens trying to get Malkin is true, then RSL made very big mistake. My opinion is, that RSL-teams should get the fair prize from top talented player, but I can sure you that developing player wont cost more than 200K$. Especially in Russia, where prizes are far least than for example in Finland.

You make a very good point. Again, Russian teams can benefit from not having a deal with the NHL if they can GOON kids into signing long term contracts. If you are young and not from a healty family in Russia how much leverege do you have as a 17 y/o if the local Govener hands you a contract and says sign this or you have played your last hockey game? None.

Russian hockeyplayers should boycot the RSL and the Russian National Team untill they sign the IIHF deal because right now the only ones beeing hurt is Pittsburgh and young hockeyplayers in Russia.

Also if the RSL would be as attractive to young russian hockey players like some russian fans on here seems to belive this deal would be great, wouldn't it? First of all they would be paid for players that don't have a contract from the NHL. WHILE RSL TEAMS CAN SIGN PLAYERS FROM THE NHL WITHOUT CONTRACTS FOR FREE? Kovalchuk would for example go for nothing right now from Atlanta to AK Bar, while Atlanta would have to pay Ak Bar for signing a russian player without contract...

 

[Muscle Bob]

By that same reasoning, should Pittsburgh have to give some random transfer money to Rimouski for Crosby? This all just seems too much an issue of egos to me.

You don't understand anything. There are two different systems of preparing players in Russia and in other world. In Russia it is free, in other world parents have to pay.
Who can say where from Crosby ? I've never heard about it, because its not important. And everyone who knows hockey well, knows that Ovechkin is from Moscow, Malkin from Magnitogorks.
You can look at another thread about this topic, somebody has written about it in details

 

[Ola]

You don't understand anything. There are two different systems of preparing players in Russia and in other world. In Russia it is free, in other world parents have to pay.
Who can say where from Crosby ? I've never heard about it, because its not important. And everyone who knows hockey well, knows that Ovechkin is from Moscow, Malkin from Magnitogorks.
You can look at another thread about this topic, somebody has written about it in details

Who told you that. Oh a Russian GM hard to guess.

Rethorics(or real world) 101 - Don't put much value in what a one PART in a buissnis negotiation says...

I am willing to bet huge sums that icetime, coaches, equipment together is 10x as expensive in Sweden then in Russia, and it aint paid by parents. Though in Sweden tickets costs 40 USD and the arenas takes 7000-10000 spectators. Huge parts of that income goes to developing players. Not signing guys like Vincent Lecavalier and a ton of other expensive stars. Put that money into developing kids and Russian hockey would be fine.

Without a doubt getting what you call market transfer money, maybe ransom is a better word IMO, would of course be great for Russian hockey. But the only way they will be able to get that is if they are able to force young vulnerable kids in their teens to sign long term contracts.

Also if NHL thought it was a good idea putting more then the 5 million USD or something Russia would get under IIHF transfer deal don't you think they would invest that money somewhere else then Moscow, Russia?

I am pretty sure 10 million USD would develop quit a few great hockeyplayers in Canada for example...

 

[JPL]

Newest information about the contract.

Players, not been drafted and are over 22 years, should have made contract with NHL-team before 18th of August. So these players are not available anymore, without approvement from current team.

I did not find any information about this from any newspapers in US. This was announced today, because few contract has been trashed because of this. (Niklas Bäckström GK, Kärpät; Tuomas Eskelinen F, Blues and perhaps also allready announced contract of Hannu Pikkarainen HIFK--> NYR) (HIFK has made an offer about Pikkarainen to NYR, we'll see what happens)

Also very interesting rumour sais, that there is (only) 100000USD penalty, if NHL team signs player after trade deadline, which is this night. Dont know, can European team then reject this contract or not.

 

[Vladiator]

Without a doubt getting what you call market transfer money, maybe ransom is a better word IMO, would of course be great for Russian hockey. But the only way they will be able to get that is if they are able to force young vulnerable kids in their teens to sign long term contracts.

And when Crosby, a "young vulnerable kid" is forced to sign a contract for three years with a club, and then remain as its property for another 7 years, that's OK? Of course, he can change the club in the next 10 years -- when Pittsburg DECIDES that they WANT to offload him and when Pittsburg AGREES on COMPENSATION with another club in the process of club to club NEGOTIATIONS.

Ah, wait a second... NHL does what RSL wants to do... That cannot be right: it's common knowledge that Russian owners are still greedy totalitarian communists with mafia connections while NHL owners are of the kind caring and fluffy type, with players' prosperity and well-being being the only things on their minds.

So what is the reason for such a disparency in the attitude? Is it because NHL still considers itself as being the number one league in the world (which is true) with other leagues, like CHL, AHL and Euro leagues, being players incubators from which NHL owners can pick and chose who they like and whenever they like? Well, I am proud that RSL feels it's strong enough to prove NHL wrong. I don't care if a few players will leave without a compensation because of our labour laws -- there is a motion to change laws to accommodate professional sport contracts like in NA. So eventually it will be stopped.

And don't be fooled that other Euro leagues are happy with the current arrangements: Czehs clearly want more money for their players. There must also be a reason why the NHL/IIHF agreement was signed for only two years. Maybe IIHF just need time to prepare for a new more beneficial agreement?

Finally, to those who strife to see Russia kicked out from IIHF tornaments... Fasel, though being NHL's pet, said over and over again that the decision to sign the agreement is totally voluntary, and that Russia's refusal will not result in any sanctions. Wouldn't it be very communist-like to force someone to sign something, anyway?

 

[hockeydadx2*]

And when Crosby, a "young vulnerable kid" is forced to sign a contract for three years with a club, and then remain as its property for another 7 years, that's OK? Of course, he can change the club in the next 10 years -- when Pittsburg DECIDES that they WANT to offload him and when Pittsburg AGREES on COMPENSATION with another club in the process of club to club NEGOTIATIONS.

Point well taken, I guess. The difference is, these rules are all agreed to with collective bargaining. The players AGREE to abide by these rules. It's not a dictatorship. The players' union permits it, and during collective bargaining gets something else in return. There are also opportunities, albeit slight, to leave during restricted free agency. If Russian hockey players had a union, I imagine they'd eventually get better terms of employment. It would be amusing to watch the Russian owners deal with a real union, but I don't know if they even have effective organized labor in Russia.

Finally, to those who strife to see Russia kicked out from IIHF tornaments... Fasel, though being NHL's pet, said over and over again that the decision to sign the agreement is totally voluntary, and that Russia's refusal will not result in any sanctions. Wouldn't it be very communist-like to force someone to sign something, anyway?

Doesn't serve any purpose to keep Russia out of the tournaments, as there is no reason to punish the average Russian hockey fan or even player.

Eventually, a deal will be reached, and it will probably be on the NHL's side of the terms. The Russians need the money, pure and simple. If they lose players over time and get no money, they will eventually see the logic in negotiating. They will NEVER get a situation whereby clubs negotiate individually, because a level playing field doesn't exist to permit that; the Rangers and Flyers will end up drafting all of the good Russians and paying millions to get them out, while the rest of the teams sit by and watch because they can't afford it. Nope, that will never happen. Eventually the Russians will come around and grasp reality, because they need the money to keep flowing. Some money, is better than no money. And those Russian owners love money.

 

[CSKA]

Eventually, a deal will be reached, and it will probably be on the NHL's side of the terms. The Russians need the money, pure and simple. .

o boy its not all about the money ..........money comes second here

1.Respect "russian" contracts
2.Money

"The Russians need the money" - wrong again , most of the teams have already big money from such people like Abramowith and they simply dont wanna such a BS agreement with the NHL !

"and it will probably be on the NHL's side of the terms" - who says that ? I already heard "malkin from Metallurg to Pit for free " and some other BS things...... and what happend ? Malkin stays in Russia ....

 

[Muscle Bob]

Today, Velichkin said that Malkin stays in Russia for a 1 year. He also said, that he hopes, that law will be updated before next season starts. So if Pittsburgh wants Malkin they should contact Metallurg and talk about compensation

 

[Egil]

Once a players contract expires, they are going to be a "free transfer", will they not? That is what happens in football as well, is it not? Kaigorodov has 1 year left on his Russian deal, so is it worth it for the Russians to demand too much money, and then lose him for nothing?

 

[Jussi]

1.Respect "russian" contracts

So they basically don't want NHL clubs to sign player under contract to Russia but rather have them wait until the player's contract expires? And they still want the transfer money? Hmm, in the current situation the clubs can wait for the player's contracts to expire and NOT PAY THE RUSSIAN CLUB ANYTING. I wonder what the NHL GM's are going to with those options?

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Today, Velichkin said that Malkin stays in Russia for a 1 year. He also said, that he hopes, that law will be updated before next season starts. So if Pittsburgh wants Malkin they should contact Metallurg and talk about compensation

Malkin has a contract with us until 2008. Yes, he may leave earlier than that, but he shouldn’t forget that he has such a team, as Metallurg, that can fight for him with any competitor. This fight would follow all possible civilized rules. No one is going to hinder Malkin to leave. Even this year no one prohibited him to go. If he’d bought an airplane ticket to America, than who would stop him? We made an effort to keep the player for Russian fans, especially, Magnitogorsk.

http://www.rushockey.com/events.php?i=sl&stream=sl_interviews&id=289

Kind of shows that absent the IIHF-Agreement the Russians know that they do not have a leg to stand on, doesn't it? A roll of Charmin has more value than his Russian contract as far as its 2008 end date.

If this is his decision, then that is fine though I am disappointed. Then again this is Russian media, hell we have seen Canadian media be wrong about stories, let alone Russian media. But let us say that it is right. I have a pretty good feeling about him coming next year, and an even stronger one that the Russians may break and sign the agreement sooner rather than later.

Otherwise, they will not be able to have their pros, including Malkin, AO, etc, in the Olympics or WJC's right? And risk losing Malkin and others for nothing when they do come. I just do not see where Russia can win in this. Bettman is going to break and let them negotiate player by player or potentially millions per player? Give me a break.

 

[hockeydadx2*]

Pittsburgh and the NHL don't lose here. Malkin's only a kid, and if he continues to develop in Russia for the next year or so, it only helps the Pens. When he gets to Pittsburgh, he'll be more of a contributor than he would this year. Pittsburgh is not going to negotiate with Magnitogorsk for a ransom. Eventually Malkin will want to leave, and Magnitogorsk will have no leverage. If the Pens hadn't gotten Crosby, the immediate need for Malkin would have been much higher. Let him play in Siberia for another year, and in the Olympics. It can only help him.

For some reason, I don't think Malkin wanted to be a rookie the same year as Crosby arrived, anyhow.

 

[hockeydadx2*]

o boy its not all about the money ..........money comes second here


"and it will probably be on the NHL's side of the terms" - who says that ? I already heard "malkin from Metallurg to Pit for free " and some other BS things...... and what happend ? Malkin stays in Russia ....

As a side benefit, Malkin's family is allowed to survive.

 

[Muscle Bob]

Once a players contract expires, they are going to be a "free transfer", will they not? That is what happens in football as well, is it not? Kaigorodov has 1 year left on his Russian deal, so is it worth it for the Russians to demand too much money, and then lose him for nothing?

Well, first, who have said that he will not deal a new one ?
There are new rules in Russia: young player, after finishing hockey school must deal 5-year contract with his team, and after that, if team will give him +30% he must sign 3-year contract. Wait for 8 years and receive new "young" star

 

[Muscle Bob]

So they basically don't want NHL clubs to sign player under contract to Russia but rather have them wait until the player's contract expires? And they still want the transfer money? Hmm, in the current situation the clubs can wait for the player's contracts to expire and NOT PAY THE RUSSIAN CLUB ANYTING. I wonder what the NHL GM's are going to with those options?

Sure, tell that to Pittsburgh

 

[Muscle Bob]

Malkin has a contract with us until 2008. Yes, he may leave earlier than that, but he shouldn’t forget that he has such a team, as Metallurg, that can fight for him with any competitor. This fight would follow all possible civilized rules. No one is going to hinder Malkin to leave. Even this year no one prohibited him to go. If he’d bought an airplane ticket to America, than who would stop him? We made an effort to keep the player for Russian fans, especially, Magnitogorsk.

http://www.rushockey.com/events.php?i=sl&stream=sl_interviews&id=289

Kind of shows that absent the IIHF-Agreement the Russians know that they do not have a leg to stand on, doesn't it? A roll of Charmin has more value than his Russian contract as far as its 2008 end date.

If this is his decision, then that is fine though I am disappointed. Then again this is Russian media, hell we have seen Canadian media be wrong about stories, let alone Russian media. But let us say that it is right. I have a pretty good feeling about him coming next year, and an even stronger one that the Russians may break and sign the agreement sooner rather than later.

Otherwise, they will not be able to have their pros, including Malkin, AO, etc, in the Olympics or WJC's right? And risk losing Malkin and others for nothing when they do come. I just do not see where Russia can win in this. Bettman is going to break and let them negotiate player by player or potentially millions per player? Give me a break.

Malkin may leave now. Not after the law will be updated.

I just do not see where Russia can win in this.

Do you read what other people are writing here ? After updating law, no player can leave RSL if he has contract(Only if NHL club will buy contract)

 

[Timmy]

Well, first, who have said that he will not deal a new one ?
There are new rules in Russia: young player, after finishing hockey school must deal 5-year contract with his team, and after that, if team will give him +30% he must sign 3-year contract. Wait for 8 years and receive new "young" star

Does he sign this agreement upon entering hockey school?

If so, at what age would he be signing this agreement?

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Malkin may leave now. Not after the law will be updated.


Do you read what other people are writing here ? After updating law, no player can leave RSL if he has contract(Only if NHL club will buy contract)

So you admit that Russian contracts, absent the IIHF agreement, are worthless? Good, we are finally getting somewhere. So how does it help Russia at all to hold out. Worthless contracts until they do, no WJC, no olympics. I just do not get it.

 

[Egil]

Well, first, who have said that he will not deal a new one ?
There are new rules in Russia: young player, after finishing hockey school must deal 5-year contract with his team, and after that, if team will give him +30% he must sign 3-year contract. Wait for 8 years and receive new "young" star

So you believe that a Russian club can force a player to sign a 3 year contract? I don't think that would be upheld in court, should a player leave after the 5 year deal.

BTW, I saw a Russian Interview with Bettman. It sounds like every Russian Super League team is LOSING money.

 

[Wetcoaster]

So you believe that a Russian club can force a player to sign a 3 year contract? I don't think that would be upheld in court, should a player leave after the 5 year deal.

BTW, I saw a Russian Interview with Bettman. It sounds like every Russian Super League team is LOSING money.

If you want to play in the NHL you are forced to sign a contract with the team who drafts you. If you do not then you go back in the draft and your rights go to another team. The NHL sets out the entry contracts and their terms. Sign it or do not play. How is that any different?

Unless you are an Eric Lindros type talent - you sign where drafted if you want to play in the NHL.

In terms of profit, I thought according to the NHL most teams were losing money as well. Was that not the rationale for the lockout?

 

[Egil]

If you want to play in the NHL you are forced to sign a contract with the team who drafts you. If you do not then you go back in the draft and your rights go to another team. The NHL sets out the entry contracts and their terms. Sign it or do not play. How is that any different?

You sir should be a politician. You, instead of answering my query, decided to invent your own, sortof related but not really, question, and then answer it.

You are talking about a team holding the RIGHTS to a player in a particular league. I am talking about forcing a player to sign a contract against his wishes, keeping him in a particular league.
A NHL team holds the NHL rights to a player they draft. Nobody is forcing them to sign a contract to play in the NHL, they are free to play in any other profesional league (including the RSL). But please, continue to enlighten us with your misdirection.

 

[Weary]

So you believe that a Russian club can force a player to sign a 3 year contract? I don't think that would be upheld in court, should a player leave after the 5 year deal.

The player isn't forced to sign a 3 year contract. He has a five year contract with another three year team option. Why wouldn't that be upheld by a court in any country?

 

[Egil]

If its an option, that is different. The post I am referencing doesn't mention an option (it sounds more like a RFA than anything else).