Malkin '100%' coming over next year. RSL club threatens legal action

[Sammy*]

1.

ummm... The consesus is that North American families are able to support their kids. That's number one. And number two - the kids aren't really going anywhere. A youngster from Saskatchewan might go to Florida, yes, but he's still in the same league. He still works for the North American audience. He basically contributes to the overall North American economy. It's not the same when Russian hockey coaches develop players and then see them wave goodbye on the first plane across the ocean. And there are many many many more ice rinks in Canada than there are in Russia. You can blame the Russian government for this (as for many other things), but even in USSR with all the humongous investments that went into sports, Montreal alone had more closed rinks that the whole USSR combined. Puts things into perspective, doesn't it?.

Ahhh, your argument is that people & organizations should be able to recoup their investments in players. From your response here, it appears that your point of principal is restricted to Russia , or am I missing something here?

 

[Kirk Muller*]

Yes, it IS a free choice. But don't you think that the NHL benefits with talent like Kovalchuk, Malkin, Ovechkin, etc... ? I think it does.

The obligation is only contractual and moral. Malkin has a contract until 2008. That's contractual. He already spent an extra year in Magnitogorsk. That's the moral side. Meaning that the contract has to be dignified. And I'm not sure that he's in any way angry at his own club (yet) about the situation. He understands that Metallurg should get the compensation.

He signed a typical Russian contract. The laws are a little different in Russia, yes, but that's for American (yes, I said American) courts to decide. That's why going to court about this is a good idea. Velichkin, Magnitogorsk's GM, said that they would some clarity on this, and he trusts American courts. Here's the deal - in Russia an athlete is not an official profession. That could give both parties a couple of problems to discuss. If the courts say that Russian contracts can be nulled and voided, then that's the decision. It means that Russia will have to conjure a good judicial system before its citizens want to go and question other nations' business laws. I'm more discussing the moral side of this, anyway.

I understand the moral side of wanting to compensate the clubs for their development efforts. All I'm saying is that it's not an obligation, and that these clubs do not indefinitely hold the rights over the future of their players. If they invest time and money, that's their choice. Any other club would have grabbed them up once they showed promise. And ultimately, hockey players have the right to emigrate and to work where they want. Clubs don't hold the right to force to play for them.

I'm not against transfer fees. I'm simply saying that the Russian clubs don't inherently have the right to decide the players' futures just because they invested resources into their development.

What is so comical about it? I think it's very logical to expect Russians (and people of other nationalities, as well, as evidenced by responses in this thread) to be in generally for compensation.

What I find comical is that the hardliners are the old club owners, which is entirely normal, and young expatriates who now have the priviledge of living in the wealthiest societies in the world, yet who would prevent other Russians from doing so if they wanted to as well. I saw a CBC report about the Ovechkin case. They interviewed current Dynamo players like Sushinski and Kharitonov and they were all laughing off the lawsuit, saying Dynamo should leave Ovechkin alone and let him play where he wants. So yes, it's very comical that those who want the Malkins and Ovechkins of the world to be submitted to the wills of Russian hockey clubs are the hockey club managers (which is normal) and the nationalist youths who enjoy the relative freedom and wealth of the West but don't want it for Malkin and Ovechkin.

I would love to enjoy the kids play here, but being Russian gives me some perspective on what things are. And insofar, I've lived most of my life in Russia, and there has only been one or two really good competitive athletes coming out of my city of 700,000 inhabitants on Russia's Pacific Coast. And it's frustrating enough to see the best go to Moscow. But then at least we'd see them on TV or something. NHL is the whole other planet. And I'm not saying that our city would get compensated in any way - actually, a team like Magnitogorsk would probably snatch our best talent anyway by the time they'd reach 13-14 years of age (like what happened with Chistov (from Chelyabinsk, I think), Zherdev, Babchuk (both from Kiev), and some other kids). But when we're talking about a kid like Malkin, Magnitogorsk's home-boy, I would expect Metallurg to ask some compensation for him. A few million dollars, perhaps, depending on contractual agreements, but something tangible for years and years of determined hard work.

Your years in the West have really softened you up if you actually believe that you have a 'right' to be entertained, and that this right trumps the right of Malkin to emigrate to and work wherever he wants, whether it be Moscow, Vladivostok or Pittsburgh.

You can laugh about it, but I find NOTHING comical in trying to help my home-country get back on its feet. Who knows if this money will be spent on another Pavel Rosa or on a couple of kids who would otherwise roam the polluted streets of Magnitogorsk. It would still be a plus. Laugh all you want, but the joke's on you.

Oh please. No need to go dramatic about something as insignificant as transfer money (because that's what it is, it's insignificant. total transfer payments are maybe 20M$ a year, which is an insignificant amount). Don't give me some "help my motherland get back on its feet" crap. If you want to help your home country, then actually go help it. Don't dictate that Malkin's future should rest in the hands of Metallurg.

 

[hbk]

This is a negotiation tactic. Nothing more. They are trying to get the NHL to bid up their transfer price. Worst thing that the league can do is respond to it. They have to continue to strike a back door deal with the Russian Federation that bypasses the need to negotiate with the individual club.

 

[SuperUnknown]

What people don't seem to realize on this thread is that russian local labour laws don't apply in other countries. The NHL teams, with no transfer agreement in place with Russia, can sign Russian players regardless of their contracts in Russia and without paying a transfer fee.

 

[KIRK]

He can breach his own contract. Then he wouldn't be able to play in Russia again, but maybe he doesn't care.

That's the main point. A US court might rule for Magnitogorsk. On the other hand, the shoe was on the other foot with Alexander Semin:

Washington held his rights. Through the CBA RFA qualifying/arbitration process, there was a contract procedure in place. Semin signed with a RSL club anyway. The Caps sued. A US court ruled for the Caps. The RSL ignored the ruling; a Russian court refused to enforce the ruling. A US court might use that as precedent if Malkin hopped a plane and came to the NHL. Absent an international contract-- a transfer agreement-- I'm not sure it's a slam dunk lawsuit to get a Russian personal service/employment contract enforced by a US court.

Yes, he might not be able to play in Russia again, but Russia has a lot to lose in all of this: First, under this scenario, they would lose their top center for international play for the next decade. Second, if the US court didn't assert jurisdiction, then the precedent would allow more Russian players with RSL contracts to sign with NHL teams. These two factors explain what some people with the IIHF and Russian Hockey Federation feared when no transfer deal got done; it explains why one should get done with Tretiak.

 

[Absolut]

"Numerous Art Ross" ? He's won the top scorer award in the Italian league two times. And the Italian league is only one of the traditionnal top four leagues in Europe, while the NHL supposedly has all the best players.

And he's only won one "european player of the year" and zero "fifa player of the year". How you translate that into "some Harts" I don't know.

Shevchenko has been in contention for Ballon D'Or every year since he was a young lad playing for Dynamo. He has led Italian league in goals, he was the MVP of the European Championship League winning campaign, and he holds a record for most goals in a ECL season. Soccer has many great players. There are many legends of the game playing today. Because of an insane level of the competition in European football, I believe it's a greater achievement to win the European Footballer of a Year then to win the Hart Trophy. But that's just my football-obsessed opinion. Overall, you must not know much about football other then the stats not to understand Sheva's position in the game today, and the legendary status he's achieved.

 

[Haute Couture]

I understand the moral side of wanting to compensate the clubs for their development efforts. All I'm saying is that it's not an obligation, and that these clubs do not indefinitely hold the rights over the future of their players. If they invest time and money, that's their choice. Any other club would have grabbed them up once they showed promise. And ultimately, hockey players have the right to emigrate and to work where they want. Clubs don't hold the right to force to play for them.

They don't, and they probably won't. First rule is that when a player is unhappy, he is not to his fullest to help his club. However, the NHL today is almost exactly the same organization - a player without a contract does not have a right to play for any other team until he is 27. Draconian rules? Probably not (age 31 wasn't either a few years ago). It's meant to help the poorer markets (which Russia is, compared to NA). You're forgetting that the NHL understands these positions like no one else, and yet barely gives its young players any freedom of choice of playing where they want to play. That starts in Major Junior, btw, this "tradition." Isn't THAT ironic? You're advocating for Malkin to "do whatever he wants", i.e. "play for Pittsburgh", when it might not even be the team he wants to play for. Does he have a say in it? No...
Yeah, I know what you wanna say.. "It' not same." Well, it's not. There's a degree of similarity, though.

I'm not against transfer fees. I'm simply saying that the Russian clubs don't inherently have the right to decide the players' futures just because they invested resources into their development.

NHL teams have the right to decide the futures of players they draft. Why can't Russian clubs decide futures of players they develop? It's not in NA tradition to thank the academy that brought a player into the world. But let me explain again - Malkin wouldn't have become a player if he played on the streets of Magnitogorsk. No scout from Omsk or Yaroslavl would bother coming to Magnitogorsk (or, as in my example, Vladivostok) to watch kids play unless there really IS some real talent that is so over-the-heads better than other talent out there (and even THAT would be a stretch, sadly). There are no colleges that covet players for college hockey. It's only clubs. They scout the countryside oftentimes, yes, but mostly the second-tier hockey schools, like Chelyabinsk, St. Petersburg, Kiev, Minsk, etc. That's what the majority of Russian hockey players have to give thanks to - the system. There are not enough rinks and junior leagues to go around, believe, and there's barely any high-school hockey (well, maybe it's better now, but 5-10 years ago, cost of equipment and lack of normal indoor hockey rinks was a good deterrent).

What I find comical is that the hardliners are the old club owners, which is entirely normal, and young expatriates who now have the priviledge of living in the wealthiest societies in the world, yet who would prevent other Russians from doing so if they wanted to as well.

I don't understand this comment at all. Malkin isn't coming to America because it's the wealthiest society in the world. He's coming here because NHL is the best league in the world. He'd get more money next year (and year after that, probably) playing for Magnitogorsk. It certainly looks like that personally, living in America I would be happy to get a fourth of what he's getting in Russia. What is so comical? I want to deny him the privilege that he already has over me to begin with? Even if true, then it would only be logical, not ironic . And it's not true. I want him to come over - because, eventually, he should. But I also understand that if Metallurg wants a decent compensation, he should get it. Again, as I said, a few millions of dollars. Something sizable, but not Shevchenko-like money. It would only make sense.

I saw a CBC report about the Ovechkin case. They interviewed current Dynamo players like Sushinski and Kharitonov and they were all laughing off the lawsuit, saying Dynamo should leave Ovechkin alone and let him play where he wants.

Dynamo situation was different. There was a talk of whether the kid signed a contract or not. I was actually on his side purely because the case was too murky for me to care. But it's straight-to-the-point, relatively, in Malkin's case. He had a club that raised him from when he was very young. He wouldn't have become the player he is now if it weren't for Metallurg - not like anyone else would come along and snatch him and develop him and whatnot. Why doesn't Metallurg deserve a sizable compensation? Yes, in business terms, more money than it is being offered. There's a lot you can do with that money.

So yes, it's very comical that those who want the Malkins and Ovechkins of the world to be submitted to the wills of Russian hockey clubs are the hockey club managers (which is normal) and the nationalist youths who enjoy the relative freedom and wealth of the West but don't want it for Malkin and Ovechkin.

First, I don't enjoy as much freedom and wealth as Malkin and Ovechkin both enjoyed in Russia. Firstly, I frankly don't have as much money as they do, even though I'm about the same age they are. Secondly, stemming from the money issue, I have a lot less room to maneuver. I'm not gonna be going to Russia every year for 2-3 months after the season is over and party. And you really have a fetish for saying "nationalist youth", don't ya?

Your years in the West have really softened you up if you actually believe that you have a 'right' to be entertained, and that this right trumps the right of Malkin to emigrate to and work wherever he wants, whether it be Moscow, Vladivostok or Pittsburgh.

There's no right. I never said anything about any rights. From the moral side, though, there's a reason why many Russians in Russia feel awkward toward Russian NHLers. They're entertaining "the other crowd." I think oftentimes it stems into exaggeration, since most of the NHLers are really nice guys who've done what anyone else would've done, almost. But there's a reason. Good job embellishing what I said.

Oh please. No need to go dramatic about something as insignificant as transfer money (because that's what it is, it's insignificant. total transfer payments are maybe 20M$ a year, which is an insignificant amount). Don't give me some "help my motherland get back on its feet" crap. If you want to help your home country, then actually go help it.

Doing best I can. It's not very easy without completed education. I'm not a superstar hockey player or anything.

Don't dictate that Malkin's future should rest in the hands of Metallurg.

Dictating Malkin's future is what Pittsburgh and North American fans are going to be doing in the next seven or eight years. "He's a free man," yes, but then he can't even change his NHL team upon entrance to the freakin league. And he's not yet obliged to any contract. But Pittsburgh sucked for too long, eh? They deserve to provide Evgeni with a couple of years of abysmal performances.

The kid signed a contract, and if it's deemed legitimate by the American courts, Pittsburgh just should buy it out. It seems reasonable to me. If there'd be no contract, then sure, Malkin can just leave for free. Ovechkin did the same, it just worked fine. In a perfect world it'd be nice to reimburse their hockey schools to some extent, but I'm not staunch about it or anything.

 

[Kaizer]

The same thing as Crosby wants to play for Montreal or Nash wants to play for Toronto.. nah...

 

[jekoh]

Shevchenko has been in contention for Ballon D'Or every year since he was a young lad playing for Dynamo. He has led Italian league in goals, he was the MVP of the European Championship League winning campaign, and he holds a record for most goals in a ECL season. Soccer has many great players. There are many legends of the game playing today. Because of an insane level of the competition in European football, I believe it's a greater achievement to win the European Footballer of a Year then to win the Hart Trophy. But that's just my football-obsessed opinion. Overall, you must not know much about football other then the stats not to understand Sheva's position in the game today, and the legendary status he's achieved.

I know enough to understand some people overrate him, and questioning other people's knowledge simply because they disagree with you is pretty weak.

Hart winner is supposedly the best player in the World. Ballon d'Or is the best player in Europe, it's certainly not a greater achievement. You made the comparison, now you disregard it since it doesn't appear too impressive after all. Note that Ovechkin is in contention for the Hart at 21 and Malkin, at 20, is arguably just as good as AO already. Shevchenko was never in contention for the Ballon d'Or before turning 23 (when voting was made he was actually a Milan player already).

I'll give you something, though: Sheva is definitely more dominant now than Malkin. I don't think anyone claimed otherwise. But Malkin is ten years younger.

 

[66-30-33]

I say if russia doesn't agree with us by the time next season comes and Malkin doesn't come over or any of the other Russians for us not to draft or bring in anymore Russians (though smuggle Malkin here before they do that, obviously ) untill they sign, but that's just me.

 

[jekoh]

I say if russia doesn't agree with us by the time next season comes and Malkin doesn't come over or any of the other Russians for us not to draft or bring in anymore Russians (though smuggle Malkin here before they do that, obviously ) untill they sign, but that's just me.

That would be great news for Russian hockey.

 

[Deleted member 3032]

"Numerous Art Ross" ? He's won the top scorer award in the Italian league two times. And the Italian league is only one of the traditionnal top four leagues in Europe, while the NHL supposedly has all the best players.

And he's only won one "european player of the year" and zero "fifa player of the year". How you translate that into "some Harts" I don't know.

I'd say winning one of the major European awards in soccer is far more of an accomplishment than winning one of the major awards in the NHL. I'm not a soccer fanatic by any means, but the massive worldwide support for soccer makes it's situation far different from hockey's. The amount of amazing soccer players FAR outdoes the number of amazing hockey players. Just being in strong contention for a major european award is arguably more of an accomplishment than winning a major NHL award.

Regardless, although doing exceptionally well, Malkin is simply not near being a comparable (proven) player to Shevchenko when he was sold.

I do think Malkin's team is due some sort of compensation. I'd say anywhere from $1.5M to $2.5M is fair.

 

[jekoh]

I'd say winning one of the major European awards in soccer is far more of an accomplishment than winning one of the major awards in the NHL. I'm not a soccer fanatic by any means, but the massive worldwide support for soccer makes it's situation far different from hockey's. The amount of amazing soccer players FAR outdoes the number of amazing hockey players. Just being in strong contention for a major european award is arguably more of an accomplishment than winning a major NHL award.

Regardless, although doing exceptionally well, Malkin is simply not near being a comparable (proven) player to Shevchenko when he was sold.

We were comparing the players' respective status in their sport, and a top player is a top player. The amount of players is irrelevant, it only explains why football transfer fees and salaries are much bigger. Well salaries aren't bigger, actually.

And Malkin is a proven player.

 

[Haute Couture]

The amount of players is irrelevant, .

yeah, or else any comparison would be a moot point.

While Shevchenko was able to prove his worth in CL prior to transfer, Malkin insofar hadn't had an opportunity to do so with hockey's specifics. But proportionally-speaking, I'd say both are about at the same level at the same age in each sport.

 

[LoonieToon]

We were comparing the players' respective status in their sport, and a top player is a top player. The amount of players is irrelevant, it only explains why football transfer fees and salaries are much bigger. Well salaries aren't bigger, actually.

And Malkin is a proven player.

The amount of competition is never irrelevant. Certainly not when assessing how tough it is to get an award. Competition is MUCH greater in soccer - top players truly come from around the world (not from 4-5 countries), and there is a much greater number of them currently playing. How many true legends of the sport are playing in the NHL these days, vs. a number of soccer greats playing in Europe? You simply cannot dismiss the level of the competition. That's just a wrong approach, no argument can change that.

On to Malkin. He has proven himself in the Russian League. The league where Alexei Morozov is the best player. He had a good Olympic tournament. So did Alexei Kovalev many moons ago. So? Yes, he's obviously an outstanding talent - but not a proven NHL star by any means. His team should get compensated for sure, but to compare him to Shevchenko is ridiculous.

 

[Alessandro Seren Rosso]

You all are underrating the RSL. You tease us saying that Morozov is the best player but we could reply that the RSL is the league in which Heatley scored 4 points in 11 games or Ovechkin scored 26 points in 37. Never underrate Non-american hockey

 

[LoonieToon]

You all are underrating the RSL. You tease us saying that Morozov is the best player but we could reply that the RSL is the league in which Heatley scored 4 points in 11 games or Ovechkin scored 26 points in 37. Never underrate Non-american hockey

Heatley was coming off a serious injury and a highly traumatic year. I don't think he's a good example. Ovechkin as any young player was not given the minutes that veteran players get. Look, the fact remains that Morozov is the best player in the RSL. And that's saying a lot.

 

[jekoh]

The amount of competition is never irrelevant. Certainly not when assessing how tough it is to get an award.

Assessing how tough it is to get an award is irrelevant. There is more competition in football, but that doesn't change the fact that Gretzky was to hockey what Maradona was to football. They had pretty much the same status.

On to Malkin. He has proven himself in the Russian League. The league where Alexei Morozov is the best player. He had a good Olympic tournament. So did Alexei Kovalev many moons ago. So? Yes, he's obviously an outstanding talent - but not a proven NHL star by any means.

I said proven player, not proven NHL star.

There is more to hockey than the NHL.

 

[jekoh]

Look, the fact remains that Morozov is the best player in the RSL. And that's saying a lot.

One of the best defensemen in the NHL, McCabe, couldn't even make HV 71's roster. That shows how much stronger the Elitserien really is.

 

[Siberian]

Russian born players who were raised by the Russian Club sponsored hockey schools should not be drafted by NHL. In fact, Russian Clubs should demand that all the Russian players who have been drafted should be removed off their draft owners. NHL wanted to have a socialistic system, but this should not be related to another, absolutely separate business which is PHL (Russian Professional Hockey League or in other words Russian hockey club owners). If NHL decides to still draft players out of Russia then NHL itself should negotiate directly with the Russian club. If the Russians were removed from the draft then they would have been all unrestricted and could potentially go to any NHL bidder. Another thing is that NHL should prepare and make the cap for annual transfers. This will happen sooner or later. The faster european leagues become strong the sooner it will happen. The whole draft process works well only if you have only one strong professional hockey league in the world, which is the case with NFL and MLB and already not the case with NHL. NHL of course understand that but as a business they made a really smart decision with IIHF. IIHF itself is a joke of course, so is their agreement but props to NHL managers - their position is impeccable. They paid basically peanuts to all european leagues and could pull a trigger on any player even if he is under local contract. That is capitalist sharks right here.

In case of Malkin we all understand that he as a product is valuable not only to Pens but to the whole NHL - he will sell a lot of tickets. And considering that Malkin will play for the first three years underpaid (just like Ovechkin, who already should be making 5-7 mil a year) NHL is making huge bucks on them. Heck, selling 1000 Malkin's jerseys probably bring you 1 mil in profits alone. So all this non-sense about joke of the agreement with IIHF - Russia should not sign it as the Euro teams did - all these leagues are of different levels why should they be levelled with the same agreement?

If you take all the socialistic stuff out of NHL and look at Malkin, already one of the best players in the world you could probably argue that his market price for NHL is easily around 5-7 mil. The reason is simple, you would rather have Malkin for 7 mil and pay him 1 mil a year then have Gonchar play in the next 3 years for 15 mil. These players are not even in the same league. So what Velichkin is asking is very reasonable and he should try everything possible to get the right money for what belongs to his club now.

 

[johnny_rudeboy]

One of the best defensemen in the NHL, McCabe, couldn't even make HV 71's roster. That shows how much stronger the Elitserien really is.

First of all McCabe is overrated, he only have a hard slap shot and well, that is all. Then he came to HV71 very unfit and like he showed in the Olympics he could not handle the bigger rinks.
But yes, the european pro leagues are good and the top teams here would probably do well in the NHL as well. (not being a botton team that is)

 

[timmy12]

NHL is making huge bucks on them. Heck, selling 1000 Malkin's jerseys probably bring you 1 mil in profits alone.

It sure would if you found a way to sell those jerseys for $1000 apiece

 

[Siberian]

It sure would if you found a way to sell those jerseys for $1000 apiece

oops, wrong math, of course you are right. I meant 10,000. I do not think it is a strech to say that they can sell 10,000 jerseys. I wonder how many Ovechkin's jerseys were sold this year?

 

[jekoh]

First of all McCabe is overrated, he only have a hard slap shot and well, that is all. Then he came to HV71 very unfit and like he showed in the Olympics he could not handle the bigger rinks.

Exactly. Same goes for Morozov. He is a good player, only better suited for the European game. He outscored every established NHL star in the RSL during the lockout season.

 

[WalterSobchak]

Reading your post, I don't even know if you agree with me or not.

My point is that Magnitogorsk are not saying they should get 25 million, merely "millions". They're not saying anything more than that. They even say they can't name the exact price. Shevchenko is used as an example of a big club paying big money.

as long as TSN isn't getting sued for liebel, then it came right from the horses mouth. Did he specifically say the number 25, no.

He never said 25, no, but from that quote it would seem to be implied. I am arguing semantics and it really is not important.