Proposal for Offer Sheet Compensation: Smooth, logical solution

[kgboomer]

Vets are being overpaid for being in the league a long time while the league stands on the backs of 20-25 year olds.

Only recently have we seen them flex their muscle...and what has the response been? Anger from the fans.

Well look at who negotiated along Fehr in the last lockout. Ryan Miller, Martin St-Louis, Hainsey, Parros, Westgarth... the only 2 young guys I remember were Crosby and Del Zotto. And Crosby signed his 12 years contract right before the lockout, he was taken care of.

 

[Merrrlin]

...

In part, that was my reason for the comment on guaranteed contracts. That said, I don't think UFA deals would normalize - I think you'd end up with a lot more folks being out of jobs early.

I'd be tempted to have a setup in which UFA years on contracts are not guaranteed, myself, but I suspect the NHLPA would have me preemptively assassinated for even having that thou

You wouldn't make it out your front door

I think they would normalize only because there is a hard cap. Unfortunately, "normalize" would also marginalize decent players who are less...valued. Everyone in that 3-6 million group would get squeezed. I would argue, though, that this would probably closely resemble their true value, however.

What it comes down to for me is that RFAs should not be asked to sacrifice dollars to help the league stay balanced. Players should make what they deserve when they deserve it. People keep asking me if that means I am okay with Barzal making 8-10 million (if he returns to PPG+ form)...of course I am okay with that. Barzal is half the reason I watch the Islanders. If he's producing like a #1C, I would expect he gets paid to be one, regardless of his age or "restricted" status.

 

[MikeyMike01]

Boston
Vegas
Nashville
San Jose
Tampa Bay
New York
Boston
New Jersey
Vancouver
Philadelphia
Detroit

Huh. There seems to be some variety there.

(Also, I love how you stopped just short of adding three years more post-lockout so as to make it look even more dominated by a few teams.)

Who cares about variety in the losers?

 

[Viqsi]

Who cares about variety in the losers?

Ah, you're one of those "nothing matters unless you win it all" types. Which means either you're going to be very grumpy most of the time, or you were really badly spoiled by the Trottier/Bossy/Potvin etc. years, or possibly both.

 

[MikeyMike01]

Ah, you're one of those "nothing matters unless you win it all" types. Which means either you're going to be very grumpy most of the time, or you were really badly spoiled by the Trottier/Bossy/Potvin etc. years, or possibly both.

I’m 26, so certainly no spoilage here.

 

[Viqsi]

I’m 26, so certainly no spoilage here.

Noted.

Snark aside, though, parity isn't measured strictly by Stanley Cup winners. There's 31 teams out there and only one can win the Cup each year, so any measure based strictly on that is going to be a bit devoid of information. Better to look at who all is competitive during that time - thus, my listing the other Cup finalists. It gives a better impression of what teams are rising and falling.