Speculation: RFA stars! Want the big contract Now!

[SeaOfBlue]

Can’t blame Marner for wanting to get paid. I’d want to get paid what I was worth if I was in his shoes. There is no guarantee that he won’t get injured/ peak before he hits free agency and miss out on career earnings because he took less than his value.

People can’t point out that RFAs don’t get paid as much as UFAs all they like but these new young superstars are challenging that concept and coming out ahead.

The problem is that even on the UFA scale he's overpaying himself (if not more than if you take it out of the equation, because UFA's are already starting to get paid less) and he's not wanting to get paid what he's worth. He wants to get paid significantly more. And clearly nobody in the NHL wants to pay that price.

 

[Jozay]

A trash team with a high profile RFA will have to do it. Leafs cant because they're trying to win a cup. Its why Nylander was signed last year.

 

[Stephen]

As much as I love the NHL, the hard cap is the real villain here. It's depressing that something like capfriendly is as important to following the sport as much as goals, assists and wins and losses. The economics really shouldn't be so front and center with sports. It puts artificial barriers on what a team can spend (but ironically there's no hard cap on what teams can charge fans) to keep or acquire talent. It turns fanbases against players who are more vilified for their contract demands than celebrated for their abilities. Right now, you have two teams that could be NHL dynasties (Toronto and Colorado) unable to keep their bands together before the ELC's are up. How broken is that?

Now, you might turn around and tell me that the hard cap is essential to maintaining parity in the league, competitive balance, but this logic is really only about the expansion of TV cable rights and pulling in more expansion dollars. It's a broken weak link model.

 

[Advanced stats]

I do think the GM's have the stones to refuse to sign players to crippling contracts. So far no GM has caved and signed their RFA to a crazy overpayment.

GM's are not going to cripple their team for one RFA, no matter who he is. In the end it's the player losing out and not the GM

 

[Drew311]

I saw no evidence of that other than from fans, and it was a fan opinion that he caved. Nylander called to get the deal done, not Dubas.

I agree. From what the insiders have said the league was pissed off about the Matthews contract. Big money, less term and walking him to free agency. If that is the new template for RFA deals then I can see why GM’s are upset.

 

[DarkKnight]

As much as I love the NHL, the hard cap is the real villain here. It's depressing that something like capfriendly is as important to following the sport as much as goals, assists and wins and losses. The economics really shouldn't be so front and center with sports. It puts artificial barriers on what a team can spend (but ironically there's no hard cap on what teams can charge fans) to keep or acquire talent. It turns fanbases against players who are more vilified for their contract demands than celebrated for their abilities. Right now, you have two teams that could be NHL dynasties (Toronto and Colorado) unable to keep their bands together before the ELC's are up. How broken is that?

Now, you might turn around and tell me that the hard cap is essential to maintaining parity in the league, competitive balance, but this logic is really only about the expansion of TV cable rights and pulling in more expansion dollars. It's a broken weak link model.

Teams should get an exception or two to resign their own kids.

 

[kb]

Teams should get an exception or two to resign their own kids.

Exactly. Or at the very least maybe designate a franchise player who doesn't count against the cap.

 

[BertCorbeau]

Teams should get an exception or two to resign their own kids.

I think the AAV contract value of RFA's who re-sign their teams should be discounted by 10-15% off of the cap value for starters.

With the way the league is shifting to younger prime years, perhaps the league should look into lowering the UFA age/requirements as well.

 

[Gin and tonic]

So as not to change the topic too much, I am curious about one point. I thought that the UFA/RFA switch over is 7 years in the league or the age of 27, whichever comes first. In Mathews case, he signed for 5 years and has a rookie deal at 3. Making the total 8 years. But all I hear is the Leafs are walking him to free agency!!!

Which number is correct?

 

[nofehr]

So as not to change the topic too much, I am curious about one point. I thought that the UFA/RFA switch over is 7 years in the league or the age of 27, whichever comes first. In Mathews case, he signed for 5 years and has a rookie deal at 3. Making the total 8 years. But all I hear is the Leafs are walking him to free agency!!!

Which number is correct?

I believe Matthews' contract includes 1 UFA year

 

[ACC1224]

So as not to change the topic too much, I am curious about one point. I thought that the UFA/RFA switch over is 7 years in the league or the age of 27, whichever comes first. In Mathews case, he signed for 5 years and has a rookie deal at 3. Making the total 8 years. But all I hear is the Leafs are walking him to free agency!!!

Which number is correct?

Leafs bought one UFA year and gave Matthews full NMC for that year.

 

[RoyalCitySlicker]

Leafs bought one UFA year and gave Matthews full NMC for that year.

So why is everyone (not you) crying that they "walked him to UFA"? Seems like they walked him to one year into UFA as opposed to three.

Always something to cry about I guess. Can't wait until the games start and there is something more intersting/less excruciatingly painful to talk about.

 

[JT AM da real deal]

As much as I love the NHL, the hard cap is the real villain here. It's depressing that something like capfriendly is as important to following the sport as much as goals, assists and wins and losses. The economics really shouldn't be so front and center with sports. It puts artificial barriers on what a team can spend (but ironically there's no hard cap on what teams can charge fans) to keep or acquire talent. It turns fanbases against players who are more vilified for their contract demands than celebrated for their abilities. Right now, you have two teams that could be NHL dynasties (Toronto and Colorado) unable to keep their bands together before the ELC's are up. How broken is that?

Now, you might turn around and tell me that the hard cap is essential to maintaining parity in the league, competitive balance, but this logic is really only about the expansion of TV cable rights and pulling in more expansion dollars. It's a broken weak link model.

So true. The Bettman promise from day 1 of his reign was producing the best and richest US cable TV which never ever seems to occur but seems to keep a large chunk of you pacified and buying into his parity system. Do you realize under Bettman a Canadian team has never won the Cup? Do you realize the games top end players are making same amount of $$$ as when he started in office? Do you realize that no team can draft and accumulate talent over the long term in Bettman's system? The only thing I give him credit for is using Jacobs to round up the middling and welfare teams to keep him around. He is useless for Toronto. We need a hockey guy back running the show. Not a NYC lawyer.

 

[ACC1224]

So why is everyone (not you) crying that they "walked him to UFA"? Seems like they walked him to one year into UFA as opposed to three.

Always something to cry about I guess. Can't wait until the games start and there is something more intersting/less excruciatingly painful to talk about.

There's your answer.

 

[Menzinger]

Exactly. Or at the very least maybe designate a franchise player who doesn't count against the cap.

That would make too much sense, pity the NHL isbthe most dysfunctional pro league in the world

 

[Jozay]

Some sort of cap hit discount should be applied for every player that a team drafted.

Maybe take 10% off the cap hit.

It makes no sense that the league punishes you if you draft and develop well.

 

[RoadWarrior]

As much as I love the NHL, the hard cap is the real villain here. It's depressing that something like capfriendly is as important to following the sport as much as goals, assists and wins and losses. The economics really shouldn't be so front and center with sports. It puts artificial barriers on what a team can spend (but ironically there's no hard cap on what teams can charge fans) to keep or acquire talent. It turns fanbases against players who are more vilified for their contract demands than celebrated for their abilities. Right now, you have two teams that could be NHL dynasties (Toronto and Colorado) unable to keep their bands together before the ELC's are up. How broken is that?

Now, you might turn around and tell me that the hard cap is essential to maintaining parity in the league, competitive balance, but this logic is really only about the expansion of TV cable rights and pulling in more expansion dollars. It's a broken weak link model.

Hard cap and the lack of salary arbitration following ELC’s.

I’m not convinced cable tv will be the huge windfall everyone thinks it is.

Agents are not doing their clients any favours with holdouts either but in the absence of arbitration there aren’t many options.