Short,Medium and Long.....A look at where contracts are heading

[topshelf15]

After seeing the shorter term huge bonus ladden that Matthews received ,coming off his ELC ...Iam worried this may become the new normal in the NHL ???With our own star set to head into his second contract,should we be concerned??

Click to read more...

 

[DaveMatthew]

After seeing the shorter term huge bonus ladden that Matthews received ,coming off his ELC ...Iam worried this may become the new normal in the NHL ???With our own star set to head into his second contract,should we be concerned??

Yes.

Thomas Chabot is in a position where he can ask for a contract that's over $8.5 million per season and doesn't buy up any UFA years, and it'll be more if we do want to buy up UFA seasons.

 

[topshelf15]

Yes.

Thomas Chabot is in a position where he can ask for a contract that's over $8.5 million per season and doesn't buy up any UFA years, and it'll be more if we do want to buy up UFA seasons.

Ty for the reply ,yep after seeing this I think its not only us that will feel the sting...I think we may see much more trade activity as a root cause of this in the future

 

[The Lewler]

Honestly, trying to break free of guaranteed contracts is a hill that the NHL Owners maybe should die on.

 

[topshelf15]

Honestly, trying to break free of guaranteed contracts is a hill that the NHL Owners maybe should die on.

I think the one reason as to why they dont ,is the signing bonus or guaranteed money ...That will come with non guaranteed contracts

 

[danielpalfredsson]

Issue is not AAV. AAV has stayed fairly consistent for players when viewed as a percentage of the cap.

Issue is signing bonuses and how they are expected by players as a means of preventing buyouts and getting cash sooner. They aren't being used as they likely were intended when brought into the CBA, and I'd imagine this will be a point of contention in the next lockout.

There is a misconception about long term deals coming off of ELCs. Most players don't have the leverage to force for them because of how ineffective offer sheets are. Most RFAs only leverage is to sit out like Nylander did. Teams give these to players because it is mutually beneficial. Look at Karlsson's contract and compare it with Subban. Subban is what teams are trying to avoid when they don't go for bridges.

We are one team in a unique spot in that we better be careful with our RFAs as our top ones like Chabot will have legit leverage via offer sheets if it's true that Melnyk cannot spend. A 5 year 8M offer sheet is only a 1st/2nd/3rd in compensation and could pay Chabot 20M via bonuses in the first 12 months of the contract (10M+10M front loaded)

 

[Que]

Honestly, trying to break free of guaranteed contracts is a hill that the NHL Owners maybe should die on.

100% agree.

 

[Upgrayedd]

After seeing the shorter term huge bonus ladden that Matthews received ,coming off his ELC ...Iam worried this may become the new normal in the NHL ???With our own star set to head into his second contract,should we be concerned??

I think that there are likely only a handful of super strong markets that can offer up these types of contracts, but they are certainly alarming and it doesn't take much deep thought to understand how this line of operating could essentially have the league shrunk down from the 31 teams we see today to 6-7 in the future?

Currently I am not concerned as the current owner has stated he cannot or will not be remotely competitive moving forward so losing a Chabot from a basement team likely doesn't move the needle much, I would also assume the fans that had held on until that point are buying whatever is fed to them so they likely won't care at that time as well.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

New CBA will very likely have Bonus and Salary as a big part of the discussion. It will be interesting to see how that plays out.. It can create somewhat of an uneven playing field. I'd like to see it addressed

 

[BonkTastic]

Honestly, trying to break free of guaranteed contracts is a hill that the NHL Owners maybe should die on.

Protecting guaranteed contracts is 100% a hill the players will die on. I've never been more sure about anything in hockey, ever, than this fact.

We're talking about a multi-year lockout here if the owners go that route.

 

[Micklebot]

Protecting guaranteed contracts is 100% a hill the players will die on. I've never been more sure about anything in hockey, ever, than this fact.

We're talking about a multi-year lockout here if the owners go that route.

guaranteed contracts aren't going anywhere. the best the owners can hope for is limiting max term to something like 5 years, and making buyouts easier.

 

[Stylizer1]

Sports are stupid.

 

[Cosmix]

The maximum term of 8 years is far too long and dramatically increases the risk to the team that the player will not be able to play at his prior level. That must change to about 5 years max. The salary and bonus treatment must also be changed address the lockout issues.

 

[leftwinglocker]

NHLPA will de-certify the union before giving up guaranteed contracts. Everyone becomes a free agent, then teams would have to negotiate individual contracts with each player. Salaries would go through the roof and threaten the league. Bettman loses sleep over a de-certification. In the last lockout, as soon as the NHLPA floated the idea, the CBA got done pretty quickly. I don’t think a mess like that is what Bettman would like as a legacy.

 

[Sensung]

Would a hybrid work, where teams were allowed to offer 8 years, but could only guarantee the first 5? (Years 6-8 could be either side opt out)

 

[Caeldan]

Remember that non guaranteed contracts are a two way thing. For every albatross contract you can cut, you will have an overperforming RFA sitting out for a renegotiation of terms to get their payday sooner.

On top of that, the optics are just bad in a physical sport to cut a guy as a result of injuries.

I really don't think owners or players really want to get away from guaranteed contracts. It's cost control and job security.

 

[coladin]

The GMs have basically made the CBA toothless. Nylander had to sit out because he had no other recourse. That is the whole point of being an RFA. The team controls you, pretty much. Now, Matthews and McDavid have made the jump right to UFA money. This is going to be a big problem.

What if Chabot refuses the Sens offer? What is he going to do, what Nylander did? He cannot play anywhere so the CBA is supposed to keep the costs down on the young stars.

Can anyone recall what Crosby got out of his rookie contract?

 

[Caeldan]

Also, right now all major contracts are being structured as being "lockout proof" with all the bonuses being paid out because a lockout is all but assured with Fehr at the head of the NHLPA.

There's also tax ramifications for bonuses, in that they're taxed based on your home as opposed to being covered by the "jock tax"

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

What I'd like to see:

Keep guaranteed contracts.
Max contract length to be 5 years (I'd much rather 3 or 4, but that would be impossible, NHLPA would never go that far).
Max allowable for bonuses 30% of the yearly value of the contract.

...now for all of that, the NHL would have to give something to the players....perhaps a much lower limit into escrow?

 

[DaveMatthew]

The GMs have basically made the CBA toothless. Nylander had to sit out because he had no other recourse. That is the whole point of being an RFA. The team controls you, pretty much. Now, Matthews and McDavid have made the jump right to UFA money. This is going to be a big problem.

What if Chabot refuses the Sens offer? What is he going to do, what Nylander did? He cannot play anywhere so the CBA is supposed to keep the costs down on the young stars.

Can anyone recall what Crosby got out of his rookie contract?

8.7 million per year, which at the time was 15% of the cap.

Today, the equivalent would be $11.9 million per year.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

The GMs have basically made the CBA toothless. Nylander had to sit out because he had no other recourse. That is the whole point of being an RFA. The team controls you, pretty much. Now, Matthews and McDavid have made the jump right to UFA money. This is going to be a big problem.

What if Chabot refuses the Sens offer? What is he going to do, what Nylander did? He cannot play anywhere so the CBA is supposed to keep the costs down on the young stars.

Can anyone recall what Crosby got out of his rookie contract?

His 1st was for 3,7 AAV (3 years) . His second was for 8.7 AAV for 5 years . That was 10 years ago. I'd say its not far off Matthews except for the bonus$

Sidney Crosby - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

 

[dumbdick]

Drop the cap 25% over the next five years. Peg it going forward to inflation not league revenues. All existing contracts are honored but the cap hits are scaled down proportionally. If players strike bring in scabs to replace them.

 

[Sensung]

Drop the cap 25% over the next five years. Peg it going forward to inflation not league revenues. All existing contracts are honored but the cap hits are scaled down proportionally. If players strike bring in scabs to replace them.

Good luck selling that to the NHLPA.

 

[Tundraman]

I have always believed that they went too low by at least one year and maybe two for players to achieve UFA status. It takes so long for most players to peak that by the time they do they are free agents. This is bad for the home fans and the team who invested so much in player development only to see them move on to richer teams. In turn for the change, the RFA rules could be tweaked to make sure players have greater access to arbitration and other tools to help ensure the players can be paid comparable salaries by their own team.

Even if they don't change the contract length for the team last holding a player's contract I'd like to see them decrease the term other teams can offer for a UFA by one more year. This might give the weaker market teams a bit more of an edge in retaining some of their key players by being able to offer significantly more term to players past their mid twenties.

They need to close in the big bonus clauses or only the rich teams with large corporate sponsors will be able to retain or sign top stars. They could allow a signing bonus equal to 80-90% of one year of the whole deal which could be spread over the contract length or if it's a lump sum let the player decide when the bonus will be paid (as in the case of lockout protection).

Players that are traded should be allowed to renegotiate an extension right away as part of the trade or after and not have to wait until the final year of their contract

 

[hawthy]

The Sens won't ever survive in this landscape. Neither will a remaining 1/3 of the league. They can lockout the players for 2-3 years at this point for all I care. Guaranteed, up-front money has rendered a good portion of the CBA (as someone worded it) "toothless" for the league. As a Sens fan, it's doubly-hopeless because our owner won't spend to begin with (and it has been that way for some time), but when you factor in the fact the so-called rich teams have once again regained their competitive advantage via up-front money, seriously, what's the point? Recognizing this fact, however, does not absolve Melnyk or the organization for its treatment of its most valuable on-ice assets and refusal to see how investing in the core would improve its brand and image (and in turn, draw people like myself back to ticket purchasing habits), but they've made that decision, as have I.