|
|
Post by Krzysztof - NAFHDL Predators on Jul 11, 2008 11:53:16 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris - Capitals on Jul 11, 2008 12:29:30 GMT -5
From what I've read the NHL and KHL (or whatever there abb. is) have come to an agreement recently saying that they both will stay away from they're players that are under contract. I can't remember exactly where I read it but I do remember seeing something about this, very soon after I read about this Raddy thing the other day.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark - Bruins on Jul 11, 2008 14:04:00 GMT -5
At least my RW position won't be so crowded this season ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Jul 11, 2008 16:56:47 GMT -5
I wouldn't celebrate the agreement between leagues too much. The agreed upon "contract" between the NHL and the KHL will only make it that much harder for Russian prospects to leave Russia for North America. It is basically just to protect current NHL players and vice versa.
At least now I get a little closure from Mark stealing this player from me way back when in the Inaugural draft.
|
|
|
|
Post by Krzysztof - NAFHDL Predators on Jul 14, 2008 15:55:39 GMT -5
I can't help but think that this is just the beginning of a trend though.
It almost seems like the FAs in the future will have the KHL as a legit option. Granted, I have read something that suggests that this new league may have issues actually upholding those contracts. That being said, if they do build up a good rep with hockey players, this may become a more common practice. I mean, look at how much money some of these teams are putting into players for years upon years. At some point the cap will stop growing this quickly. If a player feels he is worth more than what NHL teams are offering him here, he will go over.
Kinda seems to me that the NHL has shot itself in the foot.....again.....glad to see that lockout year was worth it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark - Bruins on Jul 14, 2008 21:08:40 GMT -5
Kinda seems to me that the NHL has shot itself in the foot.....again.....glad to see that lockout year was worth it. Exactly. The way some GMs are throwing money and giving so many years in a contract, its basically like playing Russian roulette. Eventually, that bullet will come out and cripple the team financially. How can you give non-franchise guys six, seven, or even eight year contracts at $6-8M per year? You might as well tie the noose around your neck because you're hanging your hopes with that player since not many teams will be willing to trade for a contract like that. Once this finally happens, owners will want to lockout the league again, but instead they should just lock themselves out of their own stupidity. At least the KHL can throw around money and not care. Those Russian billionaires running the teams just want to screw with the NHL. They'll do what they want and whatever they can, even if it takes a couple years of losing a lot of money. In the end, if it means they can stick it to North America and the NHL they'll be glad to do it. |
|
|
|
Post by Nos - Sharks on Jul 14, 2008 22:35:52 GMT -5
I don't think this is much of a problem, certainly not with the CBA. If managers want to give out huge contracts let them, at least it'll keep marquee players here. The money and league growth is there to make this happen. The cap goes up only if revenues go up and with the shared revenues program the NHL is in the best shape it's ever been in, league wide at least. Owners have no reason to want another lockout.
We're seeing three kinds of players go to Russia, first being the players that can't cut it here (Bulis), second being players in the twilight of their careers (Jagr), and third players who don't have the commitment nor desire to play in the best league in the world (Radulov). Nashville would have easily matched that number and even exceeded it to keep Radulov here. Sure there's also the chance these players just want to play closer to home but the reality is if you're a professional at the height of your profession you'll go wherever the top dogs are and thrive in the best possible environment there is for that profession. Why wouldn't you want to be the best?
Finally, if you notice, most of these contracts are front loaded meaning near the end of the contract there's less money to be paid to the player so it would be easier to either trade the player or buy him out. The term (years) allows for more money to be spent on the player without hurting the total cap number of a team. Look at the Lecavalier deal for proof of that. Big money+big term contracts are actually a smart way to get "around" the cap. Do I think players like Drury, Gomez or Briere deserve $7+ million over a long period? No, certainly not. However it is a smart move if you believe these players to be your building blocks for a successful franchise. Personally I prefer shorter contracts for non-marquee players but the demand is out there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Jul 15, 2008 5:21:48 GMT -5
The KHL does not have an actual "salary cap." The contracts are fronted by private investors, multi-billion dollar corporations, and the Russian Mafia, who all dominate the former RSL.
|
|
So exciting.
You better make that pick or trade it! I'm excited to see if we can use up all the draft picks this year.