Moderator: LGB Mods
For compensation, they divide 5 years (not 14) into total value (about $100M), which is why #Flyers wld have to give 4 first-rounders.
glen a richter wrote:I have no doubt Pie will remain in the note for a long, long time... if the lockout produces a sensible resolution to contract lengths and values.
WaukeeBlues wrote:As for Petro I'm not worried simply because he's not there yet and I think it would be quite cocky, arrogant and unrealistic of him to even claim he's at Weber's or Suter's level right now. 2-3 years down the line I have no doubt he will command a mega salary. But not right now.
philco_3 wrote:I hope the new CBA gets this shit under control. I'm sure the owners want to get the payroll down, get these ridiculous lengthy contracts to 5 or 6 years. Also the league needs to properly move Winnipeg to the West and redo all the divisions...correctly, none of that Tampa and Florida in a division with Montreal and Toronto BS.
WaukeeBlues wrote:philco_3 wrote:I hope the new CBA gets this shit under control. I'm sure the owners want to get the payroll down, get these ridiculous lengthy contracts to 5 or 6 years. Also the league needs to properly move Winnipeg to the West and redo all the divisions...correctly, none of that Tampa and Florida in a division with Montreal and Toronto BS.
Well they need to stop increasing the cap way above and beyond the rate of inflation, that would definitely help. That's point one.
I'm not necessarily oppossed to the longer term deals per se. What I don't like is what New Jersey got slapped for and that's the "purposeful avoidance of the salary cap." They need to close that loophole with re-drafting the rules to actually provide some clear guidance to GM's as to what's okay and what's not. My thought would be a rule stating that you can sign a player for any number of years that you want, but a certain % differential is not allowed. (E.g. You want to sign Kovy to a 14 year deal? Go right ahead. But you can't have more than a 50% difference in his salary year to year. Something like that). It would discourage long-term deals without forbidding them and also reign in the salary cap circumvention concerns. Boom.
Yea that NHL re-structuring was a joke to the players and the fans. On the business side it was brilliant which is why Bettman was about to have a conniption when the NHLPA rejected it
SO happy they did though.
glen a richter wrote:What about when the Islanders move? Another re-alignment, they'll definitely be heading very far west.
philco_3 wrote:glen a richter wrote:What about when the Islanders move? Another re-alignment, they'll definitely be heading very far west.
I was always thinking they would go as far as Kansas City, but I also think Seattle might be a fit for a NHL team . As far as a new alignment I would always think Columbus or Detroit would cross over, since they are in Eastern time Zone, not Nashville.
glen a richter wrote:If the Islanders relocate within New York, it'll be the opposite direction. I don't think there's any way in the universe they end up at Barclay's. I haven't seen Barclay's yet, my colleague is going there in October to see Rush so I'll ask him then, but getting there has to be a strategic nightmare. Brooklyn isn't the easiest place to get around quickly, and even if you do, good luck finding parking. They'll either have incredibly expensive lots somewhere or people will have to take the railroad which is getting more expensive by the year. If they're spending that much money to take the train to see the Islanders, they'd rather spend the same money to take the train to see the Rangers instead. The Isles don't really have that many fans.
glen a richter wrote:... that they'd resort to mass transit and a lot of people don't know how mass transit works unless they're going directly to Penn Station.
Users browsing this forum: MSN [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 4 guests