Agent Walsh on radio right now

Team 1040 in Vancouver.

www.team1040.ca for listening on web.

Is this Gaborik, Fleury and Havlat's agent?
Can you give us a recap when it's done?

Thanks in advance.

Is this Gaborik, Fleury and Havlat's agent?
Can you give us a recap when it's done?

Thanks in advance.

He's also Dupuis' agent who is holding out right now as well.

He said:

Penguins first offer to Fleury massively low.
Pens think new CBA will change bonus structure for rookies.
Just sent Pittsburgh new proposal two hours ago.

Lunched with Risebrough today about Gaborik. Won't say deal will be done soon. Difference bigger than a breadbox, smaller than a 747.

Bewildered that Ottawa paying 2 million for rock concert for fans, fraction of that would have Havlat signed.

I would love to do that interview.

Walsh how is the Gaborik signing going?

- Terrible, we will just have to wait and see.

Walsh how is the Dupuis signing coming along?

- Well, the Wild just haven't offered him anything substantial. We are prepared to wait it out.

Walsh how is MAF contract coming along?

- Well, we didn't liek the original offer so I advised him to leave camp early, so that Penguin management can see that we are serious.

Walsh how is the Havlat situation doing?

- Well, Ottawa just needs to step up and give us an offer we like. Otherwise, I refuse to answer calls and we will sit out the entire season if need be.


:yo: :yo: :yo: :yo:

Walsh the agent with the player on his heart

damn this guy is an ass. for those that dont know, Craig Patrick's first offer is always a lowball, unless the person is asking for something like 600k. His first offer to hedberg was something like 650k and a 2-way. in the end deal ended up being 1.1M, 1.2M, 1.5M as a one way. its how he forms his basis for negotiations.

On a Montreal Radio Station tonight, Shatia said that it is not impossible that Fleury would fly back as soon as tomorrow in Pittsburgh. They have written a counter proposition to the Pens. But the gap is very large. He said they jusk ask for qhat other first choices got last years.

About Dupuis, he said that both parties negociate and we understood that they are not far from an agreement.

About Gaborik, he said that they were far away an agreement.

GMs should get together and put this byasch out of business somehow.

GMs should get together and put this byasch out of business somehow.
wont work. there will always be a teeam willing to give a player the $ he wants.

wont work. there will always be a teeam willing to give a player the $ he wants.
I know, I was only dreaming.

GMs should get together and put this byasch out of business somehow.

Walsh can't get any of his players signed; don't you think that's happening to a certain extent right now?

Other Dave

his counter proposal for MAF is probably the rookie max, similar to what J-Bo got last yera.......:(

and TSN says he tried to get 2.4 mil for Dupuis. What joke...

This agent Allen Walsh is really trying to get the most out of his 3% commission,isn't he?Walsh is doing his clients more harm than good by keeping them out of camp.Think Don Meehan or another other experienced agent would have so many clients in contract hassles at once.The other guy is that Paul Krepylka who represents Eric Stall,Nathan Horton and Anthony Stewart.He is part of the Bobby Orr group.This guy is another ass.The Horton and Stewart talks have turned nasty.Staal is close to signing.Just a bunch of wannebe Drew Rosenhaus'

his counter proposal for MAF is probably the rookie max, similar to what J-Bo got last yera.......:(

and TSN says he tried to get 2.4 mil for Dupuis. What joke...

That's over two years.

i cant stand this guy!!!

Walsh can't get any of his players signed; don't you think that's happening to a certain extent right now?

Other Dave
I dont know, most likely he has more than 4 players.

Bewildered that Ottawa paying 2 million for rock concert for fans, fraction of that would have Havlat signed.

Yeah, screw the fans, sign my player! :rolleyes:

That's over two years.

1.2 mil a year for Dupuis is PRETTY REASONABLE.

Is this guy similar to Arli$?

1.2 mil a year for Dupuis is PRETTY REASONABLE.

$1.2 million is PRETTY REASONABLE for a 24 year old who has a career high of 20 goals and 48 points? Man, I'm glad you're not the GM of my team. That's a pretty hefty salary for a player like that, especially when he has a whopping 76 points to his career. I can see why the Wild are holding firm. Dupuis has a ton to prove before getting that type of money IMO.

I dont know, most likely he has more than 4 players.

As far as I can tell, these are *all* his highest profile clients. He has other players, but it seems these four are his money clients.

Other Dave

This guy is going to need a body guard when going to see his clients play this season. Fans are going to kill him if they knew who he was. Not to mention the owners, coaches, and GMs.

This guy is going to need a body guard when going to see his clients play this season. Fans are going to kill him if they knew who he was. Not to mention the owners, coaches, and GMs.


here's what the jerk looks like

http://www.startribune.com/stonline/images/news82/wild0922.e.jpg

study this face...kill on sight!

I'm afraid Walsh is right. All of his hold out clients are getting severely lowballed by cheap teams right now except for Dupuis. The Bruins would pay these guys more than their current "franchises" are willing to go right now, so Walsh is right on the money. The B's locked up their hot young goalie Toivonen for three years at a generous amount. They've kept all of their up and coming players happy, and the only walk-away was Berard. The Pens take the best goalie prospect in years and then ask him to babysit, while Mary-o is going to cash in this year and then probably dump the team like a hot rock. Again, Walsh is absolutely right. The owners figure that Walsh will break because he can't afford to represent so many holdouts: but the very opposite is true. He's not going to let these franchises that have money issues play him for a sucker.

As for the childish jokes about killing Walsh on these boards, you should all be ashamed of yourselves. What are you guys, three?

As for the childish jokes about killing Walsh on these boards, you should all be ashamed of yourselves. What are you guys, three?


actually I'm 4

I'm afraid Walsh is right. All of his hold out clients are getting severely lowballed by cheap teams right now except for Dupuis. The Bruins would pay these guys more than their current "franchises" are willing to go right now, so Walsh is right on the money. The B's locked up their hot young goalie Toivonen for three years at a generous amount. They've kept all of their up and coming players happy, and the only walk-away was Berard. The Pens take the best goalie prospect in years and then ask him to babysit, while Mary-o is going to cash in this year and then probably dump the team like a hot rock. Again, Walsh is absolutely right. The owners figure that Walsh will break because he can't afford to represent so many holdouts: but the very opposite is true. He's not going to let these franchises that have money issues play him for a sucker.

As for the childish jokes about killing Walsh on these boards, you should all be ashamed of yourselves. What are you guys, three?

Walsh up until yesterday made no connections with the teams.....he is a terrible agent. :rolleyes: Usually you make a counteroffer immeadiately not 4 days before the season begins. This guy is a joke, and is just advising his players to hold out so that HE can get more money, after all, he is on a percentage.

I'm afraid Walsh is right. All of his hold out clients are getting severely lowballed by cheap teams right now except for Dupuis. The Bruins would pay these guys more than their current "franchises" are willing to go right now, so Walsh is right on the money. The B's locked up their hot young goalie Toivonen for three years at a generous amount. They've kept all of their up and coming players happy, and the only walk-away was Berard. The Pens take the best goalie prospect in years and then ask him to babysit, while Mary-o is going to cash in this year and then probably dump the team like a hot rock. Again, Walsh is absolutely right. The owners figure that Walsh will break because he can't afford to represent so many holdouts: but the very opposite is true. He's not going to let these franchises that have money issues play him for a sucker.

As for the childish jokes about killing Walsh on these boards, you should all be ashamed of yourselves. What are you guys, three?
OK give me the examples.
He has 4 high profile players.
Name me the ones being low balled.
Any proof on what you say?
You've already excluded Dupuis...
So there are only three bing low balled according to you.
Name the others lowballed, based on FACTS.

You do this "GIVE ME THE FACTS" schtick all the time Oliver, and it's tedious. From what I've read as to what the offers might be, they sound low. Take into account that Fluery's family wanted to get Marc-Andre the hell out of Mary-o's home ASAP should say alot about how that deal is going down. As for Dupuis, I said that he might not deserve such a pay raise, but the guy was really good for MIN last year, and shows tonnes of promise? Should he get less than some others on his team?

Give me the freakin' facts as to why I'm wrong before you demand the facts from me. It's so bloody easy for you to demand satisfaction as if we're going into some chivalrous duel and yet you bring ZIPPO ZILCH to the table. You just assume that I must be making stuff up.

Welcome to my ignore list, and don't bother to PM me, it will be deleted.

No, I have no facts, I'm just making stuff up to annoy you. I'm a pathetic liar. Whatever. I've got no time for this. :rant:

No, I have no facts, I'm just making stuff up to annoy you. I'm a pathetic liar. Whatever. I've got no time for this. :rant:
Good.

Minnesota countered the 1.2 million with a 1 million for one year offer, pretty damn reasonable. Walsh rejected that contract.

Walsh I believe has one more Minnesota player under his belt, PM Bouchard, and I hope and pray negotations don't go as badly.

Ya Walsh, whgat an idiot.

These guys should just sign what ever contract there team offers, screw it all.................

$1.2 million is PRETTY REASONABLE for a 24 year old who has a career high of 20 goals and 48 points? Man, I'm glad you're not the GM of my team. That's a pretty hefty salary for a player like that, especially when he has a whopping 76 points to his career. I can see why the Wild are holding firm. Dupuis has a ton to prove before getting that type of money IMO.

You make it sound as if he's a one-dimensional scorer who should be paid solely for the points he puts up, which is plain wrong. Any offense from Dupuis is basically gravy on top of top-notch defensive skills - he is Minnesota's go-to shutdown guy and their best forward next to Gaborik. Age aside, I don't see how Doug Risebrough can justify giving Sergei Zholtok $1.25 million and be quibbling over a small amount like this. Given the contracts the likes of Kristian Huselius have received this summer, it seems fair enough.

No, I have no facts, I'm just making stuff up to annoy you. I'm a pathetic liar. Whatever. I've got no time for this. :rant:
That's what I thought.
You're throwing things without knowing any fact.
So please don't say the Pens, Sens, and Wild are cheap without knowing a single things about the negociations.
What we know so far :
Dupuis asks for too much compared to his value.
Gaborik asks to be paid like Joe Thornton.
Havlat asks to be paid around 2M$ (can sens fans confirm this?)
Fleury asks for top end money with a deal that could go around 4 to 5 M$ with incentives.

These are facts.
Now the team offers are not known. There's no way to know if they're lowballing their players except if the offers seem reasonnable and they're still not signed.
I think for everyone of these players, their asking price is too much.
I'm 100% behind every one of these GMs right now.
Mr Wlash is ruining the future of players that have not proven anything. Remember that with the upcoming lockout, these players might not be paid at all for TWO years. Maybe more.
That's bad counseling. Especially since most of these guys could be locked up for long contracts.

You make it sound as if he's a one-dimensional scorer who should be paid solely for the points he puts up, which is plain wrong. Any offense from Dupuis is basically gravy on top of top-notch defensive skills - he is Minnesota's go-to shutdown guy and their best forward next to Gaborik. Age aside, I don't see how Doug Risebrough can justify giving Sergei Zholtok $1.25 million and be quibbling over a small amount like this. Given the contracts the likes of Kristian Huselius have received this summer, it seems fair enough.
I would say the Wild's top defensive forward is Walz...

I'm afraid Walsh is right. All of his hold out clients are getting severely lowballed by cheap teams right now except for Dupuis. The Bruins would pay these guys more than their current "franchises" are willing to go right now, so Walsh is right on the money. The B's locked up their hot young goalie Toivonen for three years at a generous amount. They've kept all of their up and coming players happy, and the only walk-away was Berard. The Pens take the best goalie prospect in years and then ask him to babysit, while Mary-o is going to cash in this year and then probably dump the team like a hot rock. Again, Walsh is absolutely right. The owners figure that Walsh will break because he can't afford to represent so many holdouts: but the very opposite is true. He's not going to let these franchises that have money issues play him for a sucker.

As for the childish jokes about killing Walsh on these boards, you should all be ashamed of yourselves. What are you guys, three?

What?

The whole reason Pittsburgh is in this mess is due to the ridiculous contract that Thornton signed during the inception of the current CBA. Let's look at Nash's contract, one that is more or less the same as Thornton's with a slight cost of living increase factored in:

"His rookie-cap salary was $1.185 million, and he had an incentive package that more closely resembled the Thornton model because both are forwards. Bonuses could be earned for each of the following: 20 goals, 35 assists, 60 points, .73 points per game, top three on the team in plus-minus rating or a top-five finish in Calder voting. He would receive an estimated $500,000 for achieving one of those six requirements and the full $3 million bonus for achieving just two. In his second year, the Calder requirement is replaced by one relating to ice time."

http://www.post-gazette.com/penguins/20030928nhlnot0928np5.asp

So, basically he can make over 4 million dollars for 20 goals and and getting only in the *top 5* of Calder voting, and do the same the next year by just getting a lot of ice time on the 3rd line. What veterans get contracts like this? Take Martin Straka, a 10 year NHL veteran who once scored over 90 points. *He* makes this kind of money. Who's likely to be a bigger difference maker this year, Straka or Nash? Give me a break.

Rookies should *not* earn more than established veterans, no matter where they were picked in the draft. It's the Bruins fault that this thing is such a mess, so don't go telling us that the GMs should just pony over the money and sign these picks to outrageous contracts. Also, after the CBA expires it is a widely held belief that rookie contracts are going to have limitations on the bonus clauses, so Patrick does have some leverage in this situation. Fleury can sign now with a *realistic* incentives package and make at least a million and a half this year, possibly more if he performs like a difference maker. Otherwise, he can go back to Cape Breton, play on his stipend of $40 dollars, and risk getting injured or making less than a million when the new CBA is instated. If he doesn't sign, he's tossing away over a million and inviting uncertainty.

Here's what Walsh wants:
"DiPietro's deal is relevant because he is the only goaltender besides Fleury to be drafted first. His terms called for the rookie-cap maximum $1.075 million salary over the mandatory three-year span, plus a package of incentives which could multiply that by five with little difficulty. Bonuses could be earned for each of these six requirements: 20 victories, 3.25 goals-against average, .890 save percentage, 1,800 minutes, four shutouts or a top-three finish in voting for the Calder Trophy as rookie of the year. He would receive $400,000 for each bonus achieved and -- this is the kicker -- a $4 million bonus if four of the six are achieved."

So, he could make $5 million for a 3.25 GAA, .890 save %, 20 victories, and 1800 minutes. What goaltender would still have a starting job posting stats like that? He should *lose* money for that kind of performance, not benefit with it.

I think Patrick is looking for a return on his investment. Fleury's bonus clauses should be a 2.4 GAA, a .91 save %, and 30 victories. Even then he should make at a maximum 3 million dollars, not 5. DiPietro's contract is absurd, and comes from the same team that invested over 60 million in Alexei Yashin.

What you're proposing, wickedbsfan, is that the fools start running the asylum. Thank God Patrick is far too savvy for that.

S L

I would say the Wild's top defensive forward is Walz...

Eh, everybody says that because of the Selke nomination, but by the end of the season the Stevenson-Walz-Gaborik was more or less a steady unit. Maybe he is the top defensive forward, but he isn't used exclusively in that role as Dupuis is.

Yep, these are the same facts that I'm going on too:

Evilo wrote:
"Dupuis asks for too much compared to his value.
Gaborik asks to be paid like Joe Thornton.
Havlat asks to be paid around 2M$ (can sens fans confirm this?)
Fleury asks for top end money with a deal that could go around 4 to 5 M$ with incentives."

1.2 is fine for Dupuis in my book. No problem with that at all.
Gaborik is pretty darn good, like Hossa good, like top five young forwards good, and he's more clutch than Thornton, fwiw.
Havlat is worth $2m sorry. But he is.
With these three players, we're not talking about chopped liver, here. They're quality players who are not demanding more than market value. If they weren't playing for OTT and MIN they would have been signed a while ago.
Okay, the post about Fleury's incentives from Steve Latin clears things up for me. Thank you. That is asking too much, I agree.

So, I'll concede that the Fleury demands are out of line, but on the other three I'll stand firm.

As for the childish jokes about killing Walsh on these boards, you should all be ashamed of yourselves. What are you guys, three?

Not actually killing Walsh. You know what I along with everyone else meant.

If you honestly believe a goalie with stats worse than JS Aubin deserves 5 million a season, then by all means trade for him from the Pens and give him that kind of money. The Pens would love to unload Seabass's stats. I could see paying Fleury 5 million if he hit reasonable bonuses(2.35 GAA, .920 SVPCT, 28 Wins, 45 games started, major awards, all rookie berth). Obviously things will be heavier weighted if he hits them like the All rookie spot isn't as much pay as the 28 wins. Hell set up a complicated contract set up that if he does so well for SVPG he gets paid so much money(.910=400,000 bonus .930=800,000 bonus ect). I don't care how they do it. Get it done and for a reasonable number for both sides. I don't want to pay him well below his value, but 6 or 7 million dollars (which is what Walsh is looking for) is obsene. There aren't 10 goalies in the league that make that kind of money and to ask for it for a rookie?!?

And this "if he hits 3 he gets all 6" stuff is ********. He hits them or he doesn't.

Gaborik is pretty darn good, like Hossa good, like top five young forwards good, and he's more clutch than Thornton, fwiw..

Gaborik who scored 4 goals in the last 32 games of the season last year is clutch? While Thorton who scored over 100 points on a one line team isn't?

damn this guy is an ass. for those that dont know, Craig Patrick's first offer is always a lowball, unless the person is asking for something like 600k. His first offer to hedberg was something like 650k and a 2-way. in the end deal ended up being 1.1M, 1.2M, 1.5M as a one way. its how he forms his basis for negotiations.

Well, that's a crappy way to do business and in that case, Walsh was probably right.

Everyone read Steve Latin's post because it is dead on. Walsh is an idiot, and is trying to abuse the system. IMO he is in this for his percentage money and that alone. I'm sick of agents like this, and I'm perfectly happy with all of these players sitting out or playing in Europe for nothing just to "stick it to the gms". Good luck players, I have lost all respect for you for listening to this boneheads advice. Hopefully you will wake upp and make the smart decision.

All right, the thing is about Gaborik and Dupuis is the simple fact that they HAVE NOT PROVEN ONE DAMN THING IN THE NHL. They have shown what they can do, and how they can perform but if they can perform it consistanly throughout the years.

The thing is, and anyone can tell you, Feaster really screwed this up because of the Richards contract. Now every rookie that performs as well as Richards, wants his contract. It's giving GMs a headache.

The other thing is, the Wild and the Sens are both with young owners and have to manage their budgets wisely. Especially the Sens because they just dug themselves out of bankruptcy and I don't they want to head there again. The Wild are a young group, have a lot of investments to pay off and to see how their rookies progress so they can store away some money.

They are not that far off with Dupuis. Wild gave him 1 million for 1 year, Walsh said no and rejected it.

Hossa signed a 4 year, 8.8 mil deal off his rookie deal, and he had certainly shown more than Havlat or Richards. SO, Havlat's agent wants MORE than Hossa's average salary on a 2 year deal, and when he gets laughed at, is confused. HE IS A DOLT. MAYBE, just MAYBE if he put forth Hossa's deal, he might get it done, but he won't, cause he wants his clients to arbitration eligable. To repeat, HE IS A DOLT.

I heard Walsh was also Comrie's agent ? Is that true ? If so, you can add that contractless guy to the list.

The thing is, and anyone can tell you, Feaster really screwed this up because of the Richards contract. Now every rookie that performs as well as Richards, wants his contract. It's giving GMs a headache.
Oh, not this again.

Tell me, which guy coming off his rookie contract has done all that Richards has? (Led his team in scoring 2 years out of 3, centers the first line, plays on the PP, leads forwards in icetime). About the only thing anyone can claim over Richards is playoff performance.

Tampa did what was best for Tampa, our best players get paid accordingly, and their contracts often make up for being underpaid in the past. Not Tampa's problem if the rest of these guys have a jerk for an agent and/or their teams are being cheap.

Oh, not this again.

Tell me, which guy coming off his rookie contract has done all that Richards has? (Led his team in scoring 2 years out of 3, centers the first line, plays on the PP, leads forwards in icetime). About the only thing anyone can claim over Richards is playoff performance.

Tampa did what was best for Tampa, our best players get paid accordingly, and their contracts often make up for being underpaid in the past. Not Tampa's problem if the rest of these guys have a jerk for an agent and/or their teams are being cheap.

Very true. Tampa paid Richards in accordance to how important of a role he plays in the franchise right now.

In that case, Gaborik should get paid close to what Richards is IMO. Not quite what he is asking for, but close.

The thing is, and anyone can tell you, Feaster really screwed this up because of the Richards contract. Now every rookie that performs as well as Richards, wants his contract. It's giving GMs a headache.

OK I doubt every rookie will perform like Richards did his first three seasons in the NHL....he has had more points then any player that was 23 and under except for one guy...Paul Kariya. Richards is worth what he's getting paid he's put him numbers 3 straight years including 74 last season please do not blame Feaster for locking down one of the NHL's most under rated players especially with the credentials he has.

Yep, these are the same facts that I'm going on too:

Evilo wrote:
"Dupuis asks for too much compared to his value.
Gaborik asks to be paid like Joe Thornton.
Havlat asks to be paid around 2M$ (can sens fans confirm this?)
Fleury asks for top end money with a deal that could go around 4 to 5 M$ with incentives."

1.2 is fine for Dupuis in my book. No problem with that at all.
Gaborik is pretty darn good, like Hossa good, like top five young forwards good, and he's more clutch than Thornton, fwiw.
Havlat is worth $2m sorry. But he is.
With these three players, we're not talking about chopped liver, here. They're quality players who are not demanding more than market value. If they weren't playing for OTT and MIN they would have been signed a while ago.
Okay, the post about Fleury's incentives from Steve Latin clears things up for me. Thank you. That is asking too much, I agree.

So, I'll concede that the Fleury demands are out of line, but on the other three I'll stand firm.
1.2M$ for Dupuis? OK the question is would you have given up 1.2M$ for him a year ago? The answer is easy : no.
Now does it take one year to establish oneself? No.
Simple logical conclusion : until he's proven himself over the time, Dupuis doesn't deserve 1.2M$.

Now onto Gaborik.
Compare Gaborik's stats and Thornton's. I like Gaborik but he scores less is more inconsistant, and is less of a power forward. Basically he brings much less than Thornton. And he's younger and has more time to up his salary after finding his consistency.
Simple logical conclusion : Gaborik doesn't deserve to be paid like Thornton yet.
Onto Havlat. No matter how good, Havlat is a third liner on his team. He should be paid less than Alfredsson and Hossa. Why the hell is he asking for Hossa's salary when he hasn't come close to his impact and points total?
Simple logical conclusion : Havlat is not worth Hossa's salary.

Simple logical conclusion : These guys are asking for too much.

:handclap:

Very true. Tampa paid Richards in accordance to how important of a role he plays in the franchise right now.

In that case, Gaborik should get paid close to what Richards is IMO. Not quite what he is asking for, but close.

True on that, Gaborik though ISN'T close to Richards yet. HE has a solid first half of the season but not a second half. I think as I look at it, your close, but I hate it when players ask for Richards contract and doesn't put up the points as Richards.

Rich Winter is Comrie's agent.

OK I doubt every rookie will perform like Richards did his first three seasons in the NHL....he has had more points then any player that was 23 and under except for one guy...Paul Kariya. Richards is worth what he's getting paid he's put him numbers 3 straight years including 74 last season please do not blame Feaster for locking down one of the NHL's most under rated players especially with the credentials he has.


:handclap: :handclap: :handclap:


100% on the money my personal minor problem with his contract is that it is only a 3 yr contract i would have enjoyed 4 yrs a lot.

Richards is a CORE player for this team and the option of having both Vinny's and Richards contracts end the same year is a big big no no, you dont put all eggs in the same basket

You guys should read the business forum. :)

Actually, the situation is simple: players are saying to the owners "we don't want a salary cap, this CBA can work".

The current CBA lowballs young players, giving them no leverage. All players without arbitration rights should just get the qualifying offer and nothing else if the owners play the CBA like it was meant to be. In other words, if you take the CBA by the letter, than a player asking for more than the qualifying offer asks for too much.

However, as we see, players that have good on-ice performance and fans that see different salaries for players that are in different CBA categories won't have that (qualifying offer). Which is why the current CBA doesn't work.

Many fans keep saying it's up to the owners to fix their business, but they don't support the owners that are actually doing it (by letting players with no leverage hold out if they don't sign their offer).

Ottawa, Minnessota and Pittsburgh are just doing business the way it should be done (but the way it hasn't been done yet, which puts the owners in a bad financial situation).

Thumbs up to the teams for sticking up to their salary structure. Thumbs down to Walsh, a money-milking agent, who is putting his clients in a bad position. Let those players hold out 1-2-3 years and then don't offer them a gold mine to return (like NYI did with Peca and Yashin).

True on that, Gaborik though ISN'T close to Richards yet. HE has a solid first half of the season but not a second half. I think as I look at it, your close, but I hate it when players ask for Richards contract and doesn't put up the points as Richards.
Yeah, I hate it too, but that's the fault of the agent, and it's up to the GM to come up with counter arguments as to WHY they don't deserve that money. It's not the fault of Tampa or of Richards.

Rich Winter is Comrie's agent.
Ouch. Good luck with that! He's also Vinny Prospal's agent, jerked Tampa around two years in a row over Prospal, and caused another of his clients to be dumped because Feaster doesn't want to deal with him anymore. He does his job well, got Prospal a nice fat up-front bonus, but he's about as much of a jerk as Walsh. :)

You guys should read the business forum. :)

Actually, the situation is simple: players are saying to the owners "we don't want a salary cap, this CBA can work".

The current CBA lowballs young players, giving them no leverage. All players without arbitration rights should just get the qualifying offer and nothing else if the owners play the CBA like it was meant to be. In other words, if you take the CBA by the letter, than a player asking for more than the qualifying offer asks for too much.

However, as we see, players that have good on-ice performance and fans that see different salaries for players that are in different CBA categories won't have that (qualifying offer). Which is why the current CBA doesn't work.

Many fans keep saying it's up to the owners to fix their business, but they don't support the owners that are actually doing it (by letting players with no leverage hold out if they don't sign their offer).

Ottawa, Minnessota and Pittsburgh are just doing business the way it should be done (but the way it hasn't been done yet, which puts the owners in a bad financial situation).

Thumbs up to the teams for sticking up to their salary structure. Thumbs down to Walsh, a money-milking agent, who is putting his clients in a bad position. Let those players hold out 1-2-3 years and then don't offer them a gold mine to return (like NYI did with Peca and Yashin).

I agree with out on pretty much all accounts. Players "value" is more a function of what their contract status is, rather than how good they are. However, players in this situation (Havlat, Comrie, Gaborik, Richards, etc) do have the option to hold-out, which can give them more leverage than looks on paper. That's how Richards got his deal, although, I still think TB got schooled on that one. Feaster could have easily signed a deal $1-1.5 mil cheaper if he played his cards better.

If a team is reliant on a particular player as a cental figure on their team, then they are vulnerable to a hold-out. This is why that Havlat asking for anything substantial over and above the mandatory increase is stupid. He's a victim of the Sens depth. A hold-out has less impact on the team than it does to him (unless he holds-out until the playoffs), and the Sens know this. Gaborik has a bit more leverage, but he's also fighting against a management group (the Wild) that puts a lot of emphasis on maintaining a healthy salary structure, and are likely not going to take the short-term solution at the expense of their financial management over the long term.

As for Walsh, I guess if he does manage to get his guys the big contract, then it will be a successful tactic, however, I have my doubts that he's going to get the outcome he was looking for. He pushed off negotiations until right before the season. Starting earlier may have made some in-roads into getting the teams to come to a compromise solution earlier. It sounds like he's taking an antagonistic approach, and it wouldn't suprise me if the Wild and the Sens are being more aggresive than they usually would be in order to make an example out of Walsh, because he's being such an ass.

I agree with out on pretty much all accounts. Players "value" is more a function of what their contract status is, rather than how good they are. However, players in this situation (Havlat, Comrie, Gaborik, Richards, etc) do have the option to hold-out, which can give them more leverage than looks on paper. That's how Richards got his deal, although, I still think TB got schooled on that one. Feaster could have easily signed a deal $1-1.5 mil cheaper if he played his cards better.

If a team is reliant on a particular player as a cental figure on their team, then they are vulnerable to a hold-out. This is why that Havlat asking for anything substantial over and above the mandatory increase is stupid. He's a victim of the Sens depth. A hold-out has less impact on the team than it does to him (unless he holds-out until the playoffs), and the Sens know this. Gaborik has a bit more leverage, but he's also fighting against a management group (the Wild) that puts a lot of emphasis on maintaining a healthy salary structure, and are likely not going to take the short-term solution at the expense of their financial management over the long term.

As for Walsh, I guess if he does manage to get his guys the big contract, then it will be a successful tactic, however, I have my doubts that he's going to get the outcome he was looking for. He pushed off negotiations until right before the season. Starting earlier may have made some in-roads into getting the teams to come to a compromise solution earlier. It sounds like he's taking an antagonistic approach, and it wouldn't suprise me if the Wild and the Sens are being more aggresive than they usually would be in order to make an example out of Walsh, because he's being such an ass.

I couldn't agree with you more.

For all of those TB fans who applaud Richard's fat new contract, you know not what you do.....

I couldn't agree with you more.

For all of those TB fans who applaud Richard's fat new contract, you know not what you do.....
Whatever, I'm well aware of what the larger issues are, thank you.

Anyway, I could go through my reasons why this deal was a no brainer for the Lightning as I posted weeks ago on the Business board, but you people won't read it anyway, so why bother? We're all entitled to our opinions.

Edit: Now that I've thought about this for a minute, let me add: I can't believe this is still receiving attention, but I guess it's MUCH easier to criticize the Lightning than it is to criticize one of the "big boys". Same thing happened last year when St. Louis' salary got quadrupled. This is not some earth-shattering move, if it hadn't been pounced on by some members of the media as a reason why certain players and teams can't get deals done, no one would have batted an eyelash over this contract, and I've got to say, I don't know ANY Bolts fans who have an issue with what Richards is getting paid. I doubt any of you understand the issues involved down here, including budget and the marketability of the team.

Whatever, I'm well aware of what the larger issues are, thank you.

Anyway, I could go through my reasons why this deal was a no brainer for the Lightning as I posted weeks ago on the Business board, but you people won't read it anyway, so why bother? We're all entitled to our opinions.

Edit: Now that I've thought about this for a minute, let me add: I can't believe this is still receiving attention, but I guess it's MUCH easier to criticize the Lightning than it is to criticize one of the "big boys". Same thing happened last year when St. Louis' salary got quadrupled. This is not some earth-shattering move, if it hadn't been pounced on by some members of the media as a reason why certain players and teams can't get deals done, no one would have batted an eyelash over this contract, and I've got to say, I don't know ANY Bolts fans who have an issue with what Richards is getting paid. I doubt any of you understand the issues involved down here, including budget and the marketability of the team.

I live in Nashville so I refute your argument about not understanding. :rolleyes: Hey, if you want to live in denial, fine. THe point is this....the CBA is designed so that RFAs get the qualifying offer ONLY until they receive arbitration rights. Even then, they receive only what the arbitrator believes is fair. It is not until they become UFA that they can sign for whatever they chose. TB, signed Richards to a contract much more than the qualifying offer. Now players around the league want the same thing. I'm not saying that Richards doesn't deserve the contract, b/c he probably does, but in a few years when that qualifying offer is over 4.5 mil your not going to be liking it, and maybe then you will see why TB got hosed on this one. They had the leverage, and they caved in. Its a bad management move money wise, and it sets the tone for other GMs to have to live up to. TBs bad decision makes it a precedent for agents to use agianst other teams. I just hope that these other teams do not give in so easily as Feaster did for you.

Edit: Now that I've thought about this for a minute, let me add: I can't believe this is still receiving attention, but I guess it's MUCH easier to criticize the Lightning than it is to criticize one of the "big boys". Same thing happened last year when St. Louis' salary got quadrupled. This is not some earth-shattering move, if it hadn't been pounced on by some members of the media as a reason why certain players and teams can't get deals done, no one would have batted an eyelash over this contract, and I've got to say, I don't know ANY Bolts fans who have an issue with what Richards is getting paid. I doubt any of you understand the issues involved down here, including budget and the marketability of the team.

One, St. Louis contract is only a mil a year, and I am uncertain of the length. If it is longer than 2 years, then it is a very smart contract. If it was only 2 years, then it's still not that unreasonable.

Second, the people that are criticizing the Lightning would also be criticizing the "big boys" if they did the same thing. I appreciate that Tampa Bay had to get Richards signed because of the importance he plays to the team, the loss of Prospal, the thin hold the team has on it's fan-base, yada, yada, yada, but it still doesn't mean that they didn't overpay him. There didn't seem to be much involved in the negotiation process. Like I said earlier, I'm pretty sure that if Feaster played things out a little differently, he could have shaved a million or so off the deal without any sacrifice to the team (i.e. holdout).

Third, as for Tampa Bay fans not complaining, it's typical for fans to look at the team short-term. The real negative effects of this contract will not impact this team until the next time it has a young star in a similar situation. Other teams are already feeling the impact of it. Regardless of whether you like the contract or not from TB's perspective, it's pretty hard to ignore the impact it's had on other negotiations. Just because other Tampa Bay fans are okay with the move, it doesn't make it right.

It's a pretty natural thing for well-fiscally managed teams to have hard feelings towards teams that engage in foolish spending habits. If Tampa Bay makes this behaviour a regular thing, they are not likely to be the most popular team among other teams fans.