HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   New York Rangers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   Clear the decks... (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=151428)

Fletch 07-15-2005 09:48 AM

Clear the decks...
 
and make room foor...Lecavalier or Thornton...Ilya Kovalchuk, and many other UFAs that will now be available in their prime, instead of way-past their prime. What am I talking about? I alluded to this the other day, the luck of the Rangers being they get the #1 overall pick, pick Crosby, and when he begins to enter his prime, he leaves at 25 years old and goes to Toronto...as a UFA!

Want to rebuild fast? Sign Thornton or Lecavalier next season. That helps solve the Rangers' long-term problem at center, and with size. In three seasons, the Rangers will get a crack at Kovalchuk, who will be abuot 26 years old. There are others. But welcome to the land of the hard cap...Previously Edmonton complained they couldn't keep stars as they aged...now teams that draft well will not be able to keep stars because of the cap.

JR#9* 07-15-2005 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fletch
and make room foor...Lecavalier or Thornton...Ilya Kovalchuk, and many other UFAs that will now be available in their prime, instead of way-past their prime. What am I talking about? I alluded to this the other day, the luck of the Rangers being they get the #1 overall pick, pick Crosby, and when he begins to enter his prime, he leaves at 25 years old and goes to Toronto...as a UFA!

Want to rebuild fast? Sign Thornton or Lecavalier next season. That helps solve the Rangers' long-term problem at center, and with size. In three seasons, the Rangers will get a crack at Kovalchuk, who will be abuot 26 years old. There are others. But welcome to the land of the hard cap...Previously Edmonton complained they couldn't keep stars as they aged...now teams that draft well will not be able to keep stars because of the cap.

This is exactly why we have to use our one time only buyout chance on both Holik and Kaspar so that IF a Thronton or Vinny L became available next yr we'd be able to take a run at them.

Sure will make for some interesting times.

barrel_master 07-15-2005 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fletch
and make room foor...Lecavalier or Thornton...Ilya Kovalchuk, and many other UFAs that will now be available in their prime, instead of way-past their prime. What am I talking about? I alluded to this the other day, the luck of the Rangers being they get the #1 overall pick, pick Crosby, and when he begins to enter his prime, he leaves at 25 years old and goes to Toronto...as a UFA!

Want to rebuild fast? Sign Thornton or Lecavalier next season. That helps solve the Rangers' long-term problem at center, and with size. In three seasons, the Rangers will get a crack at Kovalchuk, who will be abuot 26 years old. There are others. But welcome to the land of the hard cap...Previously Edmonton complained they couldn't keep stars as they aged...now teams that draft well will not be able to keep stars because of the cap.

As a rangers fan it would be nice to see Lecavalier or Kovalchuk in NY. Having said that, teams like Edmonton still have a better chance of keeping their good players in this new system then the old. If the high spenders have all their cap room used up, they won't be able to make big signings like these.

SingnBluesOnBroadway 07-15-2005 12:23 PM

I'd love Richards. And he just might be the guy that the Bolts choose to part with.

dedalus 07-15-2005 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fletch
now teams that draft well will not be able to keep stars because of the cap.

Think the Patriots will not be keeping Brady because of the cap? The Eagles and McNabb? The Ravens and Ray Lewis?

The cap doesn't mean you can't keep your stars. If you want them badly enough you'll keep them (provided there's no persoinal animosities - e.g. Terrell Owens). What it will mean is that lesser players are sacrificed in order to keep those stars.

JR#9* 07-15-2005 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dedalus
Think the Patriots will not be keeping Brady because of the cap? The Eagles and McNabb? The Ravens and Ray Lewis?

The cap doesn't mean you can't keep your stars. If you want them badly enough you'll keep them (provided there's no persoinal animosities - e.g. Terrell Owens). What it will mean is that lesser players are sacrificed in order to keep those stars.


Fletchs point is that a team like TB won't be able to keep their 3 stars in Vinnly St Louis and Richards and the same thing with say Colorado w/BLake Sakic and Forsberg.

You have one or 2 stars on each team and a bunch of support players surrounding them.

The key will be getting the right 2 stars identified and on your team.

Edge 07-15-2005 01:00 PM

I dont totally agree with that.

While there certainly will be movement (which I'm not too crazy about).

I think there are enough higher end guys for teams to have more than two. There are more than 60 tops guys in the sport right now (which would be two to every team).

What I do think this means is that as you go down the star list the salaries go down.

I think it prevents a team from having a monepoly and throwing whatever cash they want at a player.

In other words, The Lightening might only be offer Richards 5 million a season as their second best player behind VL (assuming they sign him).

Richards might be able to get 6.3 million from Chicago to be their best player, but the jump won't be as huge as before and he must ask himself if it is worth the jump.

Fletch 07-15-2005 01:35 PM

We shall see...
 
Consider this, though...Edmonton drafts Crosby...the Leafs have cap room after Crosby's seventh season, and his agent cleverly advises him to sign a contract enabling that. Crosby's now about 25. He's everything he's touted to be, just coming off a 110 point season. Toronto geared-up for this and is ready to offer the kid the 'max' contract - what happens? First, Crosby could choose to leave, so the Brady comment isn't all that relevant since these superstar 25 year olds (soon to be 26 year olds) and 27 year old max can freely bolt. This won't be the norm, but it will definitely be interesting to see how this plays out. It's a whole new ballgame. Kid's may move to larger markets at younger ages beacuse it's more attractive than Carolina, Nashville and PITT.

Edge - you need to tweak your numbers...a 20%+ increase in salary, or $1.3 million per year is pretty significant. Holik made the jump for a good deal less. In other words, I understand what you're getting at, but the numbers you used for examples do not really support that.

JR#9* 07-15-2005 01:44 PM

And another point as shown in Edge's Brady in New england as oppossed to Fletch's Crosby in Edm scenario is it will depend what market these superstars wind up in.

Brady has no reason to leave Boston as it's bigtime city but even more important to a professional player is how the size of the markets may effect just how much money these stars can make outside the rink or off the field and while having your potential salary limited by a cap certain cities will be able to offer significatly more by way of possible endorsement deals/dollars and that is an angle that hasn't really been mentioned yet and may be a big factor when these future superstars become UFA's at 25 and it's an angle that will clearly benifit the NYR's as well as the Philly's Toronto's etc..

Just an example...

How many endorsement deals do you think Kovalchuk gets in that hockey hotbed that is Atlanta?

If he were in NYC he have tenfold the deals presented to him especially with the russian population.

dedalus 07-15-2005 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR#9
even more important to a professional player is how the size of the markets may effect just how much money these stars can make outside the rink or off the field

How many endorsement deals do you think Kovalchuk gets in that hockey hotbed that is Atlanta?

The endorsements will come to a superstar no matter where he plays. You ask how many endorsement deals will come to Kovalchuk because he plays in Atlanta? I might easily pose the question to you: "How many endorsement deals will Brett Favre get playing in Green Bay, Wisconsin? How many will LeBron James get playing in a place like Cleveland?"

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fletch
Crosby's now about 25. He's everything he's touted to be, just coming off a 110 point season. Toronto geared-up for this and is ready to offer the kid the 'max' contract - what happens? First, Crosby could choose to leave ... This won't be the norm

I've bolded what I see as problematic in your statement, Fletch. I agree it won't be the norm; that's actually my point. Your first post seems to suggest that it WILL be the norm, however, when you write: "Previously Edmonton complained they couldn't keep stars as they aged...now teams that draft well will not be able to keep stars because of the cap."

Your closing quote makes it seem like you're saying there's going to be an epidemic of teams losing their best players. Ain't gonna happen. If teams DO lose their best players it will be because those teams planned exceptionally poorly. The wise Edmonton GM will lock up Crosby well before he gets to 25 years of age so that Toronto (or the Flyers, Rangers, Wings, Stars, etc) never get their shot at him (or do so only when he's 31 years old). This is exactly the business model the Philadelphia Eagles and Patriots have adopted. It's what's allowed them to keep their best players and maintain successful teams.

Fire Sather 07-15-2005 02:22 PM

man. Good to be back at the Rangers board. I havent talked here in so long.. been hanging out in the Lounge and the Buinness of Hockey forum.

I guess its time to start again. If we can sign Thornton or Vinny Lac you gotta do it.

Potted Plant 07-15-2005 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fletch
the luck of the Rangers being they get the #1 overall pick, pick Crosby, and when he begins to enter his prime, he leaves at 25 years old and goes to Toronto...as a UFA!

Quote:

= Fletch]Want to rebuild fast? Sign Thornton or Lecavalier next season. That helps solve the Rangers' long-term problem at center, and with size.
So, let me get this straight.

1. It would be horribly unlucky for the Rangers to be in position to draft Crosby, only to potentially lose him after seven years.

2. The "long-term" solution to the center problem is to sign UFA's who can leave the minute their contract is up.

Do I have that right?

Fletch 07-15-2005 03:00 PM

I know dedalus...
 
it was actually a hedged statement and I had meant to say may not bet instead of won't be, but the brain and fingers didn't go together. Fact is (and I think this is a fact), we really do not know how this will play out. There may be a lot of movement. There may be key players leaving places such as Carolina, et al, at the age of 27 or earlier for other places to take more money, and be where they want to be. Before guys left at 31, and very often, those guys left and when they stayed, it was because their team seemingly always was able to afford them. Now, that age's at 25-27, and these guys will be even more sought-after than those 31 year olds.

The wise GM locks Crosby up, agreed...the wise agent makes sure his client gets a payday as soon as possible. If the kid is the Next One, and turns out the way people expect, he should be making $5-7 million as soon as possible - which would be around that age. That could get ugly, and will be interesting for sure.

Fletch 07-15-2005 03:06 PM

You do have that right Highly..
 
and let me put it this way:

First, on Crosby - there was a heck of a lot of sarcasm, but I'll walk through the sarcasm: draft Crosby, and lose him in his prime because the kid rather play someone else and having 7 seasons under his belt enables him to choose where he wants to play, if he was able to enter into contracts for which he was a UFA at 25. Not inconceivable. To me, that would be the Rangers' luck. Get the holy grail of a draft pick, and lose him when he hits his prime. Didn't say it would be horribly unlucky to draft him, as I believe you inferred.

Joe Thornton will be 27 next season. The Rangers will be one more year into the rebuild. Seemingly UFAs are signed for 4-5 years, which is 5-6 years into the rebuild. If they are to lose him at the end of that term, hopefully between now and six years from now they would've home-groomed or traded for a replacement. Yeah, I have no problem signing a guy like Thornton next season even if the Rangers are rebuilding. It would be nice to get a 27 year old UFA instead of a 32 year old.

ATLANTARANGER* 07-15-2005 04:00 PM

I did a quick little analysis myself
 
of those I thought would be brought out and I have to tell you it didn't really excite me. I'm thinking that teams are going to have a tough choice chosing between buying someone out, or not qualifying someone. The buyout cost money and for some teams that could be a real issue, i.e. LI. On the other hand not qualifying a player cost nothing, save the fact that you got nothing in return.

In looking over this and going back and forth I came to the same conclusion as I had before. The teams that have some decent prospects within their system are really going to be the ones that benefit from all of this. Teams like Atlanta can pick and chose who and what they want to pay to get it. We are about a year off to be in this situation. Some teams like Tampa, Detroit, Colorado, Toronto, Philadelphia, Ottawa, Dallas are really under the gun.

Teams still could be stuck with some bad contracts because the buyout amounts maybe too great for the organization to eat. These teams may compound an already bad decision by failing to qualify a better priced player. This is where I think some bargains may appear. Over all, I just don't see a lot from the potential buy out group that gets me excited. I see a lot of veteran role players who have raised their salaries over the years getting brought out because they are over priced and a younger, cheaper version can be found, or is already in the team's system. Much like the NFL.

Edge 07-15-2005 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fletch
Consider this, though...Edmonton drafts Crosby...the Leafs have cap room after Crosby's seventh season, and his agent cleverly advises him to sign a contract enabling that. Crosby's now about 25. He's everything he's touted to be, just coming off a 110 point season. Toronto geared-up for this and is ready to offer the kid the 'max' contract - what happens? First, Crosby could choose to leave, so the Brady comment isn't all that relevant since these superstar 25 year olds (soon to be 26 year olds) and 27 year old max can freely bolt. This won't be the norm, but it will definitely be interesting to see how this plays out. It's a whole new ballgame. Kid's may move to larger markets at younger ages beacuse it's more attractive than Carolina, Nashville and PITT.

Edge - you need to tweak your numbers...a 20%+ increase in salary, or $1.3 million per year is pretty significant. Holik made the jump for a good deal less. In other words, I understand what you're getting at, but the numbers you used for examples do not really support that.

But that's exactly what I mean. They could move yes, but that doesn't mean they always do. $1.3 million is significant but not as mind altering as if someone offered you 4 or 5 million more to move. In Holik's case he moved all of about 5 miles, so I don't think we can really use him as an example.

And while kid's may move to larger markets, they may also stay if they are on a succesful team. If they are winning and part of a system they are enjoying, they aren't likely to move for 1.3 million and not win and possibly see numbers goes down. Now had they been offered 4 million more to move, the odds of them leaving their teams goes up. Do you see what I'm getting at (or attempting to at any rate)?

Essentially I view it like this, a 40% raise is more likely attract a great player away from a great team than a 20% increase is. I just don't think you're gonna see teams going nuts with one player when they only have X amount to spent. If they are, it becomes a mute point because they won't have anyone to surround that player with and the deal is a wash.

NYR469 07-15-2005 09:19 PM

just to note from what i've heard the 7 year rule will NOT apply immediately and won't go into effect till 2007-08 when the ufa age drops to 27. so thornton and lecavalier will NOT become ufas after 7 years, they will have to wait till they are 27 or 28...the kovalchuks and nashs will be ufas at 25.

when the age drops to 27 it'll be 27 or 7 years...till then it'll still be based on age

that is most likely being done cause most guys make the nhl before they turn 24 so it would be stupid to have the ufa age set at 31 this year and use the 7 year rule


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:44 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.