Thread: Value of: Kessel to Ottawa
View Single Post
Old
04-07-2009, 07:07 PM
  #97
Frenzy1
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,787
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gorman03 View Post
Well if you think about it these two teams are pretty much done their rebuild. Both are possibly letting high priced players walk or retire either this year or next (Havlat, Khabibulin, Kariya, Tkachuk) or else these guys are taking big paycuts. If this is the case I could see them gunning for them.

St. Louis is a much more likely destination as they do not have the big name, big money young players Keith, Kane and Toews in need of big raises in coming years. Oshie, Berglund and Johnson will require raises, but not as big as the Chicago three IMO.

Shortsighted or not if these teams can pry one of these two away for a 1st, 2nd and 3rd I would not be surprised to see them pull the trigger.

I honestly don't think their will be many if any at all offers, but I see it as more likely these teams go for one of them as opposed to Toronto or Montreal.

You can go ahead and take St. Louis off the list. Their market will not allow them to spend to the cap, regardless of space available. Plus next year we will have to resign Johnson and Perron, then the following year - Oshie and Berglund.... Plus the other role players. The nice thing is we only have two bad contracts on the books where we overpaid to get a UFA - Kariya and McKee - both of which come off the books next year.

I don't think you will see a lot of teams going after RFAs. There are multiple reasons:

1. Each team has a pecking order - The top player should be getting the most $$$$. Anytime you overpay a player - like Chicago has done for Campbell - the guys whose contracts expire will be expecting to make more (ie when Keith's contract expires he will likely want 6 million also.) As a Blues fan it happened in St. Louis with Brewer - he got an extra .5 million per season because of McKees $$ contract. (Had McKee not been on the books at 4, he would have likely signed for less).

So basically it inflates the cost to resign your own players. (Fans can say what they want but the Agents will point to the other contracts on the team for comparison).

2. The RFA will not likely live up to the contract. Without massive overpayment (Penner) - you will likely be matched. The players who are not matched are likely ending up with a Penner like contract. Cost edmonton $$$ and picks. Their fans will tell you how that worked out. (It also likely cost Lowe his job as GM).

3. CAP is going down. It will be important not to overpay for any contract regardless of UFA or RFA status as it could cost you in the future.

4. Retaliation. See the Blues and the Nucks last summer. (It actually worked out very well for the Blues - but the Nucks are not likely happy paying Bernier 2.5 million for this season - it is a one year deal, which if he excelled would have cost them a more to resign this summer, and since he didn't in order to qualify him they have to offer 2.5 million to keep him on the roster.)

5. The advantage for making a trade vs. signing an RFA is that with a trade - most of the time both teams move salary. You are not just adding 5 million to your cap, in some cases you are able to offset that by trading a player or players that earn 2-3 million (example numbers but you get the idea). So you are not just adding pure salary.

Basically it comes down to this: It doesn't matter if you sign a UFA or RFA to a bad contract - it will hurt the team both salary structure wise and cap wise - the ramifications are not just one year, but multiple years. But with RFA's you also cost yourself a bit of the future in picks - that can offer great play at cheap cost on their entry level contracts - you need this to put together a solid team.


Last edited by Frenzy1: 04-07-2009 at 07:32 PM.
Frenzy1 is offline   Reply With Quote