View Single Post
Old
09-11-2004, 09:26 PM
  #72
thinkwild
Veni Vidi Toga
 
thinkwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,237
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladybugblue
The current CBA cannot change the financial stability of the NHL because of the arbitration system plain and simple. The free agents have not been signed to high paying contracts this summer but all arbitration cases made between 50-75% raises. Now tell me did the player that got 3 more goals this year deserve a 75% raise...I think not.
Im not so sure. Think about Crosby. IF there was no rookie cap, what would he get. THere would be teams that would pay a lot of money if there was some chance you could actually buy him. Surely someone would make a $10mil offer.

But under this CBA, the most he can make for the first 3 years is 1.3mil and he is on a 2-way contract where he can be sent to the minors, causing loss in pay.

Years 3 and 4 he has no arbitration, no leverage. Giving him a 10% raise is a pittance compared to what he is worth.

Come his 1st arbitration in his 6th year, he gets a 100% raise to $4mil. Still less than half his likely market value. It may be a 100% raise but it is certainly worth it when you think of it this way.

Players are going to get raises each year. Overall though there is no reason with retirement, recruitment you cant keep the overall salary in check even though players get big raises each year. Just like any company, people get raises as they get older. Companies plan for it.

If all the teams only used RFAs, there shouldnt be a problem. They all make the salaries we all say are reasonable when we complain about the players making the $10mil contracts.

Its a rare RFA who will command $10mil anymore.

thinkwild is offline