View Single Post
10-05-2003, 10:26 AM
Steve Latin*
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Thinbonesville
Posts: 1,583
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by wickedbsfan
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?

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."

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.


Steve Latin* is offline