View Single Post
Old
05-30-2005, 03:13 AM
  #1
northernKing
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,844
vCash: 500
Question regarding contract status

It seems pretty odd to me that the NHLPA and the NHL have not had seperate votes with the owners and players deciding if a year has been burned off existing deals due to the lockout.

I mean if they had seperate votes and both came back with the same result, then this is a non issue. However if they disagreed then they may need an arbitrator or maybe legal action.

Some teams would benefit from a year being burned off players deals. For example DET would not have to pay Cujo and maybe Legace would get a chance at being the starter. A team like TOR would no longer have guys like Mogilny, Nolan, Sundin, and others under the big $ deals they signed. They could go out and get cheaper younger players like Kariya, Murray, Lindros and others, yet still be competitive.

Other teams like VAN would not benefit as it would make Naslund an UFA and a year of Bertuzzi's deal would also probably pave his way out of town once he became an UFA.

It just seems that this issue should have really been decided earlier. If I am a team like PHIL with older guys like Burke, Roenick and Leclair on big money deals, then I would surely want the year to be burned off.

Thoughts?

northernKing is offline