View Single Post
09-16-2011, 12:06 AM
Registered User
Roulin's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,242
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
Salaries are almost completely based on what a player has earned in a philosophical sense.
Maybe in your philosophy! In reality, Gordie Howe ain't gonna come back and make the league max because of what he's done, and Ryan Nugent-Hopkins ain't gonna make $550k because of his lack of NHL accomplishments.

Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
First of all, the Habs will not believe that buying out two years of Subban's UFA years is worth a long term deal will most definitely not occur. The precedent has been set, many times before, that the Habs management believes in short-term earned contracts during RFA years, to both keep salary figures down, and give the player incentive to earn his pay day. Ryder, Higgins, Komisarek, O'Byrne, Andrei Kostitsyn, Price, the list goes on and on. This particularly applies to the initial contract after entry-level.
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
Basically this contract is not indicative of what the Habs will ever sign for two basic reasons:

1) Buffalo's new owner has a tonne of cash flow in the present and is using that to hedge his profits for a later date. What I mean is that he is giving out bonuses, and front loaded contracts now, in order to keep payrolls down in later years. Myers, Leino, Ehrhoff, Sekera are all evidence of this. Buffalo is a low revenue team, by flowing cash into these contracts now, while he has them, they can be very profitable down the line if they are a successful club. These are strictly business moves, not based on traditional merit contracts.

2) Montreal does not have this problem; they have consistent and heavy revenue flow on a yearly basis. They do not need to hedge money to keep costs down in the future. Another example of this is Toronto. These kind of clubs do not rely on this tactic, because it essentially has no bearing on cap hits(which are becoming more inconsequential by each passing season), so they keep contracts short in RFA years because of their upper hand in negotiations, to keep their contracts down in those years. When a player has earned, and proven himself as a strong asset to the club, he is awarded with a longer contract, with a good market term, an example of this is Markov and Plekanec, and Price will probably be the next one. Subban, probably will see a short term contract of 2 or 3 years, similar to what Kostitsyn or Price got on their first non-entry level contracts.
I have not claimed that the Canadiens are likely to make a 7 year offer. Only that comparables are used by management and agents in negotiation, and therefore in setting wages, and that using Myers as a comp for Subban does not come out of left field.

Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
But they are not comparable. Buffalo lacks a true elite level defensemen, which enables Myers to push for longer term and higher value because there is no cut off point.
There was no enabling needed! Myers and the Sabres agreed on a contract they both found reasonable. If you think Myers and his agent would have agreed to less money if Markov was a Sabre,
you are being naive.

BTW, do you really believe Myers was the one pushing for longer term? The fact that the two UFA years he gave up have value is important to this argument.

Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
Your argument is as follows:

1. X player got $5.5 million dollars on a longer term deal as an RFA.
2. Y player is about to become a RFA next year.
3. X and Y player are the same.
4. Therefore, if Y player wants a long term deal, it will be $5.5 million dollars.

The problem with that argument, while logical, is premise 3 is incorrect.
Despite the oversimplified language, I'll play along. I believe the two players are good comps because they both handle big minutes in the NHL despite their age, including on special teams. They each have a unique physical talent (Myers' size, Subban's skating) that should make them special players as they learn to think the game better. They have both shown the ability to put up points at even strength.

Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
Why would the market have any power if the player is restricted for upwards of the next 5 years?
On top of the usual RFA back and forth? Because of the 2 UFA years, and because of the 2 potential arbitration years. The player is under no obligation to give those rights up without compensation.

Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
Until you see the different strategies of different revenue capable teams in the league, you cannot differentiate between how contracts are awarded on a player by player basis.
I think I'm starting to see the root of the misunderstanding here. You believe that contracts are "awarded," not negotiated. Comps become important because both teams and agents use them in negotiation. There are two parties involved when a dollar figure is decided upon, not one.

Roulin is offline   Reply With Quote