View Single Post
Old
11-09-2012, 11:27 AM
  #338
forthewild
Registered User
 
forthewild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,624
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bozak911 View Post
Dude... Pay reduction?

The NHL has basically taken the "make whole" provision entirely into their court. The fact that Fehr uses the term "so-called" before "make whole" in that letter jumps off the page at me.
perhaps to clarify, by reducing HRR, reducing contracting rights players would get a smaller market thus a pay reduction, not on these contracts but on future ones.

what i mean to say is, take a rookies like Stammer/Karlsson RNH/Granlund and for future MacKinnon/McDavid just to name a few, with a different contracting structure that NHL wants guys who are coming up won't have the same market as guys before did.

really two reasons, one is smaller pie 50 rather then 57, but two is big payday deals won't be like they have been.

If there was a 5 year contact limit, do Parise/Suter make 98 Million dollars by age 40?

guestimate for Parise, 5 year deal at 7.5 AAV (5*7.5=37.5, 2nd deal won't be for that much, lets say 5*6.3AAV=31.5, 3rd retirement deal say a 2*5 (inflation, it would be a decade from now after all) so last deal at best what 10ish million.

so adding up the 37.5+31.5+10 we get 79 million, now this is all speculation and that number is vastly better then getting nothing, but by changing rules regarding FA and such NHL is trying to limit growth of player pay in the future, this assumes Parise is allowed to become a FA at his current age, if the new rules are in effect and he makes it there at age 30 he makes less.

i guess the term pay reduction may not the most applicable one, more something along the lines of

Pay Potential

forthewild is offline