View Single Post
11-11-2012, 10:12 AM
Gary says it's A-OK
therealkoho's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: the Prior
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,946
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by MtlPenFan View Post
Let's not kid ourselves. While owners and GM's have been complicit in these long deals, it's not like agents were sitting at the bargaining table for their big time clients and were clueless as to how to go about circumventing the cap.

Besides, what are they fighting for again? It's barely a fraction of players who sign these kinds of deals.
undoubtedly, but the fraction that do sign them have the ability to be game changers

Originally Posted by DuklaNation View Post
In a lot of these threads there is a fundamental lack of economic knowledge, namely supply & demand. We wouldnt need contract term limits if the supply exceeded demand. Unfortunately that isnt the case in this league.
agreed the supply of high end elite type does not exceed demand

Originally Posted by Wingsfan2965 View Post
Well let's see here, in the ten seasons before the cap, five different teams won Cups. (DET and NJD 3 times each, Colorado twice, Tampa and Dallas once)

In the seven season since the lockout, seven different teams have won Cups, only one of them from the previous ten years of Cup winners.

Yeah, adding the cap did nothing to form parity.
maybe so, but, and there's always that but! While most Canadian teams can survive years in the wilderness between cups, it's hardly so for some of the outposts in the southern markets. General fan enthusiasm generated by that 1 winning season dries up rather quickly in the non trad markets and that includes the money generated through corporate sponsorship, the team then quickly becomes a money loser.

Believe me I'm not advocating solely for dynasty teams, but it has been proven in league after league that having that dynastic type franchise just makes the opposing fan more vociferous and the home fan more loyal. It took a long time for Islander fans to turn their backs on a team that won them 4 SC's, many of the staunchest Islander supporters today were around for those wins.

Long term front loaded deals are disingenuous and imco detrimental to the league's health. A team like Nashville could afford one of those ridiculous amount of outlay but not two of those type of deals. Going forward while still a very solid organization they now have little to no chance to bring a cup home, how long will the fan base support this situation becomes the question.

Had there been term limits it's highly possible that there was very little chance of either of those guys leaving and possibly even resulted in getting Parise down there for the "be with my buddy angle" that ended up being played out in Minny.

In general if the league wants to have a cap then there should be safeguards written into the CBA in order to have not just the owners, but the players and their agents abide by it. I have nothing against contracts being 10 years long if the players want them, they would have to give up something to get them and that is at least 3 years of guaranteed monies, not to mention no difference more then a 5% decline between any two years of that contract

therealkoho is offline   Reply With Quote