View Single Post
11-13-2012, 06:10 PM
Registered User
DAChampion's Avatar
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,850
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Forsead View Post
The problem with your reasoning is the fact that you omit that there is already a difference in contracts in the CBA. A rookie, is almost always a bargain and same thing about alot of the RFA's, because of the nature of their contracts. That's not really what Kriss E is referring. I think he is talking about the UFA's, where in my mind it's clear there is more overpaid players that underpaid ones.
Again, since players get exactly 57%, the amount of overpayments to overpaid players exactly equals the amount of underpayment to underpaid players. That's a mathematical identity, as total payroll is fixed.

I agree, however, that there is a transfer of wealth from rookies to veterans. Players on entry-level and second contracts are underpaid relative to UFAs. Since this is a direct transfer of wealth, you cannot legitimately complain about some UFAs like Gomez, Kovalchuk, etc being overpaid without also complaining that rookies and second-contract players (Subban, Pacioretty, etc) are underpaid. These are not independent and distinct phenomena. These are two sides of the same coin. You have to complain about neither or both sides of the coin. You cannot complain about one side of the coin and praise the other as Kriss E was doing.

Personally, I would rather see offer-sheet compensation decrease, so that the value of youth contracts go up. I think that players should get comparable salaries for comparable production. I think that would be more fair. But I also think it's unlikely to happen.

DAChampion is offline