View Single Post
11-24-2012, 04:37 PM
Registered User
Riptide's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,565
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
I just don't see why you have to limit contracts to 5 years. Teams will know about the added insurance costs and will have to weight that against the benefit of signing that player to a longer term. Players will continue to sacrifice some money per for longterm security. I don't see a huge problem with that.

People are pointing out that the NBA already has that cap, how has that helped them? It looks to me like a lot of their current issues with stars moving teams and the lack of competitive balance stem from this.
Yes, but now you're saying that the team has complete control over that (and they do in the sense that they can walk away), but don't be naive. The players/agents push for these contracts, leaving the GM with the choice of trying to better their team and paying a premium to do so, or walking away - and dealing with the impact of not having on-ice success.

Limiting this to something reasonable, removes this from the equation. Now it would come down to location, team/players/staff and money. So while it still might be who has the biggest pocket, now that's taking the cap more into account than it did previously.

As for the PA's offer, I like it. However it's not enough. Change it to 6-7 years, AND make it count towards every existing contract. Otherwise I don't blame the NHL for not really liking it - however it is something that they should be able to negotiate around.

I've been looking for trouble... but trouble hasn't been cooperating!
Riptide is offline   Reply With Quote