View Single Post
12-05-2012, 09:57 AM
Registered User
Riptide's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,865
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Kimota View Post
What I meant was if the player has signed the three years entry deal first, then sign for 5 years, he won't be RFA after this no matter what since it would put the whole thing at 8 years, right. What's the disadvantage from the player's perspective if he sign a 5 year deal in his second contract instead of 7 or 10 years? He gets to be UFA, right.
One of the changes the league asked for was that ELC's would be changed. My understanding of it, was that it would be a hybrid 2-4 year contract, in that the player had to play 2 full NHL seasons (I think 41+ games counts as a season), or 4 years in the minors for it to expire. In that scenario (with the FA change they asked for), the player would have 7 years in, and still be a RFA.

However it's possible they won't be able to get that this time around. So instead of swinging for the fences, get the 5 yr contract limit, and get the 50% and drop the puck. Then next time around evaluate where things stand. If there's a chance to chip away at something else (ELCs?) then do so. If not, and everyone's making money, then leave it as is.

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