View Single Post
Old
12-05-2012, 10:57 AM
  #549
Riptide
Registered User
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,341
vCash: 500
Quote:
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