View Single Post
12-06-2012, 06:40 AM
Can't Beat Him
nyr2k2's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 22,753
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by jniklast View Post
I just don't get why the NHLPA has such a huge problem with contract length limits. Right now there are just 22 players with a deal longer than the future limit of seven years for own players. Now if they could maybe meet at 6/8 years, then it's just 42 players overall with 7+ year contracts and 18 players with 9+. And we all know that most of those contracts won't be fulfilled by the players anyway.

It really is only an issue for very few very good players. And they will earn more than enough money, no matter what CBA.
I don't think it's strictly the length that's an issue, rather it's the whole package--variance included. There are cap circumventing deals, such as what Kovalchuk initially signed, and then there are cap softening deals. A 5% variance with a six year limit eliminates the softening deals as well and makes it very difficult for a guy to actually get a max-length deal.

On top of that, it lowers the bar for where a player can start negotiating. You always start negotiations with more favorable terms than what you think you'll actually get. Now, players lose negotiating leverage, since they can't even ask for more than six years. They'll have to start at that point and probably settle for less. The NHLPA wants to preserve as much leverage as they can for their guys.

Finally, it has a trickle down effect on all players. The elite players will maybe get six year deals, and then the next tier of guys will have to accept less, the tier below them even less, and so on. It might not seem like it affects a ton of guys, but it eliminates a variable in the UFA market and restricts bargaining power for everyone--since free agent deals are always based on previous precedents. If elite player X has to settle for six years, then player Y who may have received 6 years under the previous system will now almost assuredly have to settle for 5 or less, and on down the line.

EDIT: I'm using six years as a max with the assumption that the owners would budge from five.


It's just pain.

Last edited by nyr2k2: 12-06-2012 at 06:45 AM.
nyr2k2 is offline