View Single Post
Old
12-07-2012, 08:49 PM
  #63
4evaBlue
Corsi != Possession
 
4evaBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,540
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by diceman934 View Post
That sounds reasonable....it would also work.

The NHL wants to control themselves with the 5 year term....they are saying they can not help themselves and want a clause that protects themselves from themselves.....the 5 year and 7 if it is your own effectively makes free agency mute.....the current team can offer more term....and hence more money and there is no way the players should except this.

They battled hard for UFA and now the NHL wants to eliminate it effectively.....the only way a player would leave is if they were going to be paid vastly more over 5 years. If that is the hill that the NHL is going to die on....die on it they will!
Honestly, it won't be any worse than what's been becoming the trend of late. Teams locking up their superstars at a very young age. The majority of the UFAs have been 2nd rate (or worse) players, or stars who wanted to move to a specific team (Richards, Parise, Suter, etc).

If your team offers you a 7 year extension, and some other team offers you a 5 year contract with $2M more per season, which one do you take? The difference is, this scenario wouldn't fall into the category of $26M signing bonuses BS.

4evaBlue is offline