Lockout Discussion Thread 4.0
View Single Post
12-10-2012, 03:25 AM
Join Date: Oct 2006
Originally Posted by
Not a Fish
You argue well and have raised some very valid points in support of the players. Others are showing their support for the owners. I support the team and not individual players. If a player gets traded he's gone. That's it that's all. Therefore, I don't care if the players/owners get 40% vs. 60% or 50% vs. 50%.
What I care about is what's best for my team; what's best for the Montreal Canadiens.
1. I like UFA to start at 29 or even 30 years old so that we keep our prospects longer (owners are asking for free agency to start at 28 yrs of age, therefore I support the owners on this point).
2. I would like to see a clause that makes it illegal to give players a no trade clause. I like to see more trades just like in the old days.
3. Teams should be able to negotiate and execute trades anytime during the year except during the playoffs.
4. No Player should not be allowed to veto a trade, or refuse to report to another team .
5. When negotiating trades, teams should be allowed to negotiate the percentage of the player salary that will be going to the other team and will therefore become part of the other team's salary cap.
6. Teams should be allowed to send any player down and to bring any player up from the AHL without going through wavers.
7. I don't see how offering a player a 10 or 15 year contract is good for the game.
Set maximum contract length to: 8 years (players under 25), 6 years ( players under 28)
, 4 years (players over 30).
problem with that, and that's why I dont get this from the Owners part, is that you set up yourself for a lot of contract negociations while the players are in their prime.
Over time, longer contracts arent necessarly bad for the teams/league. For example, Everyone went crazy over Dipietro's contract, but below 5M for a GOOD goalie is a bargain nowadays, sure he got injured and all, but you get the point. Same for the Ov, Malkin, Crosby of the league, they may make a little more than they should, but by giving them a longer contract you're pretty much guaranteed to have all the good years the players can give ya.
I mean, we just drafted Galchenyuk, (assuming he becomes what he's projected to), do you really want to have to negotiate 3 or 4 contracts before he reaches his 30's or would you rather play it safe and make sure to have him till he's 33 or 34 ?
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by ECWHSWI