View Single Post
Old
12-13-2012, 01:55 AM
  #24
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,988
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoast View Post
I think the NHL is having a hard time finding a wedge issue because different aspects of the CBC impact players differently.

Contracting rights is very important to guys who are about to become RFA or UFA - they don't want 1 or 2 years or other conditions added to FA eligibility.

The next generation of stars are hurt by extension of FA eligibility - owners really want to put the clamps on the 2nd contract windfall that so many players have cashed in on. This would be at the expense of your up and coming star players.

Older players, particularly the upper echelon ones, won't want to see limitations on contract terms. Even though there are relatively few really long contracts, longer contract mean security.

Lowering the players share of HRR (basically the cap) probably hurts the veteran 4th line and depth defense players the most. Teams are going to spend what they need to on their star players and divide what's left among the depth players. Veteran role players take the hit here, because they are not waiver eligible (assuming this doesn't change) so can be replaced by a young guy from the farm who can be sent down without cap implications.
That's been off the table for a while now. The only contract issues is contract length and variance.

The lower share will squish everyone - especially those that need new deals in the next 2 years. After that it'll level out a bit.

As for the contract limits, no one was getting deals longer than 5 years before the cap. Yashin had one, and that's it - currently 89 players have a deal longer than 5 years. So security clearly wasn't a big deal a decade ago... why has it suddenly popped up now?

__________________
I've been looking for trouble... but trouble hasn't been cooperating!
Riptide is online now   Reply With Quote