Short term deals better?
View Single Post
07-31-2006, 05:17 PM
Join Date: May 2004
Originally Posted by
Good point , the bottoml ine is the players want no risk in any deals. If he signs for
$ 2 mil and plays like crap ,he gets paid , if he plays as expected , he gets his 2 mil
if he plays above, he squawks and gets an extension . The year later he goes back to mediocrity and now the extension you gave him is out of whack , because you expected more from him . But as long as the payer/agent get their scratch who cares if the owner gets the bad end of the deal . Until these retarded people in the hockey world wake up and collectivley be on the same page , this will never end .
Management/Ownership knows this.... Unless the contract states that a player needs to score this many points for the contract to be valid for the next year, plays this many minutes, etc... has conditions written into the contract, than I don't see why the player shouldn't be entitled to receiving the full value of the contract he signed.
The escrow system is supposed to alleviate the fiscal uncertainty of year-to-year operations. In time, there should be some kind of equilibrium in terms of where the cap will be, the volume of FA's/year... right now, everyone is getting a lot more because they're not used to this many players being available at once. It'll still be a silly season, but not as much of one. Especially if we have this many long-term contracts already in the league...
View Public Profile
Visit saskhab's homepage!
Find More Posts by saskhab