View Single Post
07-12-2013, 10:21 AM
Mc5RingsAndABeer's Avatar
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 19,141
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
Generally your opinion would be wrong.

Lets phrase it in simplest terms. Gagner and Smid are actual NHL players of actual NHL value and worth. Lets say you're an agent. You have a choice between making 10% cut off of these players contracts or deferring several years to make a future cut off some kid thats years away. What agent would defer 10% of say 8M annual income starting immediately for the prospect of an income that won't be able to achieve that annual rate of return even optimally for about 10yrs? Given best case scenario. Worst case being never making a dime off that player. Then consider all the years you waited for that prospect to give you any foreseeable return and how much behind you are on accrued value.

Present established value trumps prospective value except in very special instances. Connor Mcdavid may prove to be that exception. But Klefbom and J Schultz are not likely in that prospective league.
I don't think that applies in this day and age with modern scouting for the top guys like McDavid. Even if he's overhyped like Tavares, he's going to end up an ELITE player. One scout said he'd have taken McDavid over Jones/MacKinnon/anyone else in this last draft (if he were eligible). I would agree that you're right for most prospects being like boom/bust stocks, but the top guys are exceptions. They're much more sure things than in the past.

If I were an agent then it would be different due to ELCs and the nature of the salary cap. A top pick, especially if it's a forward, usually drastically exceed the value of their ELCs by the time it's up. A much bigger factor that highlights the difference between agent salaries and player value is the distribution of salaries due to the cap. Four 2.5m players aren't worth anywhere near Crosby, but they'd make the agent the same.

Mc5RingsAndABeer is offline   Reply With Quote