HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Darcy Regier seriously calling out the rest of the NHL

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-04-2005, 09:13 PM
  #51
PecaFan
Registered User
 
PecaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Ottawa (Go 'Nucks)
Posts: 8,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by fullmetalninja
Regier is trying to cover his Ass.

The Hawks have dramatically improved their team and are standing at a 21 mil (including RFAs Bell and Arnason, but not TBO) payroll right now. I hardly see how they are overpaying.
Absolutely. Yeah, some guys have gone a bit high, but the Sabres couldn't even be bothered to pay their guys who did deserve decent contracts like Satan.

It's not like they had the cap to worry about. At this point, the Sabres will be lucky if they even hit cap minimum.

PecaFan is offline  
Old
08-04-2005, 09:15 PM
  #52
Bobby Lou
We Surrender
 
Bobby Lou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Crease
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,350
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shane
Yeah, and Dan McGillis is making $4.1 million, Vladimir Malakhov is making $3.6 million, Marek Malik is making $2.5 million. Those contracts are an absolute joke.
Anyway you look at it these are TERRIBLE contracts. There have been a buttload of just awful deals being handed out. Under this new system anything over 3 years is just asking for trouble considering the turnover in UFA's and the fact we simply do not know how this new system is going to play out. I can understand the criticism Regier is raising, but at the same time I can understand how people might view this as him 'covering his ass'. Regardless there have been some absolutely braindead contracts handed out this offseason, but I don't really care considering the GM's who handed them out are gonna be screwed when the new CBA starts to balance out. Anyone signed at 5 years is a terrible idea, especially anyone over 30...wtf are they thinking?

Bobby Lou is offline  
Old
08-04-2005, 09:17 PM
  #53
X0ssbar
 
X0ssbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: ...on a star!
Country: United States
Posts: 13,011
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badger Bob
It'll take a while before we see the full impact of the new CBA, but, in the meantime, let's be serious. In his defense, there have been some questionable contracts being handed out. As has been pointed out, some of the FA signings have come from surprising sources (Columbus? Florida?). The lengths of some of them are surprising too. Pronger getting 5 years. Jeez, wasn't there just talk of his career being in jeopardy a little over a year ago? Now, he's worth a long-term commitment on a franchise, which was one of the NHL small market poster children.

At least we won't see anything again along the lines of what Yashin got out on Long Island...
What has Columbus done that is so surprising? They have a total payroll now of 21.8 million that includes 16 players signed - including the Foote/Berard/Prusek UFA acquisitions. The longest term being 3 years for Foote. Throw in Nash/Klesla/Svitov and you are looking at a payroll of 28 - 30 million. How on earth is this overspending? Columbus had a payroll of 28 million (over 30 million with bonuses paid out) pre-lockout. How quickly we forget that C-bus was one of the teams that actually made money pre-lockout with that payroll. They aren't doing anything differently than before except now they are actually attracting decent talent instead of overspending on guys like Richardson/Lachance/Marchant.

I know your not just picking on C-bus but I think there is some serious over-reacting going on in this thread. Teams that have cap space are adding some key guys - just b/c they may overspend by 500k - 1mil to attact a decent guy doesn't mean they aren't being fiscally responsible.

Every team is going to be able to afford a top notch guy or two and then will fill out the rest of their roster with cheaper talent. It doesn't mean they are breaking the bank or being fiscally irresponsible - it just means the talent/money available is being spread out amongst the 30 franchises.

X0ssbar is offline  
Old
08-04-2005, 09:18 PM
  #54
NYR469
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,785
vCash: 500
almost every guy that has signed so far has been overpaid for a cap system (obviously there are exceptions)...and many of those have come from small market teams.

my theory for that is for years those teams have said they couldn't complete with the big market teams and they needed a salary cap. so their fans sat thru the lockout being told that when it was all over they would finally be able to compete...well if the lockout ended and all the top guys still signed with the same big market teams and those small market teams got no one the fans would flip.

so as a result those teams were willing to overpay a bit to land guys so they can now say "see we told you" which will get fans excited and increase ticket sales. they might regret the deals in year 3-4 of the contract but for the short terms it makes total sense for them.

NYR469 is offline  
Old
08-04-2005, 09:26 PM
  #55
oilers_guy_eddie
Registered User
 
oilers_guy_eddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Intolerable climate
Country: Norfolk Island
Posts: 10,701
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruinster
I agree with Regier, Hey even the Bruins send that kind of deal

Something i can't explain is why with no cap everyone who'll ask for more than 4M is almost sure to be kick out of Boston , but now with a cap we've already signed 3 players over 4M minus Joe ,samething with Edmonton, Chicago, Pittsburgh and a couple of others teams???
From an Oiler perspective, I don't see a problem here. The team has been saying for years that they were planning for the post-CBA environment. And now we're in the post-CBA environment, and the team has brought in some quality players as promised.

The Oilers have always operated with a self-imposed cap of around $32 million, and will do so again this year. The only difference is that this time around, $32 million puts a better team on the ice.

oilers_guy_eddie is offline  
Old
08-04-2005, 09:27 PM
  #56
Darth Milbury
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Darth Milbury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Searching for Kvasha
Country: Bosnia and Herzegovina
Posts: 38,154
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isles_Goal
Take a look at Buffaloed's post above and tell me if you still feel this way.

I think all these longterm contracts to 30ish players are counter productive.

He (the EVIL ONE) should have stood pat, let Peca walk next summer, and bought Yashin out at that time. The Isles would then be in a wondeful position to benifit from the coming glut of better (and less expensive UFAs).

Darth Milbury is offline  
Old
08-04-2005, 09:28 PM
  #57
GaryU
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Schaumburg,Il
Posts: 2,921
vCash: 500
I guess it's safe to say (after reading this thread), NOBODY knows what's gonna happen....As far as 'ridiculous' contracts being handed out (not mentioning any names...Hatcher)??? Far as I'm concerned, as long as they don't get near $39m this year, they're fine for next. I believe it's a little early to pass out the pills.
Darcy, you just keep doing whatever you're doing.

GaryU is offline  
Old
08-04-2005, 09:36 PM
  #58
WalterSobchak
Blues Trololol
 
WalterSobchak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,835
vCash: 146
I thought this was relevant.

TSN.ca

Quote:
Bruins GM Mike O'Connell agrees it's a risk, but says the market dictated what happened. Especially in his case, since he entered the week with only five players under contract and needed to be aggressive. He signed off on a pair of four-year deals (Murray and Scatchard) and one three-year commitment (Alexei Zhamnov).

"We are very concerned about that (cap space) going forward but I had no options," O'Connell said. "I had to sign guys."
An intersting point that what was seen as some pretty good Post-CBA planning may have backfired on the Bruins in the end.

WalterSobchak is offline  
Old
08-04-2005, 09:50 PM
  #59
Vlad The Impaler
Registered User
 
Vlad The Impaler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 11,727
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macman
I bet that a lot of the guys who are telling Regier to suck it up and stop whining are some of the same guys who used to whine about the Leafs, Rangers, Wings and Avalanche for spending big.

Regier is right. Many of these contracts are ridiculous. I thought the whole reason for the lockout was because the owners had learned their lesson financially. Apparently not. The absolute top end for a contract under a $39 mil cap than will only get lower next year should be $5 mil a year and not a penny more -- and that should be for only a handful of guys in the entire league. There are going to be a lot of GMs who will regret the day they saddled themselves with big four- and five-year contracts for guys in their 30s with gimpy knees.
None of this makes any sense. If the owners didn't want to spend upward of $5M, they should have put it in the CBA.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Macman
The other thing I don't understand is how teams that were supposedly losing a ton of money with payrolls that were nowhere near $39 mil a season are now fine with spending near that amount now.
It's because:

1-Revenue sharing

2-The players they can get are actually worth it and the system allows a good turnover for every team.

It makes no sense to pay $5M on some bum. But suddenly, it makes a lot of sense for the Oilers to pay a superstar like Pronger this amount.

I am amazed at how many people think they've got this whole new environment figured out when they really don't understand the situation. It's pretty simple and makes perfect sense.

Vlad The Impaler is offline  
Old
08-04-2005, 09:50 PM
  #60
TVanek26*
 
TVanek26*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Buffalo,New York
Country: United States
Posts: 8,583
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to TVanek26*
Quote:
Originally Posted by PecaFan
It's not like they had the cap to worry about. At this point, the Sabres will be lucky if they even hit cap minimum.

Again,people who make remarks like this have no clue what they're talking about.Buffalo will have a self imposed cap of 28 million for this year.What Regier will do next off-season,will sign a guy like Wade Redden or Zdeno Chara,because he will be on of the teams with any cap room next year.Players like those 2 are younger,and just hitting their prime.

TVanek26* is offline  
Old
08-04-2005, 10:01 PM
  #61
Buffaloed
Administrator
Webmaster
 
Buffaloed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Buffalo, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 24,940
vCash: 1280
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielBriere48
Again,people who make remarks like this have no clue what they're talking about.
Attacking other posters only makes you look bad and provokes a counter-attack. It adds nothing to the quality of the discussion.

Quote:
Buffalo will have a self imposed cap of 28 million for this year.
They can't go much higher than $28 million and be assured they'll be eligible for revenue sharing. If they lose out on that it defeats the whole purpose of the CBA for them. Today's signing of Numminen brings them to approx $26 million in signed contracts and offers to RFA's. There's not any wiggle room to make any major signings. Regier could have changed that by not qualifying players such as Connolly, Pyatt, Jillson, and Kotalik, but he elected to stick with them.

Buffaloed is offline  
Old
08-04-2005, 10:10 PM
  #62
Vlad The Impaler
Registered User
 
Vlad The Impaler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 11,727
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Milbury
Take a look at Buffaloed's post above and tell me if you still feel this way.

I think all these longterm contracts to 30ish players are counter productive.

He (the EVIL ONE) should have stood pat, let Peca walk next summer, and bought Yashin out at that time. The Isles would then be in a wondeful position to benifit from the coming glut of better (and less expensive UFAs).
On the surface, this sounds like a plan. I don't think it's going to work quite that way. First of all, many of the players being signed are not that old. A decline in production can happen any time based on a number of circumstances.

Secondly, I think people really underrate the competitive aspect of this. The contracts are going to be pretty similar for stars. A difference of a few dollars and the player will choose a situation he prefers.

Bobby Clarke attracted Peter Forsberg for less dollars. Because it's the Flyers and the player perceived a competitive advantage there.

The margin between star players (as far as financial compensation) is thinning.

The teams that are going to do well in this cap are those who can build momentum and ice a quality product and be perceived as attractive. I am skeptical that all of a sudden there won't be any money to throw around at one point. There will ALWAYS be a team to outbid you. There are 30 teams in this league. If people are waiting for a bigass crop of players to be available for Regier, I don't think it will happen. Next years other contracts will end, someone else will step up and "overpay" if they want the player. There isn't going to be a magical point where suddenly you've got all these options to sign. I don't expect a "supply overflow" and a low demand anytime soon.

Already, certain players are forfeiting their UFA status because they like where they are. Iginla did so. It will go on and on.

You have to establish your team in this new environment, or you sign leftovers (for contracts which may not give you the best bang for the buck). As a weak team, you decide at what point you are ready to establish yourself and what assets you need to acquire to do so. Then you have to make a statement and show you are serious.

As I said in a previous post, perhaps Doug MacLean perceives Adam Foote as a $3M. Who knows? But I know this. If he offers an average "fair" price (whatever that is) that should be the everyday price, Foote says "you're right, that's what I'm worth, and that's what this contender offers me too, so see you around because I'm not signing for the same amount on YOUR team".

If MacLean has correctly identified his team needs, if this works, if his team becomes competitive, in a couple of years he will be the one in a position to offer less money to a player who will find Columbus an attractive destination. But right now, if you offer no incentive to a player, to beat the other bids, you have to offer dollars.

The real demonstration of this is that over the years, many of the teams who got "breaks" from players were ultra-rich teams that were perceived as competitive. When Kariya was ready to sign at a bargain price, he didn't go see a team in needs of a break financially. He went to the bigass Colorado franchise and signed for a song. Guys like Brett Hull restructured their contracts in Detroit so the Wings could accomodate one more salary.

I bet you anything that next year, there will be other teams stepping up. If Regier continues to wait, he will wait forever. Lots of teams in this league still waiting to make a splash. And lots of teams trying to establish themselves as a force in the new environment.

Vlad The Impaler is offline  
Old
08-04-2005, 10:25 PM
  #63
Cawz
Registered User
 
Cawz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Oiler fan in Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,026
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badger Bob
In his defense, there have been some questionable contracts being handed out. As has been pointed out, some of the FA signings have come from surprising sources (Columbus? Florida?). The lengths of some of them are surprising too. Pronger getting 5 years. Jeez, wasn't there just talk of his career being in jeopardy a little over a year ago? Now, he's worth a long-term commitment on a franchise, which was one of the NHL small market poster children
Thats a very closed minded way of looking at it. Did you not read this post in this thread?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad The Impaler
I don't understand why people are surprised small teams are offering nice contracts. They HAVE to. You're not going to attract good free agents on a suck-squad by offering equal money. This is the lesson of the Forsberg deal. Players are going to sign affordable contracts only if they perceive other advantages, like competitiveness (or family situation, or whatever).

I still don't understand why people mention Columbus as a culprit. The Foote signing is a nice one and is perfectly logical in this environment. If you don't try to become competitive, it's not gonna happen by magic. If you make the right decisions and build a winner, THEN you can attract free agents on the strength of your competitiveness and probably get slightly better deals. If you offer Foote $3.5, and if that's the best he can get, you can be sure he's going to earn this $3.5 in an establish market, not Columbus.

Few players are going to sign for Buffalo at the average market price, unless there's no room elsewhere for you. Why would you sign a "fair" contract to be part of a team that has been GMed by a guy who put his testicles in a drawer years ago? A team that has no proven track record, in an unremarkable market? It's not gonna happen if another team offers similar money. That's reality of the market place in a league.


Last edited by Cawz: 08-04-2005 at 10:32 PM. Reason: ****ed up the quote owner
Cawz is offline  
Old
08-04-2005, 10:34 PM
  #64
Isles_Goal
Registered User
 
Isles_Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: NY
Posts: 1,020
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Isles_Goal
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Milbury
Take a look at Buffaloed's post above and tell me if you still feel this way.

I think all these longterm contracts to 30ish players are counter productive.

He (the EVIL ONE) should have stood pat, let Peca walk next summer, and bought Yashin out at that time. The Isles would then be in a wondeful position to benifit from the coming glut of better (and less expensive UFAs).

Maybe so but since they didn't buy him out they needed once and for all to get a much needed winger for Yashin...and getting rid of Peca was the right thing to do...as they wouldn't have gotten anything for him by letting him walk...and he did not want to be with the Isles anymore.

The Evil One is not my favorite by far...but this time he got it right and there is some excitement to look forward to this coming season...and I bet this will result in more fans going to the game.

Isles_Goal is offline  
Old
08-04-2005, 10:45 PM
  #65
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,515
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buffaloed
They can't go much higher than $28 million and be assured they'll be eligible for revenue sharing. If they lose out on that it defeats the whole purpose of the CBA for them. Today's signing of Numminen brings them to approx $26 million in signed contracts and offers to RFA's. There's not any wiggle room to make any major signings. Regier could have changed that by not qualifying players such as Connolly, Pyatt, Jillson, and Kotalik, but he elected to stick with them.
As far as I know, there is no longer an upper payroll limit for clubs receiving revenue sharing. There was speculation that $29M was the limit when revenue sharing was rumored to be Luxury Tax based - teams reaceiving Lux tax $'s couldn't also be paying them. Revenue sharing now is NOT based on a luxury tax, but purely on team revenues - from the top 10 revenue teams to the bottom 15.

The CBA FAQ does not list any payroll restrictions:

Quote:
What Clubs will be eligible for revenue-sharing subsidies?

All Clubs that: (1) are ranked in the bottom half (bottom 15) in League revenues, and (2) operate in markets with a Demographic Market Area of 2.5 million or fewer TV households.
Note that clause (2) is really only an anti-Wirtz clause. The only markets that have more than 2.5M TV households (not 2.5M population) are NY, LA, Chicago, and Philly - Rangers, Isles, Devils, Kings, Ducks, Hawks, and Flyers. The only two teams screwed by that clause are the Hawks and the Isles.

kdb209 is offline  
Old
08-04-2005, 10:53 PM
  #66
Tap on the Ankle
Nobody remembers No2
 
Tap on the Ankle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,548
vCash: 500
Personally, I'm delighted that other teams are locking themselves into long-term contracts worth big $$$. That way, when Chara and Redden are eligible for UFA next summer, there's a better chance the Sens can retain their services, since there won't be as many teams who will be able to bid for them.

Tap on the Ankle is offline  
Old
08-04-2005, 11:02 PM
  #67
PecaFan
Registered User
 
PecaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Ottawa (Go 'Nucks)
Posts: 8,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielBriere48
Again,people who make remarks like this have no clue what they're talking about.Buffalo will have a self imposed cap of 28 million for this year.
AKA not even trying to compete this year. And I'll put my clue quotient up against anyone, thank you very much.

Quote:
What Regier will do next off-season,will sign a guy like Wade Redden or Zdeno Chara,because he will be on of the teams with any cap room next year.Players like those 2 are younger,and just hitting their prime.
Ah, I see. So *next* year it's ok to spend like a drunken sailer, and he'll be right there in the feeding trough with everyone. But this year, anyone doing it is a spendthrift fool?

PecaFan is offline  
Old
08-04-2005, 11:08 PM
  #68
Buffaloed
Administrator
Webmaster
 
Buffaloed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Buffalo, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 24,940
vCash: 1280
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209
As far as I know, there is no longer an upper payroll limit for clubs receiving revenue sharing. There was speculation that $29M was the limit when revenue sharing was rumored to be Luxury Tax based - teams reaceiving Lux tax $'s couldn't also be paying them. Revenue sharing now is NOT based on a luxury tax, but purely on team revenues - from the top 10 revenue teams to the bottom 15.

The CBA FAQ does not list any payroll restrictions:

The CBA FAQ leaves out a ton of details. It's a 600+ page document after all.

This article on the Leafs site published after the CBA was ratified seems to indicate there is some kind of payroll formula being used for revenue sharing.


New CBA Presents New Challenges

Quote:
And at the other end of the economic spectrum, look for so-called small market clubs like Nashville, Florida, Pittsburgh and Phoenix to land somewhere in the middle of the salary grid. If Nashville has a salary total higher than $28.6 million, for example, that would eliminate the Predators from the second tier of the league's profit-sharing plan where the 10 most profitable clubs give money to subsidize the lowest 15.
The NHL CBA FAQ only states which teams will be eligible to receive revenue sharing. It doesn't state that those teams will definitely receive it. Whenever the word "eligible" is used, it means there's strings attached. We'll have to wait for the details to come out to know for sure, but I can't imagine the Sabres not having a $32-34 million payroll as they did in 2004, unless there was a catch to the revenue sharing scheme that would prevent them from receiving significant money.

Buffaloed is offline  
Old
08-04-2005, 11:24 PM
  #69
skippyx
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 27
vCash: 500
If this guy wants a handout from the high revenue teams then he should shut his trap about how his parents spend their money as long as they give him his allowance.

-Three of the best player in the world signed for over 2 million less than the max (Forsberg) or 1.8 million less than the max (Naslund and Iginla).
-Top pair defenseman like Hatcher, Zhitnik and Gonchar sign for less than half the max.
-The Flames get McCarty and Amonte for less than 3 million combined.

Did Foote get a few extra hundred grand than he should have? Maybe but how else do you get him to play in Ohio?

I fail to see the insane signings. Where are the rangers paying khabibulin and Niedermayer 15.6 million combined? It never happened, not even close.

skippyx is offline  
Old
08-04-2005, 11:39 PM
  #70
MLH
Registered User
 
MLH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,292
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by fisher
Personally, I'm delighted that other teams are locking themselves into long-term contracts worth big $$$. That way, when Chara and Redden are eligible for UFA next summer, there's a better chance the Sens can retain their services, since there won't be as many teams who will be able to bid for them.
Except for the "do-nothing crybaby dummy" Darcy Regier.

MLH is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 12:08 AM
  #71
loadie
Official Beer Taster
 
loadie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: New Brunswick
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,077
vCash: 500
The way I look at it is this: There's a cap out there, and if my teams GM chooses to spend it on so called washed up, overaged players, so be it. If we max out to the cap limit and we can't sign anyone next year, I'll have to live with it. If your GM chooses to wait and see what's happening and does nothing, so be it. Maybe next year he'll look like a genius when there's arguably better and younger players to sign. However, if I was a fan of a team that had the chance to sign a big name player to get butts back in the seats and get a city excited, and my GM didn't do anything, I would be pissed. The playing field has been levelled with the new CBA, and if you choose not to play, so be it.

loadie is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 12:14 AM
  #72
Vlad The Impaler
Registered User
 
Vlad The Impaler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 11,727
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MLH
Except for the "do-nothing crybaby dummy" Darcy Regier.
And many other teams.

Vlad The Impaler is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 01:22 AM
  #73
PECAhead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 418
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad The Impaler
On the surface, this sounds like a plan. I don't think it's going to work quite that way. First of all, many of the players being signed are not that old. A decline in production can happen any time based on a number of circumstances.

Secondly, I think people really underrate the competitive aspect of this. The contracts are going to be pretty similar for stars. A difference of a few dollars and the player will choose a situation he prefers.

Bobby Clarke attracted Peter Forsberg for less dollars. Because it's the Flyers and the player perceived a competitive advantage there.

The margin between star players (as far as financial compensation) is thinning.

The teams that are going to do well in this cap are those who can build momentum and ice a quality product and be perceived as attractive. I am skeptical that all of a sudden there won't be any money to throw around at one point. There will ALWAYS be a team to outbid you. There are 30 teams in this league. If people are waiting for a bigass crop of players to be available for Regier, I don't think it will happen. Next years other contracts will end, someone else will step up and "overpay" if they want the player. There isn't going to be a magical point where suddenly you've got all these options to sign. I don't expect a "supply overflow" and a low demand anytime soon.

Already, certain players are forfeiting their UFA status because they like where they are. Iginla did so. It will go on and on.

You have to establish your team in this new environment, or you sign leftovers (for contracts which may not give you the best bang for the buck). As a weak team, you decide at what point you are ready to establish yourself and what assets you need to acquire to do so. Then you have to make a statement and show you are serious.

As I said in a previous post, perhaps Doug MacLean perceives Adam Foote as a $3M. Who knows? But I know this. If he offers an average "fair" price (whatever that is) that should be the everyday price, Foote says "you're right, that's what I'm worth, and that's what this contender offers me too, so see you around because I'm not signing for the same amount on YOUR team".

If MacLean has correctly identified his team needs, if this works, if his team becomes competitive, in a couple of years he will be the one in a position to offer less money to a player who will find Columbus an attractive destination. But right now, if you offer no incentive to a player, to beat the other bids, you have to offer dollars.

The real demonstration of this is that over the years, many of the teams who got "breaks" from players were ultra-rich teams that were perceived as competitive. When Kariya was ready to sign at a bargain price, he didn't go see a team in needs of a break financially. He went to the bigass Colorado franchise and signed for a song. Guys like Brett Hull restructured their contracts in Detroit so the Wings could accomodate one more salary.

I bet you anything that next year, there will be other teams stepping up. If Regier continues to wait, he will wait forever. Lots of teams in this league still waiting to make a splash. And lots of teams trying to establish themselves as a force in the new environment.

Very well written. I concur with you on all your points.

I think that this CBA will accelerate the cycle of building and rebuilding of teams. Amongst that flux there will be plenty of opportunities for an organization to load or unload players while still remaining under the cap.

PECAhead is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 01:48 AM
  #74
Jaded-Fan
Registered User
 
Jaded-Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 32,950
vCash: 500
This is a misleading thread. Is it obvious only to me that the target was not other teams or their fans but his own? That he was explaining to an increasingly antsy fan base why they were doing what they were doing? Yyou should have seen the chat board here last night . . .buffalo fans were out in force and looking for bridges from which to jump. And do you know what? I agree with the guy. The dollars given do not bother me so much (though it is overpay) as some of the lengths for guys getting older all the time. Some will definately be regretting these heady days. But if you think that the GM of buffalo gives a rat's rear about you or your team, and cared enough to aim barbs your way you have an awfully well developed ego and sense of yourself as the center of the universe. This was solely aimed at placating his own restless fan base who he does give's a rat's rear about.

Jaded-Fan is offline  
Old
08-05-2005, 02:30 AM
  #75
pinnaclewm
Registered User
 
pinnaclewm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 264
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macman
I bet that a lot of the guys who are telling Regier to suck it up and stop whining are some of the same guys who used to whine about the Leafs, Rangers, Wings and Avalanche for spending big.

Regier is right. Many of these contracts are ridiculous. I thought the whole reason for the lockout was because the owners had learned their lesson financially. Apparently not. The absolute top end for a contract under a $39 mil cap than will only get lower next year should be $5 mil a year and not a penny more -- and that should be for only a handful of guys in the entire league. There are going to be a lot of GMs who will regret the day they saddled themselves with big four- and five-year contracts for guys in their 30s with gimpy knees. The other thing I don't understand is how teams that were supposedly losing a ton of money with payrolls that were nowhere near $39 mil a season are now fine with spending near that amount now.
Thanks to revenue sharing that's what you get! Love to see this CBA blow up in some GM's faces!!!

pinnaclewm is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:19 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.