HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Colorado Avalanche
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Salary Structure

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-12-2014, 10:15 PM
  #51
Nzap
Insert clever phrase
 
Nzap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Middle of Noux
Country: Finland
Posts: 5,165
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colorado Sports Fan View Post
Well RL...now you know what it's been like to be a Stastny supporter for the last 3-4 years.
Yup. I've mostly shut up about that, some small comments about wanting to sign him up to 6.75 has been popping up from me, but usually I've kept quite quiet with that.
About ROR in my stance, it has nothing to do with that article Dater "provided" us with.
I've never really forgiven what happened last time (either side), but now I am more against ROR in this battle by quite some margin, which obviously had already happened clearly before the Dater article.
And I'm mostly pissed at him and his peers by talking so nicely about all the intangibles you need to have as a hockey player, but not including the quite important intangible of respecting the team and your teammates by not holding out on the team (and the teammates) and showing no remorse by very easily signing with a team 6000 miles away just for a tad bit of extra cash, instead of showing respect towards them. And afterwards saying it was "worth it" in a TV interview. That is what pisses me off the most.
Now there's a new management in place, which have been giving out fair contracts to everyone (including Staz I have to say (despite hating it) considering his position on our team).
Everything has changed, we've become a respectable team again, with an identity, with good free agents wanting to come here, with rising fan support and with a very bright future with an amazing core.

And now it looks like he's doing the same stuff still. And please don't give the ******** "business side" crap. Of course there's a business side, and I'm not mad about that. I'm just pissed that he and his peers try to portray him as an angel who does all the right things for the good of the team and then he pulls out crap like this. That is why I'm pissed.

EDIT: and yeah, salary structure, sooo.... hmmm.... I have to come up with something. MacK and EJ will give new "guidelines" regarding the structure with their new deals I'd say. Will be very interesting to see how it plays out.


Last edited by Nzap: 07-12-2014 at 10:27 PM.
Nzap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2014, 10:31 PM
  #52
Gigantor The Goalie
Registered User
 
Gigantor The Goalie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: New London
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,096
vCash: 500
That Dater article had nothing of substance in it. The only thing that's making me somewhat annoyed with him is Landeskog/Duchene/Varly all signed their extensions no problem. This Avs management group has had no issue giving above/at market value deals as seen with Holden/Mitchell/Berra/Landeskog/Duchene/Varly. If O'Reilly wanted to get a contract done at market value that is fair to him and the team, it would take seconds between hearing about the negotiation starting to hearing it's signed.

If O'Reilly doesn't want to be here I hope he tells management so they can sign and trade him off the team. O'Reilly has looked great next to Duchene. O'Reilly has shown that hard working effort that allows him to push past his supposed ceiling. There are few people that watch O'Reilly and don't appreciate his effort and play on the team. Everyone wants him and everyone realizes his importance.

The Avalanche organization has given O'Reilly everything. They gave him a spot on the team in 2009-10. They gave him the 2nd overall pick and Calder winner as his linemate in 2011-12. Then with Roy on board, Roy gives him a spot beside the best player on the team comparing him to the Forsberg-Sakic duo. O'Reilly goes on to lead the team in goals, wins the Lady Byng and has a career year. The only dislike between O'Reilly and management was that contract dispute. That management is now gone so what the hell is the problem now?

Gigantor The Goalie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2014, 10:38 PM
  #53
CoachBadkitten
Matt Hunwick
 
CoachBadkitten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Colorado
Country: United States
Posts: 4,869
vCash: 500
I just hate how people are automatically assuming he's being super greedy, and it's all his fault. We don't have any information, for all we know the Avs are offering him something like 5.6 or 5.7 in which i definitely don't blame him for wanting more. Just don't think we should be throwing terms like "greedy ******" and "selfish, money first guy", until we know more.

CoachBadkitten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2014, 10:47 PM
  #54
Nzap
Insert clever phrase
 
Nzap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Middle of Noux
Country: Finland
Posts: 5,165
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoachBadkitten View Post
I just hate how people are automatically assuming he's being super greedy, and it's all his fault. We don't have any information, for all we know the Avs are offering him something like 5.6 or 5.7 in which i definitely don't blame him for wanting more. Just don't think we should be throwing terms like "greedy ******" and "selfish, money first guy", until we know more.
The thing is we know the history of him, and having no problems putting his teammates in a pinch by signing in another country because he wasn't happy with the money we were offering (which by reports was more than fair).
I can't see how that couldn't be a point that would be able to be pointed at now, and say that that is probably happening again. And 5.7 is a fair deal again for him if that is offered (for a 3-5 year deal. For more years than that he should be able to get more than that though even in my eyes). He won't get more than that in arbitration.

EDIT: Of course it's a big assumption, but at least we have past history to back it up with him feeling good about holding out and not playing for the shirt and his teammates last time around.


Last edited by Nzap: 07-12-2014 at 10:55 PM.
Nzap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2014, 10:55 PM
  #55
tigervixxxen
Moderator
Optimism=Delusional
 
tigervixxxen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Denver
Country: United States
Posts: 20,546
vCash: 447
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoachBadkitten View Post
I just hate how people are automatically assuming he's being super greedy, and it's all his fault. We don't have any information, for all we know the Avs are offering him something like 5.6 or 5.7 in which i definitely don't blame him for wanting more. Just don't think we should be throwing terms like "greedy ******" and "selfish, money first guy", until we know more.
Pat Morris going on TV saying it starts at 6.5 is an indicator for starters. Second, the close to a dozen fair bordering on generous contracts Sakic and Roy have given and saying the core should be paid the same is an idea what they are offering. Third, O'Reilly himself saying its fine to go year to year. Fourth, the history of getting it to a point of an offesheet and how things happened in the past. Fifth, the tactics and reputation of Newport and how they conduct business, especially for their big fish. I could go on but the point is there is little evidence to take the "let's not assume and this will turn out ok approach". I get that players and their agent operate differently. Some view contracts in a different manner and I can accept it but at the end of the day after the tears and holdouts and posturing and whatnot the player ends up with a contract. How many offersheets have been signed in NHL history, not many. How long has it been since a case has even gone through arbitration, years. This is not a typical "difficult" situation, it hasn't been and there is little reason to hold out hope it will become one.

I find it very interesting how this case parallels Subban's and yet there is little talk of it. Here is a guy who was "wronged" by getting forced into a lowball contract and now he's set to get a substantial contract. Represented by the same agency and also going to arbitration! Does anyone actually think he won't sign long term in Montreal? Does anyone expect his hearing to go through? Why isn't he pulling the "I'll take a year to year deal and absolutely rake in the money in UFA"? I don't get it.


Last edited by tigervixxxen: 07-12-2014 at 11:02 PM.
tigervixxxen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2014, 10:09 AM
  #56
StayAtHomeAv
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 1,982
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gigantor The Goalie View Post
That Dater article had nothing of substance in it. The only thing that's making me somewhat annoyed with him is Landeskog/Duchene/Varly all signed their extensions no problem. This Avs management group has had no issue giving above/at market value deals as seen with Holden/Mitchell/Berra/Landeskog/Duchene/Varly. If O'Reilly wanted to get a contract done at market value that is fair to him and the team, it would take seconds between hearing about the negotiation starting to hearing it's signed.

If O'Reilly doesn't want to be here I hope he tells management so they can sign and trade him off the team. O'Reilly has looked great next to Duchene. O'Reilly has shown that hard working effort that allows him to push past his supposed ceiling. There are few people that watch O'Reilly and don't appreciate his effort and play on the team. Everyone wants him and everyone realizes his importance.

The Avalanche organization has given O'Reilly everything. They gave him a spot on the team in 2009-10. They gave him the 2nd overall pick and Calder winner as his linemate in 2011-12. Then with Roy on board, Roy gives him a spot beside the best player on the team comparing him to the Forsberg-Sakic duo. O'Reilly goes on to lead the team in goals, wins the Lady Byng and has a career year. The only dislike between O'Reilly and management was that contract dispute. That management is now gone so what the hell is the problem now?
All that was just given to him? So, he didnt earn the right to play as a true rookie? Its not like it would have been hard with our roster. He didn't earn the right to be the 3rd line defensive C? Its not like he had not shown to be very solid defensively. He didn't earn the right to play on our top scoring line? During the lockout year I though RoR showed the best shooting touch (accurate and very quick release). If someone like me saw that I'm sure it was a very easy call for the Avs.

StayAtHomeAv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2014, 12:58 PM
  #57
Gigantor The Goalie
Registered User
 
Gigantor The Goalie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: New London
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,096
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by StayAtHomeAv View Post
All that was just given to him? So, he didnt earn the right to play as a true rookie? Its not like it would have been hard with our roster. He didn't earn the right to be the 3rd line defensive C? Its not like he had not shown to be very solid defensively. He didn't earn the right to play on our top scoring line? During the lockout year I though RoR showed the best shooting touch (accurate and very quick release). If someone like me saw that I'm sure it was a very easy call for the Avs.
If the Avs had a defensively responsible 3rd line centre already signed and didn't give O'Reilly a fair shot to make the team then ROR is back in junior. O'Reilly was given a chance by the Avs and he took it, props to him. O'Reilly easily could have been back on the 3rd line centring Mitchell and Downie but Roy decided to move him to the wing of the best player on the team which allowed him to put up career numbers. The Avalanche organization and the two management teams have done nothing to deserve the holding out and signing of KHL contracts from O'Reilly. The only mistake made was by the 1st management team of the Lacriox's who came back with a take it or leave it attitude after the bridge deal was shot down.

Gigantor The Goalie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2014, 09:34 AM
  #58
StayAtHomeAv
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 1,982
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gigantor The Goalie View Post
If the Avs had a defensively responsible 3rd line centre already signed and didn't give O'Reilly a fair shot to make the team then ROR is back in junior. O'Reilly was given a chance by the Avs and he took it, props to him. O'Reilly easily could have been back on the 3rd line centring Mitchell and Downie but Roy decided to move him to the wing of the best player on the team which allowed him to put up career numbers. The Avalanche organization and the two management teams have done nothing to deserve the holding out and signing of KHL contracts from O'Reilly. The only mistake made was by the 1st management team of the Lacriox's who came back with a take it or leave it attitude after the bridge deal was shot down.
You are either NHL ready or you are not. Most draft picks are going to be given a chance. Now maybe our roster allowed him to play a bigger role right away, but he earned being on the roster. That wasn't just given to him. That is absurd.

He could have been easily put at 3rd line C with Mitchell and Downie, but why would they do something like that? Why would they put the best goal scorer in a defensive role? Why would they take away the top line defensive workhorse who can cover for Duchene just to make him play a defensive role? And how would he end up with those linemates? None of those guys started on the 3rd line. Roy decided to do what was best for the team based n what RoR had shown. But keep making it sound like Roy just gave that too him. Roy could have easily put Duchene on the 4 th line. He could have easily sent MacK back to juniors. He could have played Sarich all year and had Wilson on the top line. But in all cases he did what was best for the team. RoR proved to be one of our best finishers around the net. He earned that top spot next to Duchene.

The Avs org completely screwed him around last time when he held out and went o the KHL. You even admit they made a mistake. That was a very big mistake. One that was insulting. They forced RoRs hand.

StayAtHomeAv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2014, 11:53 AM
  #59
Tweaky
Eternal Pessimist
 
Tweaky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Bangkok Thailand
Country: Thailand
Posts: 908
vCash: 451
I just want to interject some facts.

First, people keep saying that Landeskog is clearly a better defensive forward. Based on +/-?. According to the numbers, ROR played against slightly better competition 5 on 5 (bested only by Duchene). ROR also played 22% of the penalty kill, versus 4% played by Landy. Pretty sure you don't keep the better defensive player on the bench for a kill.

Second, people seem to be upset with ROR for signing the offer sheet from Calgary. One seemed to be saying that made ROR a horrible person. You know who else signed an offer sheet for huge money (talking changed the game money, at the time).... Joe Sakic http://slapshot.blogs.nytimes.com/20...ckey-business/ .

Third, you have to take into account the year a contract is signed. That is the year that defines percentage of cap hit. Last year, $6m for Duchene was 9.33% of the cap. This year, $6.43m is that much cap hit. So if ROR is asking for $6.5m, it is not really that far off what Duchene is making. Extended to the end of his contract, Duchene will be making less than 7% of the cap. To put that in perspective, Kane will be making 15% of Chicago's cap next year.

All gains in cap assume 5% annual growth, which is less than the skewed average growth of 6.5% since 04-05. I say skewed because the last lockout reset the numbers by two years...up until then the growth had been 8.75%, and the last two year it was just over 7%.

Also, who is to say that ROR has not turned down offer sheets this year? Teams had until 7/5 to do so. Maybe they did, and ROR turned them down out of loyalty. The team had already filed for arbitration (they had 48 hours from the cup winning goal to do so, not much time IMO). Who is to say that the Avs are offering anything above the $5.25m minimum, with the intention of taking it to arbitration that ROR cannot walk away from.

Personally, I wish this was not an issue. But it is. I think matching Duchene's contract would be about right.

Tweaky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2014, 12:24 PM
  #60
Nzap
Insert clever phrase
 
Nzap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Middle of Noux
Country: Finland
Posts: 5,165
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tweaky View Post
I just want to interject some facts.

First, people keep saying that Landeskog is clearly a better defensive forward. Based on +/-?. According to the numbers, ROR played against slightly better competition 5 on 5 (bested only by Duchene). ROR also played 22% of the penalty kill, versus 4% played by Landy. Pretty sure you don't keep the better defensive player on the bench for a kill.
I've always read that Landeskog had much more difficult competition. Anyone can verify this?

Quote:
Second, people seem to be upset with ROR for signing the offer sheet from Calgary. One seemed to be saying that made ROR a horrible person. You know who else signed an offer sheet for huge money (talking changed the game money, at the time).... Joe Sakic http://slapshot.blogs.nytimes.com/20...ckey-business/ .
This has been said so many times, Sakic just wanted a chance to play with Gretzky. ROR last time around apparently then wanted to play with Backlund, Giordano and Ramo.

Quote:
Third, you have to take into account the year a contract is signed. That is the year that defines percentage of cap hit. Last year, $6m for Duchene was 9.33% of the cap. This year, $6.43m is that much cap hit. So if ROR is asking for $6.5m, it is not really that far off what Duchene is making. Extended to the end of his contract, Duchene will be making less than 7% of the cap. To put that in perspective, Kane will be making 15% of Chicago's cap next year.
This is a valid point, however why not compare that to Duchene now and say that "as our best player is only taking 7% of our cap, why should you take more?"

Quote:
Also, who is to say that ROR has not turned down offer sheets this year? Teams had until 7/5 to do so. Maybe they did, and ROR turned them down out of loyalty. The team had already filed for arbitration (they had 48 hours from the cup winning goal to do so, not much time IMO). Who is to say that the Avs are offering anything above the $5.25m minimum, with the intention of taking it to arbitration that ROR cannot walk away from.
Loyalty wasn't found last time around, can't see him turning down a contract which would've benefited him and that he would've liked.

Quote:
Personally, I wish this was not an issue. But it is. I think matching Duchene's contract would be about right.
We all would be ecstatic if that happened. Too bad that ROR is not, hence saga vol2.

Nzap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2014, 12:27 PM
  #61
Lonewolfe2015
Registered User
 
Lonewolfe2015's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 12,634
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nzap View Post
I've always read that Landeskog had much more difficult competition. Anyone can verify this?
You are correct. The previous poster is not.

http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_stati...4+45+46+63+67#

Lonewolfe2015 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2014, 12:33 PM
  #62
RockLobster
Moderator
Beatles Guru
 
RockLobster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Kansas
Country: Germany
Posts: 14,868
vCash: 844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nzap View Post
This has been said so many times, Sakic just wanted a chance to play with Gretzky. ROR last time around apparently then wanted to play with Backlund, Giordano and Ramo.
Yeah, I'm sure that the fact that talks were not leading to a deal (and that is not me saying that talks were "bad" just that a deal hadn't been struck yet) and New York came in and offered WAY MORE than the Avalanche were prepared to offer at that time, and on top of it brought in a new wave of paying NHL players more...it essentiall "reset the market" (a term that I've seen Freudian use when talking about Toews' and Kane's new contracts) had absolutely nothing to do with it.

If you or anyone REALLY believes that Sakic ONLY signed that OS "just to play with Gretzky"...I'd invite you to give your head a good, long shake, because I would combat that and say that the obvious bias against O'Reilly and his contract status is blinding you.

__________________


Hope shines brightest, in the dark, where nothing's ever seen. Lighting undiscovered places, no one's ever been.
RockLobster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2014, 12:34 PM
  #63
InjuredChoker
Registered User
 
InjuredChoker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: LTIR or golf course
Posts: 23,276
vCash: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonewolfe2015 View Post
You are correct. The previous poster is not.

http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_stati...4+45+46+63+67#
depends on measure. i guess he meant toi/g measures, which is more reliable imo.

but the difference was pretty negligible. ROR did play against tougher D though.

InjuredChoker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2014, 01:13 PM
  #64
StayAtHomeAv
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 1,982
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonewolfe2015 View Post
You are correct. The previous poster is not.

http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_stati...4+45+46+63+67#
According to that website, when based on +/-, RoR is ahead.
According to extraskater, when based on TOI, RoR is ahead, but when based on Corsi/Fenwick Lando is ahead.

If we are needing to be that selective in determining who did face the toughest competition then it's safe to say its pretty darn even. One thing is for sure, neither of these guys faced "much more" tough comp compared to the other.


As for the Sakic offer sheet, so it's OK to want to go play with Gretzky, but wanting a bigger payday makes RoR a terrible person? Trying to maximize your salary in your career field makes someone a terrible person? Hardly. It's not like he has been playing the Avs like Staz did, who for some reason gets a free pass with all the RoR haters. UFA who plays games and then signs for an absurd amount- "hey, good or you". RFA who is honest but stubborn- "get the lynch".

StayAtHomeAv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2014, 01:16 PM
  #65
Tweaky
Eternal Pessimist
 
Tweaky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Bangkok Thailand
Country: Thailand
Posts: 908
vCash: 451
I was going by TOI of 5v5 Competition:
http://www.extraskater.com/players/d...c_toi&team=col

Tweaky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2014, 01:48 PM
  #66
Tweaky
Eternal Pessimist
 
Tweaky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Bangkok Thailand
Country: Thailand
Posts: 908
vCash: 451
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nzap View Post
This is a valid point, however why not compare that to Duchene now and say that "as our best player is only taking 7% of our cap, why should you take more?"
OK, do that. Everyone signs based of Duchene's salary. Like MacKinnon. Say at the end of his three year ELC, he is on par with Duchene, as they both continue to delvelop. So he is forced by this logic to take $30m/5yr. Three years later, continued development makes him better than Matt, who is now due a new contract. But the best player is making $6m, so he has to take less. Despite the cap having gone up to $88m or so.

Now if you base it off the percentages of salary for the year the contract is signed, it makes more sense. Say we pay the best player 9.33%, which last year was $6m, this year is $6.43, and year after next when MacKinnon is due, it is $7.1m. Three years later, it is $8.2m for Duchene's new deal.

You can also look at it from the perspective of back pay. ROR was paid under $1m for his first three years. Duchene was paid over $3m for those same years. In total, Duchene has been paid $16.6m, ROR a fair bit less at $12.7m. While I agree that Duchene is worth more, is he worth a third again as much (meaning ROR is only worth $4.5m/yr)? Is not right for the Avs to make up that discrepancy at some point?

Tweaky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2014, 02:08 PM
  #67
Freudian
Clearly deranged
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 33,549
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tweaky View Post
OK, do that. Everyone signs based of Duchene's salary. Like MacKinnon. Say at the end of his three year ELC, he is on par with Duchene, as they both continue to delvelop. So he is forced by this logic to take $30m/5yr. Three years later, continued development makes him better than Matt, who is now due a new contract. But the best player is making $6m, so he has to take less. Despite the cap having gone up to $88m or so.

Now if you base it off the percentages of salary for the year the contract is signed, it makes more sense. Say we pay the best player 9.33%, which last year was $6m, this year is $6.43, and year after next when MacKinnon is due, it is $7.1m. Three years later, it is $8.2m for Duchene's new deal.

You can also look at it from the perspective of back pay. ROR was paid under $1m for his first three years. Duchene was paid over $3m for those same years. In total, Duchene has been paid $16.6m, ROR a fair bit less at $12.7m. While I agree that Duchene is worth more, is he worth a third again as much (meaning ROR is only worth $4.5m/yr)? Is not right for the Avs to make up that discrepancy at some point?
Duchene didn't make that much money. Most players hit their A bonuses but very few of their B bonues. I suspect Duchene got somewhere around $1.4-1.6M/year on his ELC. Not a big difference and certainly not something Avs have to compensate O'Reilly for.

If there was any difference it's already eaten up by O'Reilly making over $9.5M on his offer sheet bridge deal and Duchene making $5.65M on his two year bridge deal.

Freudian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2014, 02:15 PM
  #68
StayAtHomeAv
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 1,982
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tweaky View Post
Is not right for the Avs to make up that discrepancy at some point?
No. You don't overpay someone just because they were underpaid previously. You don't underpay someone because they were previously overpaid. Players and teams agree to contracts. Neither part should be resposible for making up past differences. Present value and future predicted worth should be the only factors.

StayAtHomeAv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2014, 02:50 PM
  #69
EdAVSfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,192
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by StayAtHomeAv View Post
You are either NHL ready or you are not. Most draft picks are going to be given a chance. Now maybe our roster allowed him to play a bigger role right away, but he earned being on the roster. That wasn't just given to him. That is absurd.

He could have been easily put at 3rd line C with Mitchell and Downie, but why would they do something like that? Why would they put the best goal scorer in a defensive role? Why would they take away the top line defensive workhorse who can cover for Duchene just to make him play a defensive role? And how would he end up with those linemates? None of those guys started on the 3rd line. Roy decided to do what was best for the team based n what RoR had shown. But keep making it sound like Roy just gave that too him. Roy could have easily put Duchene on the 4 th line. He could have easily sent MacK back to juniors. He could have played Sarich all year and had Wilson on the top line. But in all cases he did what was best for the team. RoR proved to be one of our best finishers around the net. He earned that top spot next to Duchene.

The Avs org completely screwed him around last time when he held out and went o the KHL. You even admit they made a mistake. That was a very big mistake. One that was insulting. They forced RoRs hand.
How did they screw him?? They offered him a more than fair 2 yr 7M dollar contract.
Thats not screwing him.

He just didnt want it. He wanted a larger, long term deal.

Tell me, why is it that the avs screwed ROR by only offering him a bridge, but its not ROR screwing the avs by only wanting a long term deal?

EdAVSfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2014, 03:24 PM
  #70
Tweaky
Eternal Pessimist
 
Tweaky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Bangkok Thailand
Country: Thailand
Posts: 908
vCash: 451
Ah, but isn't that a part of loyalty? ROR had no choice at all about the ELC. No draftee does. Sign what they put in front of you, or you don't get to play. What about the end of career contracts, where guys get paid stupid amounts even though they cannot play to that level anymore. ---And yes, I realize this is asinine, but I wanted people thinking about it.

The B bonuses are paid directly by the league, and are not figured into the cap, AAV, or other figures used above. Unless the team adds its own schedule B bonuses. But yeah, not sure how much he actually got (goals 2 years, point & assists one year, none third year...where was he in Calder voting?...but plenty of categories he would not have bonused in anyhow). I would take the $1.5m figure as a close enough average. Which does bring him down lower than ROR, negating the need for this part of the discussion altogether .

In some respects, I think I have convinced myself that it is stupid for a younger player to sign multi-year deals. Every year the cap goes up, so every year, the same player would be worth more. A contract pins him down to what dollar figure fit under the cap for a guy of his skill that year. The next year, it would be higher. But I get the impression that more years is considered better for the player. For older players, I understand the security is worth it, but for a young guy that should only be getting better...not so much.

Hell, the Avs should offer him 8 years at $6m per. Lock him into that until the cap is over $100m.

Tweaky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2014, 03:43 PM
  #71
JoemAvs
Registered User
 
JoemAvs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Country: Germany
Posts: 4,204
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tweaky View Post
Ah, but isn't that a part of loyalty? ROR had no choice at all about the ELC. No draftee does. Sign what they put in front of you, or you don't get to play. What about the end of career contracts, where guys get paid stupid amounts even though they cannot play to that level anymore. ---And yes, I realize this is asinine, but I wanted people thinking about it.

The B bonuses are paid directly by the league, and are not figured into the cap, AAV, or other figures used above. Unless the team adds its own schedule B bonuses. But yeah, not sure how much he actually got (goals 2 years, point & assists one year, none third year...where was he in Calder voting?...but plenty of categories he would not have bonused in anyhow). I would take the $1.5m figure as a close enough average. Which does bring him down lower than ROR, negating the need for this part of the discussion altogether .

In some respects, I think I have convinced myself that it is stupid for a younger player to sign multi-year deals. Every year the cap goes up, so every year, the same player would be worth more. A contract pins him down to what dollar figure fit under the cap for a guy of his skill that year. The next year, it would be higher. But I get the impression that more years is considered better for the player. For older players, I understand the security is worth it, but for a young guy that should only be getting better...not so much.

Hell, the Avs should offer him 8 years at $6m per. Lock him into that until the cap is over $100m.

I would easily do that deal if I am Roy. I would even add 500k per year without blinking twice.

That said. Projecting the cap to rise in the future is a fair bet.
But projecting it to rise by 30M + ?.

I highly doubt it. A new CBA, the canadian dollar and other influences could easily have the cap settle at say 80 M or slow down the cap growth per year so that it won't reacht 100 M before the CBA expires.

All major TV deals have seemingly be re-negotiated. There is no expected jump in there besides natural growth in revenue.

JoemAvs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2014, 04:35 PM
  #72
Tweaky
Eternal Pessimist
 
Tweaky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Bangkok Thailand
Country: Thailand
Posts: 908
vCash: 451
All gains in cap assume 5% annual growth, which is less than the skewed average growth of 6.5% since 04-05. I say skewed because the last lockout reset the numbers by two years...up until then the growth had been 8.75%, and the last two years it was just over 7% each. With regional broadcast contracts still coming around, and the Rogers contract not kicking in until this year (and the odd payment structure for that), plus all the other revenue streams, I am confident that the cap will be over $100m by the time the Kane and Toews contracts are up.

Tweaky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2014, 05:50 PM
  #73
StayAtHomeAv
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 1,982
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdAVSfan View Post
How did they screw him?? They offered him a more than fair 2 yr 7M dollar contract.
Thats not screwing him.

He just didnt want it. He wanted a larger, long term deal.

Tell me, why is it that the avs screwed ROR by only offering him a bridge, but its not ROR screwing the avs by only wanting a long term deal?
Because when he made it know he wanted a long term deal they made a joke of an offer.

StayAtHomeAv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2014, 06:24 PM
  #74
EdAVSfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,192
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by StayAtHomeAv View Post
Because when he made it know he wanted a long term deal they made a joke of an offer.
And thats perfectly fine if thats the way you want to think.

But dont say they screwed him. That implies they forced to play for league minimum or told him they wont play him on the ice.

Offering him a very good bridge deal is in no way screwing him.

They didnt want a bridge deal. The avs didnt want a long term deal. No one screwed anyone. Both used the leverage they had to force what they could get out of the other.

Theres no "woe is me" sentiment that either side should have felt or should be feeling now.

EdAVSfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-14-2014, 07:12 PM
  #75
tigervixxxen
Moderator
Optimism=Delusional
 
tigervixxxen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Denver
Country: United States
Posts: 20,546
vCash: 447
Quote:
In some respects, I think I have convinced myself that it is stupid for a younger player to sign multi-year deals. Every year the cap goes up, so every year, the same player would be worth more. A contract pins him down to what dollar figure fit under the cap for a guy of his skill that year. The next year, it would be higher. But I get the impression that more years is considered better for the player. For older players, I understand the security is worth it, but for a young guy that should only be getting better...not so much.
There is still a lot of uncertainty even in young players. How many look amazing after one season but stagnate or regress? With contracts fully guaranteed in the NHL if you can get 30+ million at a young age on a team and a situation you like then the risk makes sense for both sides. Plus it's not a lifetime contract. If you are 20 years old and you become a superstar then you'll get superstar money at the age of 27. How many young and talented guys have the Avs had only to flame out and go to Europe to play? Quite a bit of them.

tigervixxxen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 03:03 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.