You are the star player on a small market team. There are several other players who are also free agents. Your agent wants you to get top dollar (20% of the salary cap).
YOur existing team offers you a contract for half of that. Other teams offer you more. One team offers you the full 20%, and is in a bigger market.
How would you justify not going?
Note: Keep in mind as part of the current CBA, a player can not sign for less than what the NHLPA thinks that player is worth.
2007-10-01 13:27:17 · 15 answers · asked by Like I'm Telling You Who I A 7 in Sports ➔ Hockey
Jenni
Okay, you've made that decision, but the NHLPA has blocked your signing (you are lowering the value of future contracts which is a form of collusion). How do you deal with that?
2007-10-01 13:39:05 · update #1
If by the 'real world' you mean greed, certainly it is part of the real world but its not part of my world and my world is just as real.
How would I justify not going? I don't need millions of dollars 'to support my family', I can live a very comfortable existence on much less.
I don't measure success in dollars. Loyalty and integrity are far more important.
(and please don't call me naieve or idealistic - I'm neither, I just don't think that big money is good for hockey, sport or the world as a whole and yes I think that hockey players and all athletes should think of themselves as citizens of the world first)
2007-10-01 14:28:15 · answer #1 · answered by megalomaniac 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I was not aware of the new CBA agreement where the NHLPA can block a signing. In fact, I thought I heard they were not too happy with Crosby's new signing but to actually have the power to stop it. Wow. This I did not know. They need to take a look at Brodeur's contract then LOL.
My justifications for not taking it would be if I am extremely happy in that situation, great friends with my teammates, have plenty of money in the bank, my family is VERY happy there, kids love the school, wife loves the city, good chance to win a cup, etc..etc....
However, half of the max when other teams are offering the max would imply to me that the organization does not treat it's players well, they would have to move up a bit on that #, closer to the 75% range because I may look at it as a lowball insult.
That is just me though, I could get by very well on 7.5 million instead of 10 million thank you. Especially if the city/team has the qualities I mentioned above. To me, you can only spend so much money, it is already like winning the lottery every payday. You would have plenty for yourself and all of your family. Mind you, I am just a fan.
On the other hand, you don't get your FA status every year so if I wasn't happy in the city, I would have no problem moving on. Money/big market teams however would not be my only deciding factor but it would certainly weigh in if all choices seemed even.
2007-10-02 06:01:55 · answer #2 · answered by Bob Loblaw 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
"Like" has the information about the NHLPA blocking this 100% correct. They balked at Kariya and Selanne signing for less with Colorado a few years back but did not have the power to stop it. If that were to take place now, the NHLPA would not allow it to happen.
If I am worth that contract to the larger market team, the small market team better come close for me to even consider resigning and I do nothing to justify it. Half from the smaller market team seems like they are trying to under pay me. The owners of all major sports teams are in this to make money and so are the athletes. Unfortunately, we have left the days of player and organizational loyalty behind us.
2007-10-01 14:06:51 · answer #3 · answered by Lubers25 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
If you want to stay in the small market you negotiate a long term extension in the off season before the last year of your contract (ex. Mike Fisher in Ott).
This takes the power away from the NHLPA by not allowing comparables.
To justify not going can be any number of reasons...
You are happy with your role on the team.
You get along with your coach.
Your wife and kids are sick of moving.
You have local off-ice charities you are committed to.
You think this team has a great chance win.
You grew up idolizing this team.
2007-10-02 07:03:07 · answer #4 · answered by sensfantodd 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If I am not mistaken, personal service contracts are not allowed, so if I need to justify staying in the small market, line up some endorsement deals for me, defer some of the payments and add a few incentives. Put AlMo back on the IR. I could also retire for the first half of the season, which satisfies the NHLPA.
2007-10-01 18:00:59 · answer #5 · answered by cme 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
What Jenni said. Also, there are other avenues into getting the full 20%. Correct me if I'm wrong, but incentives doesn't count towards the cap, does it? I'd push for that. Nothing wrong with actually working for my money. I'd also have to factor in what management is doing to help me get a Cup; what kind of support staff they're going to hook me up with. Like the Mastercard commercials, some things are just priceless.
Other factors that would justify not going would be just life itself. If I have just recently bought a house in that city, I wouldn't want to go through all that listing and selling. I also wouldn't want to drive nor transport my new Hybrid Civic to the new city either. If I have a kid (SCARY thought) and he needs medical attention and only that particular city can provide for, I'd stay (kind of like Giguere with his kid). But then again, that's just me and I'm a little lazy when it comes to these things. lol
Even if I do end up signing for 10% of the cap space, there are so many things I can do myself to make up for the shortfall: live modestly, go green some more by making my Hybrid Civic more fuel efficient (which I just did to my '96 Civic by adding an extra 50+ kms per tank! Boo-yah!), smart investments (what's the next project Mark Cuban has going?), things like that. But then again, that's just me. I never believed in people just giving me money, but rather, work for it.
Just another thought. Doesn't teams give each player a set allowance for food on the road? I vaguely remember hearing that the Leafs give each player $85 CAD for food so they'll eat healthier instead of going to...I don't know, McDonalds for a late night binge or something like that. Anyways, I'd probably use that money and just buy groceries, cook it myself, and pocket the change by investing it some more.
2007-10-01 13:48:07 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Interesting point about the NHLPA interceding in these affairs. I would go with the incentive-laden contract, but I wonder if the small-market team would prefer a straight contract(not sure how incentives work against the cap).
2007-10-02 01:10:58 · answer #7 · answered by Duffman 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I undetstand get you. 'heaven' wouldn't have,restricted belongings you do not might want to be emotion complete or inspite of. properly, distinct relegioms have distinct 'heavens' some do not even believe in heaven. In my relegion: Heaven = the sky So this is observed as paradise no longer heaven ;) anyhow paradise is the position you wish inspite of you want and continuously be totally satsified. There are distinct degrees of paradise yet no count number which one you need to pass in, this is going to easily be proper. So in case you don't like something or inspite of that couldn't take position because you are able to replace something and make each little thing proper. What your affirming isn't plausible because Paradise has something you are able to imagine of. Yoy can change right into a doll in case you favor to...do you recognize what I mean?
2016-10-20 04:25:49 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I see a lot of indignant responses, but Gomez and Briere are two examples of such athletes whose previous teams refused to execute deals when the price would have been significantly lower.
Whether the teams were looking to walk from these guys or were knowingly taking a gamble, it's completely on them. The players had no long-term security all season and they performed. They are thoroughly deserving and I don't begrudge them a penny of their windfall.
Romantic notions of allegiances to a team or the game are nice, but rapidly becoming improbable and impractical in today's NHL. Such luxuries will have to be reserved for the final stages of player careers from this point forward.
2007-10-01 21:45:21 · answer #9 · answered by zapcity29 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
I'd justify not going b/c I already a have the chemistry needed to play on my current team. Money isn't everything.
I feel ok about it. I can 'make-up' the diff by investing my $$ in buying equity and other investments. I have no need for a 1/2 million dollar car.
2007-10-01 13:34:57 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋