http://gamingtrend.com
October 25, 2014, 06:27:31 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: 2012 NHL Off-Season  (Read 7188 times)
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
kronovan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7930



View Profile
« Reply #160 on: July 05, 2012, 06:54:11 AM »

Lou should have made a play for Jagr as a Devil. With Marty there for at least 2 more, the 2 of them would have been an awesome pair of geriatric bookends.   High five!
« Last Edit: July 05, 2012, 06:57:59 AM by kronovan » Logged
Devil
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7742



View Profile
« Reply #161 on: July 05, 2012, 05:21:46 PM »

No Jagr!

It's like the NBA now. Need to find guys who have friends to play with.

Kovy and Ovechkin are friends, aren't they?  icon_wink
Logged

XBox Gamertag: Devil13Devil
Wii Number: 0305 6568 6417 2609
PS3 Thing: Slived
gellar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8992


I'm a dolphin!


View Profile
« Reply #162 on: July 05, 2012, 05:23:36 PM »

The amount of epic butthurt by some Devils fans on the structure of the Parise contract is amusing.  OH THE IRONING.
Logged
theohall
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1151



View Profile
« Reply #163 on: July 06, 2012, 09:58:22 AM »

Quote from: gellar on July 05, 2012, 05:23:36 PM

OH THE IRONING.

Gotta keep them wrinkles out. 
Logged
Devil
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7742



View Profile
« Reply #164 on: July 06, 2012, 11:38:37 PM »

Quote from: gellar on July 05, 2012, 05:23:36 PM

The amount of epic butthurt by some Devils fans on the structure of the Parise contract is amusing.  OH THE IRONING.

The butthurt comes from the pile sanctions only the Devils seemed to face when circumventing the cap.

It's not the Parise contract alone (at all), it's the 8-12 others that are all similar to Kovy, but had a blind eye turned to them. Fuck that, they were singled out, restructured and still punished. It was bullshit then, and is still now.
Logged

XBox Gamertag: Devil13Devil
Wii Number: 0305 6568 6417 2609
PS3 Thing: Slived
gellar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8992


I'm a dolphin!


View Profile
« Reply #165 on: July 07, 2012, 12:37:17 AM »

Quote from: Devil on July 06, 2012, 11:38:37 PM

Quote from: gellar on July 05, 2012, 05:23:36 PM

The amount of epic butthurt by some Devils fans on the structure of the Parise contract is amusing.  OH THE IRONING.

The butthurt comes from the pile sanctions only the Devils seemed to face when circumventing the cap.

It's not the Parise contract alone (at all), it's the 8-12 others that are all similar to Kovy, but had a blind eye turned to them. Fuck that, they were singled out, restructured and still punished. It was bullshit then, and is still now.


Are there any that are similar to Kovy?  I thought his was really the only one that stretched beyond the reasonable playing years.
Logged
Canuck
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5485


I live in Japan


View Profile
« Reply #166 on: July 07, 2012, 02:55:43 AM »

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=400063
Luongo has come out and pretty much said that things are over in Vancouver.  How long before he is traded I wonder?
Logged
kronovan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7930



View Profile
« Reply #167 on: July 07, 2012, 07:52:52 AM »

Something to know about Canuck's GM Mike Gillis is that he's a systems guy with a systematic approach to everything. It's a given he has all sorts of metrics and milestones in place for brokering the best possible deal for Luongo. That his favorite time to make a trade is just before the start of the season, says a lot about him. I was anxious for movement on the trade too, but once Schneider was signed to 3 years I knew it was inevitible. Its going to happen, but Gillis won't pull the trigger until all the beans have been counted and he's 110% certains its the absolute best deal.
Logged
theohall
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1151



View Profile
« Reply #168 on: July 07, 2012, 03:33:22 PM »

Quote from: gellar on July 07, 2012, 12:37:17 AM

Quote from: Devil on July 06, 2012, 11:38:37 PM

Quote from: gellar on July 05, 2012, 05:23:36 PM

The amount of epic butthurt by some Devils fans on the structure of the Parise contract is amusing.  OH THE IRONING.

The butthurt comes from the pile sanctions only the Devils seemed to face when circumventing the cap.

It's not the Parise contract alone (at all), it's the 8-12 others that are all similar to Kovy, but had a blind eye turned to them. Fuck that, they were singled out, restructured and still punished. It was bullshit then, and is still now.


Are there any that are similar to Kovy?  I thought his was really the only one that stretched beyond the reasonable playing years.

Kovy's contract would have had him playing until age 44.
Suter's new contract has him playing with the Wild until age 41.
Parise's new contract has him playing with the Wild until age 41.

The same argument could be made about reasonable playing age and circumventing the cap with those contracts.
Logged
gellar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8992


I'm a dolphin!


View Profile
« Reply #169 on: July 07, 2012, 08:30:16 PM »

Quote from: theohall on July 07, 2012, 03:33:22 PM

Quote from: gellar on July 07, 2012, 12:37:17 AM

Quote from: Devil on July 06, 2012, 11:38:37 PM

Quote from: gellar on July 05, 2012, 05:23:36 PM

The amount of epic butthurt by some Devils fans on the structure of the Parise contract is amusing.  OH THE IRONING.

The butthurt comes from the pile sanctions only the Devils seemed to face when circumventing the cap.

It's not the Parise contract alone (at all), it's the 8-12 others that are all similar to Kovy, but had a blind eye turned to them. Fuck that, they were singled out, restructured and still punished. It was bullshit then, and is still now.


Are there any that are similar to Kovy?  I thought his was really the only one that stretched beyond the reasonable playing years.

Kovy's contract would have had him playing until age 44.
Suter's new contract has him playing with the Wild until age 41.
Parise's new contract has him playing with the Wild until age 41.

The same argument could be made about reasonable playing age and circumventing the cap with those contracts.

Yeah it seems like the NHL decided age 41 was the reasonable age.  If I recall, Kovalchuk's was shortened by 3 years.  So the Devils basically caused the NHL to decide on an arbitrary limit by posting 44 as too high.

The new CBA will of course fix this, but then owners will find other loopholes.
Logged
theohall
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1151



View Profile
« Reply #170 on: July 07, 2012, 09:57:12 PM »

Quote from: gellar on July 07, 2012, 08:30:16 PM

Quote from: theohall on July 07, 2012, 03:33:22 PM

Quote from: gellar on July 07, 2012, 12:37:17 AM

Quote from: Devil on July 06, 2012, 11:38:37 PM

Quote from: gellar on July 05, 2012, 05:23:36 PM

The amount of epic butthurt by some Devils fans on the structure of the Parise contract is amusing.  OH THE IRONING.

The butthurt comes from the pile sanctions only the Devils seemed to face when circumventing the cap.

It's not the Parise contract alone (at all), it's the 8-12 others that are all similar to Kovy, but had a blind eye turned to them. Fuck that, they were singled out, restructured and still punished. It was bullshit then, and is still now.


Are there any that are similar to Kovy?  I thought his was really the only one that stretched beyond the reasonable playing years.

Kovy's contract would have had him playing until age 44.
Suter's new contract has him playing with the Wild until age 41.
Parise's new contract has him playing with the Wild until age 41.

The same argument could be made about reasonable playing age and circumventing the cap with those contracts.

Yeah it seems like the NHL decided age 41 was the reasonable age.  If I recall, Kovalchuk's was shortened by 3 years.  So the Devils basically caused the NHL to decide on an arbitrary limit by posting 44 as too high.

The new CBA will of course fix this, but then owners will find other loopholes.

I could accept star defenseman playing to 41.  Even then, there were only two active 40 or older defenseman last season.  Not so much for forwards.  40+ year old NHL forwards are extremely rare.  Keith Tkachuk seemed like he played forever.  He retired at 38.  Heck, how many forwards were 40 or older last season in the NHL?  Last season there was one - Teemu Selanne.  Odds are Parise never finishes out that contract, just like Kovy likely won't finish his.  Yes, the NHL needs to correct this via the CBA and stop the idiotic cap circumventing contracts.
Logged
kronovan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7930



View Profile
« Reply #171 on: July 08, 2012, 07:09:02 PM »

Quote from: theohall on July 07, 2012, 09:57:12 PM

Quote from: gellar on July 07, 2012, 08:30:16 PM

Quote from: theohall on July 07, 2012, 03:33:22 PM

Quote from: gellar on July 07, 2012, 12:37:17 AM

Quote from: Devil on July 06, 2012, 11:38:37 PM

Quote from: gellar on July 05, 2012, 05:23:36 PM

The amount of epic butthurt by some Devils fans on the structure of the Parise contract is amusing.  OH THE IRONING.

The butthurt comes from the pile sanctions only the Devils seemed to face when circumventing the cap.

It's not the Parise contract alone (at all), it's the 8-12 others that are all similar to Kovy, but had a blind eye turned to them. Fuck that, they were singled out, restructured and still punished. It was bullshit then, and is still now.


Are there any that are similar to Kovy?  I thought his was really the only one that stretched beyond the reasonable playing years.

Kovy's contract would have had him playing until age 44.
Suter's new contract has him playing with the Wild until age 41.
Parise's new contract has him playing with the Wild until age 41.

The same argument could be made about reasonable playing age and circumventing the cap with those contracts.

Yeah it seems like the NHL decided age 41 was the reasonable age.  If I recall, Kovalchuk's was shortened by 3 years.  So the Devils basically caused the NHL to decide on an arbitrary limit by posting 44 as too high.

The new CBA will of course fix this, but then owners will find other loopholes.

I could accept star defenseman playing to 41.  Even then, there were only two active 40 or older defenseman last season.  Not so much for forwards.  40+ year old NHL forwards are extremely rare.  Keith Tkachuk seemed like he played forever.  He retired at 38.  Heck, how many forwards were 40 or older last season in the NHL?  Last season there was one - Teemu Selanne.  Odds are Parise never finishes out that contract, just like Kovy likely won't finish his.  Yes, the NHL needs to correct this via the CBA and stop the idiotic cap circumventing contracts.

There was also Jaromir Jagr who turned 40  in February, but I agree forwards that old are a rarity. D-man a little less so, but really not by much. 40+ goaltenders are a bit more common, but I think if you went back as far as 2 CBA's and did an average on 40+ players in any position, it would be such a miniscule percentile that you make a case against allowing contracts that factored anything beyond an age of 39.
Logged
Devil
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7742



View Profile
« Reply #172 on: July 09, 2012, 12:30:37 AM »

It's not the age or the length of the contract, it's that there were no rules until the Devils did it and no punishment before or after.

They are all circumventing the cap.

Lost Robinson today too.

Awesome off season! icon_frown
Logged

XBox Gamertag: Devil13Devil
Wii Number: 0305 6568 6417 2609
PS3 Thing: Slived
gellar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8992


I'm a dolphin!


View Profile
« Reply #173 on: July 09, 2012, 01:29:32 AM »

Quote from: Devil on July 09, 2012, 12:30:37 AM

It's not the age or the length of the contract, it's that there were no rules until the Devils did it and no punishment before or after.

Well, incorrect.

The rule before was 'hey, don't circumvent the cap'.  The NHL always had the power to veto any deal they thought was cap circumvention.  The Devils just did it so egregiously that they were the ones that got rammed.  It's like a 65 mph speedlimit.  If you go 75, you're technically breaking the law but most likely won't get a ticket.  The Devils were the guys going 110 mph.

Since then, the rule has been spelled out and that's why there is 'no punishment after':


    As of September, 2010, new rules apply to any contract that runs longer than four years and extends beyond the player's 41st birthday.
    The cap hit will be the average salary every season in the contract up to the year after the player turns 41.
    In subsequent seasons, the actual salary for that season will be the player's cap hit.
    If any three years of the deal average more than $5.75 million, then none of years from ages 36 to 40 will have a cap hit of less than $1 million.

Presumably the Devils could have kept Kovalchuk's original contract, but of course they wouldn't do that.
Logged
kronovan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7930



View Profile
« Reply #174 on: July 09, 2012, 06:10:01 PM »

Mason Raymond re-signed with the Canucks for a 1 year deal worth 2.275 million and avoided arbitration. That's down quite a bit from his last contract that IIRC put him in the 3-4 million range. Gotta feel bad for the guy; he got a serious crack to his spine and consequently had a much lower points season and now he's paying the price in his pocket. Of course we're still talking millions here, so I can only go so far in feeling sympathy for him $-wise. He was one player I thought might be moving on, but having sustained that injury probably made him too unattractive to other teams. I love the speed he brings to the game, so I'm hoping he can get his game back on track this season.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2012, 06:16:02 PM by kronovan » Logged
Devil
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7742



View Profile
« Reply #175 on: July 09, 2012, 06:41:44 PM »

Quote
The rule before was 'hey, don't circumvent the cap'.  The NHL always had the power to veto any deal they thought was cap circumvention.  The Devils just did it so egregiously that they were the ones that got rammed.  It's like a 65 mph speedlimit.  If you go 75, you're technically breaking the law but most likely won't get a ticket.  The Devils were the guys going 110 mph.

Correct. All illegal. One punished. 75, 85, 95, 110, 130. I can see the league telling them no dice and tell them to cut the shit and fix it, but millions of dollars in fines, lost draft picks to one team and no penalty to any others says that they picked their spot and the Devils were it. Arbitrary enforcement after the fact.

Again, if there were others who tried and were fined, it's there own fault. They pushed a little harder, but the punishment went from zero to eccesive in the span of 1 team.

In the end, doesn't really matter. I'd do it again in a second, and would have for Parise too.
Logged

XBox Gamertag: Devil13Devil
Wii Number: 0305 6568 6417 2609
PS3 Thing: Slived
gellar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8992


I'm a dolphin!


View Profile
« Reply #176 on: July 09, 2012, 07:01:42 PM »

Quote from: Devil on July 09, 2012, 06:41:44 PM

In the end, doesn't really matter. I'd do it again in a second, and would have for Parise too.

The irony is that the Kovalchuk contract is a big reason why the Devils could not match the Wild offer, the other being that the Devils are poor.  The structure of the Parise/Suter deals is fucking insane.

Not saying that Parise would have stayed even if the Devils could, but the Kovalchuk contract definitely guaranteed they could not.
Logged
kronovan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7930



View Profile
« Reply #177 on: July 17, 2012, 03:16:59 PM »

I don't know if anyone else had heard this, but apparently there's a proposal on the table by the owners to reduce the salary cap from it's current 70 million to 52!   icon_eek  It's linked to a reduction in players' percentage of total revenue, but it's supposed to provide some formula to respect current salaries. Whatever the exact details, I'm hoping this is more of a bargaining chip with lots of room for movement. Heck even if it's met in the middle, that still quite a significant reduction.
Logged
theohall
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1151



View Profile
« Reply #178 on: July 17, 2012, 07:32:08 PM »

Quote from: kronovan on July 17, 2012, 03:16:59 PM

I don't know if anyone else had heard this, but apparently there's a proposal on the table by the owners to reduce the salary cap from it's current 70 million to 52!   icon_eek  It's linked to a reduction in players' percentage of total revenue, but it's supposed to provide some formula to respect current salaries. Whatever the exact details, I'm hoping this is more of a bargaining chip with lots of room for movement. Heck even if it's met in the middle, that still quite a significant reduction.

Heard the same thing.  It is probably a bargaining ploy.  I'm just hoping they put an end to this 10-year, play until 41, contract nonsense.
Logged
Clanwolfer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1412


View Profile
« Reply #179 on: July 17, 2012, 07:38:46 PM »

If they assume the status quo is the players' starting point (which is not unreasonable, the players seem okay with the current system and even offered to play another system under it), then meeting in the middle would be something like 51.5 percent to the players, which is reasonable. I would actually see 50-50 as likely the final split, but only if the players trade that 1.5 percent for the other bargaining chips the owners hold (getting rid of escrow, better final appeals process for discipline, schedule/realignment concerns, etc). If I were a betting man, we end up there, but the players have to give more than they wanted - maybe a fourth year on entry-level contracts, maybe expanding the contract slippage threshold to 20 games instead of 10, or giving up salary arbitration entirely.

Personally, I think it's a non-starter - rolling player salaries and share back isn't going to fix what's wrong with the league structure, which is the disparity between haves and have-nots from a market standpoint. They need to rework the whole revenue-sharing model, which is going to pit owners against owners (exactly why the league doesn't want to put it on the table).

The choices as I see them - address competitive concerns by screwing the players out of mobility (making small teams more competitive by giving them 3-4 more years of control and cheap salaries over drafted players), or do it by screwing big-market owners out of competitive advantage by making them share cash more evenly with their Sun Belt brethren.

I really do feel more pessimistic that we're going to lose October hockey at least.
Logged

gellar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8992


I'm a dolphin!


View Profile
« Reply #180 on: July 19, 2012, 04:58:20 AM »

WHOA.

@DarrenDreger Breaking: Shea Weber agrees to offer sheet with Philadelphia. 14 years, upwards of $100 mil. Preds have 7 days to match. Wow!!

Nashville has to match, don't they?
Logged
Jimmy the Fish
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1333


View Profile
« Reply #181 on: July 19, 2012, 05:53:39 AM »

The only insane part about that offer sheet is the length. It averages out to just over 7 million a season, but holy crap, 14 years is crazy. He'll be 40 years old by the last year.
Logged
pr0ner
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5363


Go Flames go!


View Profile
« Reply #182 on: July 19, 2012, 02:43:30 PM »

Quote from: gellar on July 19, 2012, 04:58:20 AM

WHOA.

@DarrenDreger Breaking: Shea Weber agrees to offer sheet with Philadelphia. 14 years, upwards of $100 mil. Preds have 7 days to match. Wow!!

Nashville has to match, don't they?


I guess if you're going to sign someone to an offer sheet, that's the way to do it.

I wonder if Nashville thinks long and hard about letting Weber walk if they get 4 first round picks out of the deal.  Beyond that, they almost have to match, unless Weber's going to be a sulking baby for the rest of his career.
Logged

XBox Live Gamertag: Pr0ner
gellar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8992


I'm a dolphin!


View Profile
« Reply #183 on: July 19, 2012, 02:59:25 PM »

Four 20ish picks aren't worth Weber at all.  That's crazytalk.

The problem is the structure of the contract.  Something like > $20M in year one.  Nashville might not have that money.
Logged
Jimmy the Fish
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1333


View Profile
« Reply #184 on: July 19, 2012, 03:22:24 PM »

Here is the breakdown of the deal (from TSN):

"In total, Weber will make $14 million in each of the first four years; $12 million in years five and six; $6 million in each of the next four seasons; $3 million in year 11; and $1 million in each of the remaining years."

LOL, he's the hockey bargain of the century in years 7 to 14.
Logged
gellar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8992


I'm a dolphin!


View Profile
« Reply #185 on: July 19, 2012, 04:08:34 PM »

Nashville Predators President of Hockey Operations/General Manager David Poile issued the following statement this morning:

"We are in receipt of the offer sheet signed between the Philadelphia Flyers and Shea Weber. Under the rules pertaining to an offer sheet, the Predators have one week to decide whether to match or accept the compensation. We have stated previously that, should a team enter into an offer sheet with Shea, our intention would be to match and retain Shea. Our ownership has provided us with the necessary resources to build a Stanley Cup-winning team. Due to the complexity of the offer sheet, we will take the appropriate time to review and evaluate it and all of its ramifications in order to make the best decision for the Predators in both the short and long-term.

“We do not anticipate any further comments on this situation until we make our decision within the next seven days.”

Sounds like they are going to match to me.
Logged
kronovan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7930



View Profile
« Reply #186 on: July 19, 2012, 06:41:12 PM »

I think they'll match, but IMO it's crap like this that could very well lead to a scuttling of the CBA talks.
Logged
gellar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8992


I'm a dolphin!


View Profile
« Reply #187 on: July 19, 2012, 06:43:56 PM »

Quote from: kronovan on July 19, 2012, 06:41:12 PM

IMO it's crap like this that could very well lead to a scuttling of the CBA talks.

What?
Logged
Jimmy the Fish
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1333


View Profile
« Reply #188 on: July 19, 2012, 07:05:33 PM »

Quote from: kronovan on July 19, 2012, 06:41:12 PM

I think they'll match, but IMO it's crap like this that could very well lead to a scuttling of the CBA talks.

That makes no sense. From the NHLPA's standpoint, this mega-deal shouldn't be a problem. Weber gets the security of both the dollars and years and it sets the precedence for other players to get these kind of contracts. The Flyers GM is an extension of ownership, so he wouldn't have made the offer to Weber without the owner's approval. If the owners collectively bitch about the rules that allow this kind of offer sheet they have only themselves to blame. And if they really have a problem with it, then that should be incentive to negotiate a new CBA sooner than later.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2012, 07:07:25 PM by Jimmy the Fish » Logged
Jimmy the Fish
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1333


View Profile
« Reply #189 on: July 19, 2012, 08:24:45 PM »

Holy crap. Check out this Puck Daddy article that has an even more detailed breakdown of the terms of the offer sheet. There's some NFL-like money massaging going on in terms of the base salary vs. signing bonus, which pretty much protects the deal from whatever comes out of the new CBA. As much as Nashville NEEDS to match the offer sheet for the sake of their fans and their commitment to hockey in the area, it's really going to come down to whether or not the Preds' owner has the money and the stomach to pay so much guaranteed money up front.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/flyers-offer-sheet-shea-weber-110-million-over-141400012--nhl.html
Logged
gellar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8992


I'm a dolphin!


View Profile
« Reply #190 on: July 19, 2012, 08:42:11 PM »

It's really fairly genius on the Flyers part. 
Logged
Jimmy the Fish
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1333


View Profile
« Reply #191 on: July 19, 2012, 09:08:30 PM »

I agree. They figured out a creative way to stay within the existing CBA rules and still future proof the deal. It'll be interesting to see what kind of animosity this creates between the big market vs. small market teams while the new CBA deal is being negotiated.
Logged
gellar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8992


I'm a dolphin!


View Profile
« Reply #192 on: July 19, 2012, 09:13:35 PM »

Quote from: Jimmy the Fish on July 19, 2012, 09:08:30 PM

I agree. They figured out a creative way to stay within the existing CBA rules and still future proof the deal. It'll be interesting to see what kind of animosity this creates between the big market vs. small market teams while the new CBA deal is being negotiated.

Also, even if Nashville matches, it eliminates any of the Flyers rivals from possibly getting Weber next summer (or earlier via trade).  No Pittsburgh, New Jersey, Rags, or Sabres runs at Weber.  It's either Nashville or Philly for the next fourteen years.

As a Kings fan, I'm quite happy they did this.  No chance the Sharks or Canucks can make a run at Weber either.  YAAAAAAY.
Logged
Jimmy the Fish
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1333


View Profile
« Reply #193 on: July 19, 2012, 10:26:53 PM »

I was a bit surprised that San Jose was even in on Weber. A couple of weeks ago, there was someone who posted on the hfboards that he claimed he saw Weber and his agent in town with Doug Wilson. Most people were like "suuure" but with the mention in the past day or so that the Sharks were in the running for Weber, I guess that guy really was telling the truth. I wonder how Wilson would have restructured the team if Weber was signed by the Sharks. Maybe the rumors of Dan Boyle to the Rangers for Gaborik (ugh) were related.
Logged
pr0ner
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5363


Go Flames go!


View Profile
« Reply #194 on: July 20, 2012, 01:45:46 PM »

The epic front loading on the offer sheet reminds me a lot of what Carolina offered Sergi Fedorov in the late 90s and forced Detroit to match.
Logged

XBox Live Gamertag: Pr0ner
theohall
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1151



View Profile
« Reply #195 on: July 20, 2012, 06:34:26 PM »

Quote from: Jimmy the Fish on July 19, 2012, 05:53:39 AM

The only insane part about that offer sheet is the length. It averages out to just over 7 million a season, but holy crap, 14 years is crazy. He'll be 40 years old by the last year.

It's crazy, but the way the money is setup in the contract, almost all of it winds up hitting the team's salary cap in the first 5 years of the contract.  Nashville matching means they have to somehow lose ~ $1M in salary (cut someone) this season and it extremely limits what they can do in the off-season the next 4 years.  Not sure how it impacts Philly.  I would assume this would be their only big signing for the next few years.
Logged
gellar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8992


I'm a dolphin!


View Profile
« Reply #196 on: July 20, 2012, 06:42:09 PM »

Quote from: theohall on July 20, 2012, 06:34:26 PM

Quote from: Jimmy the Fish on July 19, 2012, 05:53:39 AM

The only insane part about that offer sheet is the length. It averages out to just over 7 million a season, but holy crap, 14 years is crazy. He'll be 40 years old by the last year.

It's crazy, but the way the money is setup in the contract, almost all of it winds up hitting the team's salary cap in the first 5 years of the contract.  Nashville matching means they have to somehow lose ~ $1M in salary (cut someone) this season and it extremely limits what they can do in the off-season the next 4 years.  Not sure how it impacts Philly.  I would assume this would be their only big signing for the next few years.

No.  Just no.

That is not at all how the salary cap works.
Logged
theohall
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1151



View Profile
« Reply #197 on: July 20, 2012, 10:48:10 PM »

Quote from: gellar on July 20, 2012, 06:42:09 PM

Quote from: theohall on July 20, 2012, 06:34:26 PM

Quote from: Jimmy the Fish on July 19, 2012, 05:53:39 AM

The only insane part about that offer sheet is the length. It averages out to just over 7 million a season, but holy crap, 14 years is crazy. He'll be 40 years old by the last year.

It's crazy, but the way the money is setup in the contract, almost all of it winds up hitting the team's salary cap in the first 5 years of the contract.  Nashville matching means they have to somehow lose ~ $1M in salary (cut someone) this season and it extremely limits what they can do in the off-season the next 4 years.  Not sure how it impacts Philly.  I would assume this would be their only big signing for the next few years.

No.  Just no.

That is not at all how the salary cap works.

It's not how it's supposed to work, but front-loading the contract and the early guaranteed money causes some weird BS to trigger most of the cap-hit in the first 5 years.  Heard this on NHL Radio yesterday, and again today, from dudes who know far more than I.  This is the reason some folks are saying this is the kind of deal which will cause small market owners to call BS on the league and these cap-circumventing deals creating another lockout.
Logged
gellar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8992


I'm a dolphin!


View Profile
« Reply #198 on: July 20, 2012, 10:55:14 PM »

Quote from: theohall on July 20, 2012, 10:48:10 PM

Quote from: gellar on July 20, 2012, 06:42:09 PM

Quote from: theohall on July 20, 2012, 06:34:26 PM

Quote from: Jimmy the Fish on July 19, 2012, 05:53:39 AM

The only insane part about that offer sheet is the length. It averages out to just over 7 million a season, but holy crap, 14 years is crazy. He'll be 40 years old by the last year.

It's crazy, but the way the money is setup in the contract, almost all of it winds up hitting the team's salary cap in the first 5 years of the contract.  Nashville matching means they have to somehow lose ~ $1M in salary (cut someone) this season and it extremely limits what they can do in the off-season the next 4 years.  Not sure how it impacts Philly.  I would assume this would be their only big signing for the next few years.

No.  Just no.

That is not at all how the salary cap works.

It's not how it's supposed to work, but front-loading the contract and the early guaranteed money causes some weird BS to trigger most of the cap-hit in the first 5 years.  Heard this on NHL Radio yesterday, and again today, from dudes who know far more than I.  This is the reason some folks are saying this is the kind of deal which will cause small market owners to call BS on the league and these cap-circumventing deals creating another lockout.

Incorrect.  You are mistaking it with the draft pick compensation rules.

Cap hit is 7.8M or whatever it is.  Evenly distributed throughout the contract.
Logged
Koz
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1357


View Profile WWW
« Reply #199 on: July 20, 2012, 11:52:50 PM »

The small market owners cry BS because of the guaranteed money. Nashville probably can't afford $26 million or whatever it is over 3 years even though they have the cap room. The cap hit is the average of the term, which is why there's 3 years tacked on the end of the contract at $1 mil per.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.15 seconds with 103 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.034s, 2q)