FogBat Posted June 23, 2008 Report Posted June 23, 2008 People still take Eklund seriously? Come on.... I certainly don't.
shrader Posted June 23, 2008 Report Posted June 23, 2008 This practice is no different then allowing players under contract try and work out their own trade. It is now being reported that San Jose has given select East conference teams permission to speak to Campbell. Would be nice if Buffalo would get in on the action but I'm sure Darcy's busy getting those four qualifying offers ready or looking for Don Meehan's phone number. So certain teams get a jump on free agency ahead of others. It shouldn't be allowed. Why even have a starting date for free agency if this is going to happen? Some teams have actually traded for those negotiation rights while others are now freely given them? Its not right.
nfreeman Posted June 23, 2008 Report Posted June 23, 2008 A) He will get offered close to $8 million although he may take less to sign with the team of his choice (Ottawa or NYR) B) As many times as I've said, I do not take shots at Darcy gratuitous or otherwise. It is Quinn and Golisano, mostly Golisano, who I have a problem with. I do think that they have put too much on Darcy's plate in order ot eliminate that costly layer of management. I called BS on this before and am doing so again, just for the record. Having said that -- if you think Soupy is going to get offered close to $8 million, how much do you think Hossa is going to get offered? Not arguing, just asking.
ROC Sabres Posted June 23, 2008 Report Posted June 23, 2008 I called BS on this before and am doing so again, just for the record. Having said that -- if you think Soupy is going to get offered close to $8 million, how much do you think Hossa is going to get offered? Not arguing, just asking. We might as well start calling ourselves the Russian Super League with the price tags that some players are acquiring now a days. Soupy shouldn't get more than 5 or 6 but with the hype building everyday he will probably pull in 6.5-7. If he gets more, I want his agent. On the same note, what do you think is the drive for the price of players these days related more to, the agents, players or NHLPA? From the past year I would have to go with agents. Thoughts?
nfreeman Posted June 23, 2008 Report Posted June 23, 2008 We might as well start calling ourselves the Russian Super League with the price tags that some players are acquiring now a days. Soupy shouldn't get more than 5 or 6 but with the hype building everyday he will probably pull in 6.5-7. If he gets more, I want his agent. On the same note, what do you think is the drive for the price of players these days related more to, the agents, players or NHLPA? From the past year I would have to go with agents. Thoughts? I think both the "agents" theory and the "NHLPA" theory are whacked-out conspiracy theories that ignore the laws of human nature. It's human nature for GMs, with their jobs on the line and huge piles of other people's money to spend, to get in bidding wars for players, and it's human nature for players to try to get as much as they can get. This doesn't mean the players are greedy -- only normal.
tom webster Posted June 23, 2008 Report Posted June 23, 2008 I called BS on this before and am doing so again, just for the record. Having said that -- if you think Soupy is going to get offered close to $8 million, how much do you think Hossa is going to get offered? Not arguing, just asking. Well, Hossa turned down $7.13 so he must think its going to be closer to $9 or he would have signed with the Pens.
tom webster Posted June 23, 2008 Report Posted June 23, 2008 So certain teams get a jump on free agency ahead of others. It shouldn't be allowed. Why even have a starting date for free agency if this is going to happen? Some teams have actually traded for those negotiation rights while others are now freely given them? Its not right. In all cases, if a player signs before July 1st, there will be compensation involved.
Chief Enabler Posted June 23, 2008 Report Posted June 23, 2008 He's not even a Sabre so why does it still bother you what he does??? As far as being a pansy I hightly doubt the definition of being a Pansy is waiting till the start of freeagency to shop your services to the highest bidder... From TSN video; Soupy is stalling negociations with SJ because he is interested in returning to the east coast to be closer to family <_< I'm over him....
awill29 Posted June 23, 2008 Report Posted June 23, 2008 Well, Hossa turned down $7.13 so he must think its going to be closer to $9 or he would have signed with the Pens. I can't see Hossa making 9M a year. The league maximum this past year was somewhere around 10. Ovechkin's deal gets him a little north of 9/yr. Nobody else in the league, including Crosby or Malkin, deserve that kind of money. 8M is probably what he's aiming for, but I still think that would be ridiculous for him.
tom webster Posted June 23, 2008 Report Posted June 23, 2008 I can't see Hossa making 9M a year. The league maximum this past year was somewhere around 10. Ovechkin's deal gets him a little north of 9/yr. Nobody else in the league, including Crosby or Malkin, deserve that kind of money. 8M is probably what he's aiming for, but I still think that would be ridiculous for him. Max salary will be around $11.2. Because most teams have locked up their star players, its Hossa and then a huge drop off. Campbell will be paid because he is the premier puck moving D man who eats minutes.
X. Benedict Posted June 23, 2008 Report Posted June 23, 2008 I called BS on this before and am doing so again, just for the record. Having said that -- if you think Soupy is going to get offered close to $8 million, how much do you think Hossa is going to get offered? Not arguing, just asking. I think Soupy get just under 8 - let's say 7.8. Hossa gets 10 if it is short term. Long term average of 9. Pretty much just a hunch looking at numbers.
nfreeman Posted June 23, 2008 Report Posted June 23, 2008 Well, Hossa turned down $7.13 so he must think its going to be closer to $9 or he would have signed with the Pens. Good point, although I still have a hard time believing that someone would give Hossa (or for that matter anyone other than Crosby, Ovechkin, LeCavalier, Zetterberg, Malkin, Iginla or Chara) more than $8 milliion -- but I can't deny that it's possible. I think Soupy get just under 8 - let's say 7.8.Hossa gets 10 if it is short term. Long term average of 9. Pretty much just a hunch looking at numbers. Yikes. Actually, this wouldn't be a bad idea for a predictions thread, where everyone goes on record with how much they think the big UFAs will get.
shrader Posted June 23, 2008 Report Posted June 23, 2008 In all cases, if a player signs before July 1st, there will be compensation involved. I know, but that's not the point. Why did Tampa have to pay for the rights to Prospal while Montreal gets Sundin's for free? It won't happen since Sundin is so loyal to Toronto, but what's to stop him or someone else in this situation from saying, "we worked something out, but hey, let's wait until July 1 so you don't have to give up anything"?
BetweenThePipes00 Posted June 23, 2008 Report Posted June 23, 2008 Actually, this wouldn't be a bad idea for a predictions thread, where everyone goes on record with how much they think the big UFAs will get. I think the most common answer would be "Too much."
apuszczalowski Posted June 23, 2008 Report Posted June 23, 2008 I know, but that's not the point. Why did Tampa have to pay for the rights to Prospal while Montreal gets Sundin's for free? It won't happen since Sundin is so loyal to Toronto, but what's to stop him or someone else in this situation from saying, "we worked something out, but hey, let's wait until July 1 so you don't have to give up anything"? I know what you mean, but its up to the teams I guess, and Toronto must be more desperate to get something for him that they would be willing to work out something that would allow him to talk early to Montreal, and I think in there situation theres a deal in place thats mats to the Canadians for a 2nd, but the deal is contingent on Montreal signing him first, and that if he signs with them (even after July 1st, Toronto would get something, or else the Leafs are idiots in thinking they are going to get anything in return, and the league would probably not allow something like that (although the Leafs may just be that dumb) The problem is, the GM's of the league are now just figuring out the loop holes and coming up with new ways of getting advantages of acquiring players under the rules, before others. You will probably see this alot more now, until some players start complaining about it (because it keeps them from playing the GM's in a bidding war) and they go back and revise the rules
shrader Posted June 23, 2008 Report Posted June 23, 2008 I know what you mean, but its up to the teams I guess, and Toronto must be more desperate to get something for him that they would be willing to work out something that would allow him to talk early to Montreal, and I think in there situation theres a deal in place thats mats to the Canadians for a 2nd, but the deal is contingent on Montreal signing him first, and that if he signs with them (even after July 1st, Toronto would get something, or else the Leafs are idiots in thinking they are going to get anything in return, and the league would probably not allow something like that (although the Leafs may just be that dumb) The problem is, the GM's of the league are now just figuring out the loop holes and coming up with new ways of getting advantages of acquiring players under the rules, before others. You will probably see this alot more now, until some players start complaining about it (because it keeps them from playing the GM's in a bidding war) and they go back and revise the rules There are reports going around that similar deals have been put in place for Hossa with Boston and Campbell with NY. It sounds as if these are set up so that the player will sign at the start of free agency. This way, the current team is essentially shaping the market so that the player doesn't end up with a direct rival. It won't be the players that eventually complain, since they get their money anyway, it will be the team that wanted to sign the player but was never given that opportunity. I don't know how these deals don't qualify as tampering.
apuszczalowski Posted June 23, 2008 Report Posted June 23, 2008 There are reports going around that similar deals have been put in place for Hossa with Boston and Campbell with NY. It sounds as if these are set up so that the player will sign at the start of free agency. This way, the current team is essentially shaping the market so that the player doesn't end up with a direct rival. It won't be the players that eventually complain, since they get their money anyway, it will be the team that wanted to sign the player but was never given that opportunity. I don't know how these deals don't qualify as tampering. They would only qualify as Tampering if the team they are technically still a part of did not give the other team permission to speak to the player. Since the team that holds their rights right now gave the other team permission to speak to them, it can't be tampering. Although I'm sure there is some other term that could be used that would mean that its unfair to other teams that didn't get a chance to talk to him early but wanted to. Although i can't see that there isn't something in place by their current teams that would restrict the other team from signing them after July 1st without giving up something.
shrader Posted June 23, 2008 Report Posted June 23, 2008 They would only qualify as Tampering if the team they are technically still a part of did not give the other team permission to speak to the player. Since the team that holds their rights right now gave the other team permission to speak to them, it can't be tampering. Although I'm sure there is some other term that could be used that would mean that its unfair to other teams that didn't get a chance to talk to him early but wanted to. Yeah, I've been struggling to find the right word but I finally have: collusion. Although i can't see that there isn't something in place by their current teams that would restrict the other team from signing them after July 1st without giving up something. The wording is throwing me off a bit (damn double negatives), so I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. Are you trying to say that there would be something in place that would prohibit the team (in this case, Montreal) from signing the player (Sundin) after July 1st? That can't happen because as of 7/1, Sundin no longer has a contract and cannot be held by those prior terms.
tom webster Posted June 23, 2008 Report Posted June 23, 2008 Yeah, I've been struggling to find the right word but I finally have: collusion.The wording is throwing me off a bit (damn double negatives), so I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. Are you trying to say that there would be something in place that would prohibit the team (in this case, Montreal) from signing the player (Sundin) after July 1st? That can't happen because as of 7/1, Sundin no longer has a contract and cannot be held by those prior terms. Would it make you feel better if Toronto signed Sundin and then trade him to Monreal? I think this is just a case of a team maximizing their assets. They hold the rights till July 1st and if they feel they can't sign a player, why not trade their rights. One way to stop it, if they choose, have the league award compensatory picks like the NFL. That would eliminate the value of acquiring picks before hand.
Screamin'Weasel Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 The wording is throwing me off a bit (damn double negatives), so I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. Are you trying to say that there would be something in place that would prohibit the team (in this case, Montreal) from signing the player (Sundin) after July 1st? That can't happen because as of 7/1, Sundin no longer has a contract and cannot be held by those prior terms. I think what Apus was asking is: can there or would there be something in place that would prohibit the team (in this case, Montreal) from signing the player (Sundin) after July 1st when the deal had been agreed to (but not officially signed) before July 1st?
shrader Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 Would it make you feel better if Toronto signed Sundin and then trade him to Monreal? I think this is just a case of a team maximizing their assets. They hold the rights till July 1st and if they feel they can't sign a player, why not trade their rights. One way to stop it, if they choose, have the league award compensatory picks like the NFL. That would eliminate the value of acquiring picks before hand. Maximizing their assets? They haven't actually made a trade. Compensatory picks would eliminate the value of acquiring negotiation rights? Well then why did teams make those trades all the time back when they did award compensatory picks?
tom webster Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 Maximizing their assets? They haven't actually made a trade. Compensatory picks would eliminate the value of acquiring negotiation rights? Well then why did teams make those trades all the time back when they did award compensatory picks? If the player signs before July 1st, they will get compensation. Trades were made before because teams that acquired those players got the compensatory picks and teams that traded the players wanted the picks ayear earlier. Make the compensatory picks eligible only to teams that the player actually played for and make them high enough and you should eliminate some but not all of the trades. I'm still not sure the league wants to stop this, just offering ideas/
shrader Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 If the player signs before July 1st, they will get compensation. And if not, they were just provided with something without actually paying for it. Why are they entitled to that right?
tom webster Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 And if not, they were just provided with something without actually paying for it. Why are they entitled to that right? How is it any different then a conditional trade? Also, by allowing another team to negotiate, the team that presently has the rights can guage market value and maybe persuade the player to sign with them. I don't see where the harm comes in.
shrader Posted June 24, 2008 Report Posted June 24, 2008 How is it any different then a conditional trade? Also, by allowing another team to negotiate, the team that presently has the rights can guage market value and maybe persuade the player to sign with them. I don't see where the harm comes in. So what happens if he hits the open market? If he does end up signing with Montreal, how can anyone claim that the week plus of negotiating time, time that they didn't have to pay to receive, didn't help them out? Yeah, it probably won't happen, but they're opening the door for something like that in the future. That's a whole can of worms the league should do everything in their power to avoid. But then again, I'm talking about foresight from the NHL, and I know that doesn't exist.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.