NFT: NHL Free Agency Thread

In comment 12395649 BrettNYG10 said:

Quote:

Dave, I'd be interested in seeing another season of him at this level before doling that sort of money out. If he reverts back to a 60 point player, you probably regret that deal. Playmakers tend to age better than goal scorers (at least last study I read) and he'll only be 33 when the deal's up, though. So I think it's a slight overpayment, but could be okay long-term. I think arc's right about a lockout. The owners have exerted tremendous leverage and keep fucking things up. The biggest issue is guys like Orpik, Girardi, and Pouliot more than guys like Voracek making a million more than he probably should.

What's ridiculous is Crosby earning 700k more than Vorachuk.
The NHL cap is absurd, poorly constructed, socialism.

How much do you think Crosby or Ovechkin are being cheated each year so Phoenix has a team?

--barf--

Pretty underwhelming HOF crop this year in general it seems

not the for-realzies HOF

I wish the Rangers re-signed Jagr in 2008 (I think it was). Never liked Drury. Also, apparently Jagr had an option that would have kicked in had he led the league in goals - which he didn't only because Jonathan fucking Cheechoo scored the last game of the season.

Also, Patrick Kane subject to a police probe apparently.
Kane - ( New Window )

Lundqvist apparently said this in a Swedish interview:

Quote:

“I’ve questioned why we’re not more pissed off after a loss”, Henrik admits.

I think it's because Girardi sucks.
Expressen - ( New Window )

finally sign Galchenyuk. two year deal as expected.

Not good.

probably very little left in those tires but I liked him when he was here.

They still i believe only have 11 forwards signed (one of which wont play until december) and under $2 million left in cap space to work with. Maybe they have plans to somehow move/settle with Dupuis (another guy I liked when he was here... I'm starting to get hudson)

As for us, i guess this what we have is the training camp roster. I still prefer one more proven forward and one less expensive D-Man... but Gorton's hands may be completely tied by all the damn NMCs.

Affect the cap next season?

Dave, I came across this:

Quote:

The equity portion may not figure in revenue calculations for the purposes of the salary cap. “We were told to expect $120M per year in added revenue… $4M per team,” one governor said.

Later on:

Quote:

Bettman confirmed that revenue tied to this deal is considered “hockey-related revenue” which the NHL has to share with the players and tied to the salary cap. More revenue means a higher cap. James Mirtle of the Globe & Mail projected that the cap could see an increase of around $2.5 million once the money from this deal impacts the hockey-related revenue.

So looks to be a next year event.
CBS Sports - ( New Window )

The equity portion not counting is sort of bullshit. MLBAM will likely IPO and fetch a stupid valuation. Nice way of circumventing the cap for the owners IMO.

In comment 12407235 BrettNYG10 said:

Quote:

The equity portion not counting is sort of bullshit. MLBAM will likely IPO and fetch a stupid valuation. Nice way of circumventing the cap for the owners IMO.

Yup. Look for MSG to do something similar. Grantland had something on this. MSG will sign a 20 year deal with MSG Network on the cheap. Under CBA rights (the article was NBA), the bean counters look passed that deal and assign a fair value to the rights, since the Knicks owner stands on both sides of the deal. But then MSG spins off MSG Network into a stand alone entity, giving each MSG shareholder one share of MSG Network. The new company has a huge valuation because it has long term below market TV deals; and the bean counters stop looking passed the terms of the below market deal, since MSG Network is now a different entity. Players get screwed out of their share of the equity of MSG Network (which is based on the discounted TV deal).

Oh well.

I don't follow MSG's stock that closely (I've been meaning to make it a project at work, but you know how those things are), but the deal was below analyst estimates - and they were accounting for a bit of that self-dealing already.

.

oh my.

Hope the solution is proactively creating space prior to the end of next season rather than searching for answers next summer.

In comment 12407401 Deej said:

Quote:

In comment 12407235 BrettNYG10 said: Quote: The equity portion not counting is sort of bullshit. MLBAM will likely IPO and fetch a stupid valuation. Nice way of circumventing the cap for the owners IMO. Yup. Look for MSG to do something similar. Grantland had something on this. MSG will sign a 20 year deal with MSG Network on the cheap. Under CBA rights (the article was NBA), the bean counters look passed that deal and assign a fair value to the rights, since the Knicks owner stands on both sides of the deal. But then MSG spins off MSG Network into a stand alone entity, giving each MSG shareholder one share of MSG Network. The new company has a huge valuation because it has long term below market TV deals; and the bean counters stop looking passed the terms of the below market deal, since MSG Network is now a different entity. Players get screwed out of their share of the equity of MSG Network (which is based on the discounted TV deal).

This is all true and I'm glad that at least it's getting some minor publicity, but we have to imagine that it'll be close to the top of the agenda next time the CBA is negotiated right?

4 yrs, $15M. I like him and liked him on Ottawa before. Emerging young player. May be a bit of an overpay given his career high is 39 points, but he did just complete his first 81 game campaign. At 24, maybe they think that he breaks out and are betting on the come, and then it's a reasonable contract.