| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
PainTrain
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1393 Posts |
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
 Posted - 07/02/2008 : 13:51:03
|
One year though?? That's a bit of a risk.
Not just because I am an Oiler fan, but I know for certain they had a 5 or 6 year deal for $9 million a season. That's $45-$56 million. Set for life.
Instead he signs one year for $7.4 million?? Obviously, he wants a ring and I can't say that choosing Detroit is a bad decision.
However, what happens if he flops?? What happens if he gets hurt?? Let's say he comes out of the game a little cold and has 10-12 points in the first 20 games. Then he gets hurt. Who's going to sign him the following year for the $9 million the Oilers offered??
Could turn out great, but it also could be a pretty big mistake signing for such a short term deal. |
 |
|
|
99pickles
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
671 Posts |
Posted - 07/02/2008 : 21:44:14
|
Ya, I'm scratching my head a little from both points of view on this one. Why do the Wings want (or think they need) him for one season for? And why would he pass on all that security just for one kick at the can? I am not convinced that he wants a cup that badly, by the way.
This situation makes me think of the Ovechkin deal. A superstar player can go one of two ways nowadays when it comes to contracts: great overall money in a long-term contract with a good annual rate, or a great annual rate for only a year or two. The question is, when do you stop taking risks on short contracts and lock yourself up for the remainder of your career when you are likely to be less productive? Clearly, Ovechkin will be playing for many more years. By the time he gets to the last couple of years of his monster contract, he will be a great value to his team. The salary cap will be higher, and there will be a lot more money left over for the team to remain competitive, ideally.
The catch from a player's point of view is, as I said, when do you stop signing short term deals in order to enjoy the annual increases, and switch over to one long term deal to ride out. Unfortunately, in this scenario, you still have to remain either productive or at least important to your team...lest you fall victim to the dreaded "buyout".
From the team point of view you must ask yourself, is this the guy we can build around for the next ten years? 13 years? Not many players fall into this category. But what about the tier 2 semi-stars? Those are the type of players other teams might be interested in signing to an offer sheet in a year that they are "going for it". So you want to lock these guys up too, no? Hmmm, not so simple now...
Did you know, under the terms of the buyout, Darcy Tucker is being paid $6M to NOT play for the Leafs? You put that together with what Colorado is paying him to actually PLAY, and he's making a tidy sum.
If only I could find someone to pay me to NOT work for them while I do the same job for someone else.... |
|
|
|
Axey
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
877 Posts |
Posted - 07/03/2008 : 08:27:06
|
| It seems like Hossa wants to be the constant talk of the NHL, also he signed a 1-year deal meaning he will be available again next year and will sign with the 'favourite' then. He really is making a bad name for himself, yes he did turn down the huge offer for Detroit's, but think about who the Pens gave up for him, he is just playing to be carried to a championship not to lead a team to one, no loyalty and really is putting himself down. |
|
|
|
Guest8372
( )
|
Posted - 07/03/2008 : 12:25:51
|
Strange, if he signed for monster money for long term, we (as in the fans) would call him greedy and spew all that is wrong with the world of overpaid athletes. He is willing to take less money to play with a contender for the shor term and somebody questions "how badly he wants to win the cup".
Either way he can't win.
Personally, I think what he did was great. Risky but great and probably pissed of the players association and his agent but so what. You can't question Hossa's desire to win the cup if he is willing to play for less money on a contender. |
|
|
|
99pickles
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
671 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2008 : 02:35:53
|
You don't make any sense...he was not going to get this annual rate over 13 years....so he didn't sign for less money, he signed for less years so that the back end of his contract wasn't a bargain (for his employer, that is).
Did you even read the previous post?
Let me restate it simply...As a tier 1 or tier 2 star player you can either...
1) Keep signing short term, but high annual rate contracts in order to keep up with the inflation. Hence, maximum earnings. The upside: you are always going to be at max market value. The downside: What if you stop performing at the established level?
2)Or you can get a career-long return on your current high status (a la Ovechkin, let's say) and sign for great career-long value which is not as great of a year-to-year rate, BUT it is GUARANTEED money no matter how badly you bottom out. Maybe you can even get lucky and "enjoy" a buyout from one team while you sign a new contract with another team (a la Tucker)
You should be able to infer from this post that I believe Ovechkin would have been better off signing a 3 or 5 year contract at the CURRENT max value. That way, when it expires, you can sign a new 3 or 5 year contract at the NEW max value. I believe this only works when you are clearly one of the top handful of players in the league. Otherwise you should just go with long term security...at least that's what Jim Carrey the Net Detective tells me!
Edited to add: You can't sign for monster money long term, because we don't know what the salary cap will be next year, or the year after that , or the year after that...you can only max out at this year's rate ( you do realize that there is a max % of any team's salary that a player can be at, right?) and it changes EVERY single year.
I also don't think his agent is mad at him...I think his agent knows the gamble better than he does, and is likely the one that advised him in this direction. Remember, the more Hossa makes, the more Ritch Winter makes. And right now they are going to go year-to-year for a max return.
Furthermore, I don't think the NHLPA is mad at him either...they are not against players getting high salaries, they are in fact, FOR it...being that they are the players' union and all. They actually intend on exercising their option on opening the CBA agreement and re-negotiating it to further benefit their cause, and I don't think their cause includes less money and less freedom for the players. |
Edited by - 99pickles on 07/04/2008 02:52:39 |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Hossa to HockeyTown 
