2 year bridge deals why it failed, and a solution to all these RFAs Boeser included

[Solinar]

I'd like to see more performance bonus's in contracts.  Gives incentive to the player to show up.  Make a few 'classes' to choose from, from offensive to defensive player, forward and defense, and goalie.  x amount for goals, x amount for assists, etc etc  Break it down.  If you show up, and you earn it, you get paid.  You don't...you don't get paid.  Would also like to a franchise player designation which you can have exempt from your cap hits, but you can't trade em for their contract.  And nobody can get paid more than your 'franchise player'.  Oh, and contracts at 2-5 years, with only your franchise player allowed more term.  But that is just me playing around with ideas.  Oh, only 1 nmc and 2 ntc per team.

[coastal.view]

7 hours ago, Wanless said:

This does extend to the private sector. I'm a contract worker and I can be fired mid contract for not making targets, also if I get fired from the contract if the guy who is contracted after me charges more that what I said I would do it for I'm legally on the hook for the difference.

you negotiated your work arrangements

freely with whoever you contracted with

you did not have someone else regulate it

 

let's not be naive

all people at the very top of their profession

get incredible buyouts and other protections

when they contract their services

nhl athletes fall into that elite category

and negotiate protections for themselves

[Tomatoes11]

9 hours ago, Standing_Tall#37 said:

The general consensus amongst most nhl front offices nowadays is that you know what an nhl player will be by time they’re 24. They say that a player has reached 90% of his peak by then. I also heard the panel saying that if a player is going to make an all star game that if they haven’t made it by age 24 they never will... with the exception of 1 player/year. 

 

When players were playing until 36....37...38 years old,  bridge contracts made sense. But now they don’t.  We mustn’t forget that the average nhl career lasts 4 seasons now and that the lengthier ones will be about 12 seasons at the high end. 

Clock is ticking on JV then.

 

And this also hilights just how bad that Forsling for Clendenning trade was and to a certain extent the Baerschi trade.

 

What’s up with dim Jim and his baffling moves that goes against research and stats anyways?

[Wanless]

3 hours ago, coastal.view said:

you negotiated your work arrangements

freely with whoever you contracted with

you did not have someone else regulate it

 

let's not be naive

all people at the very top of their profession

get incredible buyouts and other protections

when they contract their services

nhl athletes fall into that elite category

and negotiate protections for themselves

You're contradicting the comment of yours I commented in

 

If you're gonna call things out keep it uniform

[Wanless]

9 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

No offence but you are probably not uniquely talented in that upon firing you, they can readily find someone to take over that contract.    There are only so many upper end hockey players in the world.   This discussion is really only relevant to a handful of players on each team.    These are the cream of the crop of the most elite at what they do in the world.    Don't expect their contracts to look like yours.

I don't think I am

 

That's not what that was and I fully understand how terminating contracts based on performance has too many variables to be cohesive across the league also how performance bonuses after ELC are also complicated.

 

If you back up a bit coastal.view was talking about how a proposed idea would affect other sectors and from what it seemed he was in the position that contracts in general, not just NHL, can't really be terminated

 

 

[Standing_Tall#37]

3 hours ago, Tomatoes11 said:

Clock is ticking on JV then.

 

And this also hilights just how bad that Forsling for Clendenning trade was and to a certain extent the Baerschi trade.

 

What’s up with dim Jim and his baffling moves that goes against research and stats anyways?

Yea... cuz those guys have been stellar enough to get us out of the bottom 5 teams in the league...3 out of the last 4 years  

Edited June 17, 2019 by Standing_Tall#37

[coolboarder]

One thing I would like to see for next CBA regarding to RFA, not UFA.  For RFA, if they sign a player to a long term, it shouldn't be a guaranteed money and if they wish to buy them out, pay them money but not counting toward the cap and become a UFA and it becomes a guaranteed money.   For all UFA, it's a guaranteed money and it's on the GM to know that it's worth the money but for RFA, it's a gamble whether they would perform in latter years of the long-term contract.  I would make it a compromise: anything is less than 5% of the cap is a guaranteed contract for all RFA but any players who wish to be paid more is more risky and should be treated as an unguaranteed contract.   I would suggest to be grandfathered clauses and give teams one or two compliance buyouts in exchange for a slightly increased salary cap, maybe 51/49 shared HRR.

 

I would be all for unguaranteed money for all RFA's in next CBA.   It would ensure that the team gets to pay their players and keep them and it's onus on the RFA to performs in order to earn their money.   With that CBA, RFA with unguaranteed contract will become worth more in term of offer-sheets than guaranteed money will and lose their draft picks as a compensation.    I agree that bridge deals is a show-me but when the league is getting younger, this CBA introduction to RFA unguaranteed money in exchange for bridge, making it possible for RFA to earn a big contract early and they have many years left to live up to their contract.   If the club feels that he is not performing, they can buy him out and not be counted to the cap as a compromise and UFA still get to keep their guaranteed contract in the CBA.   

 

There are 32-teams league and RFA deserve their piece of the pie and allows for teams not to be stuck with that undeserved players with their balloon contract.    RFA is kind of a tricky to maneuver because he is still unknown and unproven commodity because of their great performance early only to fizz out late in their career.   I've seen that happening all over the league in which is why teams are wary of giving out a long-term contract and give him the bridge instead.   

 

So when it comes to Boeser, it's tricky business whether to give him a bridge deal or a long-term contract especially of unknown factor of him coming off a serious injury, lacked summer training and had a bad start but got better as season went on.   He is a unknown commodity when it comes to a high paid salary not knowing what he might look like with full summer training.  If he plays like the early season flop next season, it would be tough for Canucks to build their roster with a bad contract.