Triumph

Martin Brodeur - 2 years $9 million

519 posts in this topic

It's not the money. You're not getting it, they HAVE to spend this money on something. If they rolled snake-eyes on the FA market, they may HAVE to pay him something like that. Who else are you going to give the money to? It's floor psychology. If they miss on Parise and just decided to re-sign Marty and Bryce at similiar deals (to what they're making), they'd be 20 players at $54-55M. Considering anything else would be a fodder tackon, they'd pretty much be done.

I already said this in the other thread, but anyone operating under the delusion that the floor will stay where it is deserves the bad contracts that will end up on their books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not the money. You're not getting it, they HAVE to spend this money on something. If they rolled snake-eyes on the FA market, they may HAVE to pay him something like that. Who else are you going to give the money to? It's floor psychology. If they miss on Parise and just decided to re-sign Marty and Bryce at similiar deals (to what they're making), they'd be 20 players at $54-55M. Considering anything else would be a fodder tackon, they'd pretty much be done.

I realize they need to make the floor, but they may not want to pay Marty that money.

So they just throw $5M-$6M at a 40 year old goaltender? They're obviously going with the idea that they're going to re-sign Zach. No need to throw money away now when nothing is certain with him. If Zach doesn't re-sign, then I can see Marty getting that sort of money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brodeur's over 35 so they could load up his contract with bonuses if they wanted (although I think a player might have to make less than league average for that to happen).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I already said this in the other thread, but anyone operating under the delusion that the floor will stay where it is deserves the bad contracts that will end up on their books.

If there's a rollback, the floor DOES stay where it is, you need to operate on the assumption that while the prices may change, the scale will stay the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there's a rollback, the floor DOES stay where it is, you need to operate on the assumption that while the prices may change, the scale will stay the same.

The floor is the biggest issue in the CBA for the owners. Look at how many teams are going to be at the cap this year - almost none. That's because teams are hitting their internal budgets. The league can't support a floor this high without significant revenue sharing. I don't think the cap will be touched - maybe it will be, but not significantly - and I doubt very much that there will be a rollback, the players are dead set against that.

Edited by Triumph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The floor is the biggest issue in the CBA for the owners. Look at how many teams are going to be at the cap this year - almost none. That's because teams are hitting their internal budgets. The league can't support a floor this high without significant revenue sharing. I don't think the cap will be touched - maybe it will be, but not significantly - and I doubt very much that there will be a rollback, the players are dead set against that.

If there isn't a change the % paid to the players, where the rollback would come from, we're going to be waiting awhile for the season to start. With this system, by lowering the floor, don't you HAVE to change the % paid out? Otherwise you're still paying that money out through escrow at the end of the day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there isn't a change the % paid to the players, where the rollback would come from, we're going to be waiting awhile for the season to start. With this system, by lowering the floor, don't you HAVE to change the % paid out? Otherwise you're still paying that money out through escrow at the end of the day.

You can change the revenue split - obviously that's getting changed - but you could artificially keep the salary cap where it is and/or change the escrow system (or maybe even do away with it entirely). My point is that the floor and cap won't be $14M apart anymore, and it's best to operate as though that's the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can change the revenue split - obviously that's getting changed - but you could artificially keep the salary cap where it is and/or change the escrow system (or maybe even do away with it entirely). My point is that the floor and cap won't be $14M apart anymore, and it's best to operate as though that's the case.

The escrow system is NEEDED with linkage and more needed if they're going to play with the floor without moving the cap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The floor is the biggest issue in the CBA for the owners. Look at how many teams are going to be at the cap this year - almost none. That's because teams are hitting their internal budgets. The league can't support a floor this high without significant revenue sharing. I don't think the cap will be touched - maybe it will be, but not significantly - and I doubt very much that there will be a rollback, the players are dead set against that.

so do the owners want to make it so there is no cap floor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so do the owners want to make it so there is no cap floor

The owners would love that. The players not so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The owners would love that. The players not so much.

ok stupid question why would the players hate that, i mean cap floor or no cap floor players like crosby and parise are going to make there money. no disrespect to some players but some of them should not be making the money they are making, panthers over paid for a lot of there players last year to make the cap floor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok stupid question why would the players hate that, i mean cap floor or no cap floor players like crosby and parise are going to make there money. no disrespect to some players but some of them should not be making the money they are making, panthers over paid for a lot of there players last year to make the cap floor

You answered your own question with the last part of your post. Do you really think the union will agree to have the floor done away with completely when so many members of their constituency are being well overpaid for the purpose of reaching the floor? Of course not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You answered your own question with the last part of your post. Do you really think the union will agree to have the floor done away with completely when so many members of their constituency are being well overpaid for the purpose of reaching the floor? Of course not.

after i hit the reply button i realized that i did answer my own question

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I think about it, I believe Brodeur just decided to take a step back and wait for the Zach situation to be resolved. Once Lou locks up Zach, Brodeur will re-sign as well. Of course, sitting back and waiting means entering free agency (even though he has no intention of leaving), so he probably hired an agent to field calls so he doesn't have to waste his weekend doing so himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are the Rangers at 100% they averaged 18,191 but 100% is 18,200. Make it 99.9% espn :rolleyes:

Looks like it rounds to the nearest tenth of a percent. 18,191 out of 18,200 is 99.95%, so that rounds up to 100%.

LA's capacity is well over 18,000, but they have 17,920 as 100 percent. Something weird going on.

The weird thing is how they fill those columns. Believe it or not, both the average of 17,920 and the 100% of capacity are accurate numbers. If you include the two regular-season games they played in Europe (both of which were considered home games), they did average 17,920. 13,800 showed up for the game against the Rangers in Stockholm and they drew 14,300 in Berlin against the Sabres. Back in the States, the 39 games at the Staples Center were filled to 100% capacity; they somehow managed to average 18,119 fans in the 18,118-seat arena.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Phbbbt. This situation's so clownshoes it's actually more like this:

Oh, and a couple other people have already pointed this out, but Marty does owe half a mil in alimony every year until 2020, so I don't blame him for trying to cash in one more time, if that is indeed what he's doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm reading the possibility of Marty to Tampa? Why did they just trade for Lindbeck? Plus I think Dustin Tokarski (Norfolk Admirals) is phenominal. I'd love to have that kid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No joke, i think a ton of people are saying Tampa/Florida because one of Marty's kids tweeted they were going to florida in a few weeks. As if people don't take vacations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marty *lives* in Florida in the offseason. If he signed with the Panthers he would probably live in the same place all year round. It's just does this make any sense at all hockeywise. Of course, it does not and it's a sh!tty reason to add a second team tack-on legacy to your career. Ray Bourque, this would be not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be funny if he goes to the panthers. Clemmenson goes there to play and get away from martys shadow. Marty follows him. Troll

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No joke, i think a ton of people are saying Tampa/Florida because one of Marty's kids tweeted they were going to florida in a few weeks. As if people don't take vacations.

No one is thinking that. People are saying Tampa/Florida because it has been reported by a good source, and those are two teams that are looking for goaltending improvements. Not many teams around the league need a starting goalie.

Tampa Bay makes sense. I don't think you can assume Lindback is ready to be a 60+ game starter just yet. A tandem with Brodeur works. And Marty is good buddies with St Louis and Vinny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and a couple other people have already pointed this out, but Marty does owe half a mil in alimony every year until 2020, so I don't blame him for trying to cash in one more time, if that is indeed what he's doing.

Why would he cash in now for peanuts more when he could have got a ton more years ago with the same alimony payments looming? This didn't just happen last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would he cash in now for peanuts more when he could have got a ton more years ago with the same alimony payments looming? This didn't just happen last year.

It was announced in 2009 though. Maybe something he didn't even consider when signing his last contract or that he expected to last until he retired (or a few years after).

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=3997788

By the way, this article states that he has to pay $132,000 in child support as well. Not sure how long that lasts, but we can bump the number up to $632,000 now.

Edited by devilsrule33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now