Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Devilsfan118

2014 UFA Signing Thread

922 posts in this topic

They have an opt out after eight years iirc so that'd really be six seasons left of labor peace.

Oh right of course, the opt-out. How could I forget...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't there an out clause that could be used to renegotiate the cba earlier than 2022?

Edit: I see that in the time it took me to post this, someone else already made my point.

Edited by ATLL765

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They have an opt out after eight years iirc so that'd really be six seasons left of labor peace.

I really think labor disruptions will be minor at this point. The differences now are minimal, in that it really comes down to a number for the revenue split. I suppose the players might want to take a stand against escrow, but ultimately it doesn't seem like you have a lot if teams circling the drain anymore, and the long term front loaded deals that could cripple a team are gone.

This is essentially what the NFL lockout came down to, and that got resolved without losing any games, whereas in the past the owners had resorted to replacement players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really think labor disruptions will be minor at this point. The differences now are minimal, in that it really comes down to a number for the revenue split. I suppose the players might want to take a stand against escrow, but ultimately it doesn't seem like you have a lot if teams circling the drain anymore, and the long term front loaded deals that could cripple a team are gone.

This is essentially what the NFL lockout came down to, and that got resolved without losing any games, whereas in the past the owners had resorted to replacement players.

 

The owners in the NFL resorted to replacement players over 20 years ago.  The sports labor landscape has changed considerably since then.  The reason why the NFL season started without any games missed is because NFL careers are so short that missing even one week of exhibition games costs the players considerable money, money that they will never get back.  The NHL union is not so desperate.  The NFL players caved on everything except an 18 game season and during the next labor negotiation the same thing will happen and the NFL owners will continue to get richer.

 

The NHL owners are not negatively impacted by lockouts as a whole.  As such, it makes sense to have them because they squeeze the players for as much money as possible.  And that is what will happen next time too.  The NHL doesn't have enough healthy franchises to where they're going to want to avoid labor strife, as is the case in MLB, in which most teams are doing fairly well and which has been seriously impacted by labor strife.  The owners will opt out in 6 years and there will be a lockout - enjoy early season hockey until then, because it is absolutely inevitable.  You just have to do the math.

Edited by Triumph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really think labor disruptions will be minor at this point. The differences now are minimal, in that it really comes down to a number for the revenue split. I suppose the players might want to take a stand against escrow, but ultimately it doesn't seem like you have a lot if teams circling the drain anymore, and the long term front loaded deals that could cripple a team are gone.

This is essentially what the NFL lockout came down to, and that got resolved without losing any games, whereas in the past the owners had resorted to replacement players.

 

Like Tri said, the owners/Bettman will always find an excuse to lockout until proven otherwise.  Especially considering the NHL was less negatively effected by losing a complete season than MLB was by losing a World Series.  

 

Granted I think this time around people (and more importantly corporations) had finally gotten pretty close to the breaking point where they had enough and you run the risk of more organized boycotts in the age of social media, evenmoreso than people did in 2004 because anyone with a brain knew the game was damaged at that point with the # of teams going bankrupt.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The owners in the NFL resorted to replacement players over 20 years ago. The sports labor landscape has changed considerably since then. The reason why the NFL season started without any games missed is because NFL careers are so short that missing even one week of exhibition games costs the players considerable money, money that they will never get back. The NHL union is not so desperate. The NFL players caved on everything except an 18 game season and during the next labor negotiation the same thing will happen and the NFL owners will continue to get richer.

The NHL owners are not negatively impacted by lockouts as a whole. As such, it makes sense to have them because they squeeze the players for as much money as possible. And that is what will happen next time too. The NHL doesn't have enough healthy franchises to where they're going to want to avoid labor strife, as is the case in MLB, in which most teams are doing fairly well and which has been seriously impacted by labor strife. The owners will opt out in 6 years and there will be a lockout - enjoy early season hockey until then, because it is absolutely inevitable. You just have to do the math.

It's more that the owners have less to gain at this point. Let's say they get an extra couple percent of revenue split. It amounts to a few extra million per team, if that. It doesn't mean much to owners like Harris who care much more about what the team is worth, and it doesn't mean much for the Torontos or Dolans. After that who's really left?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's more that the owners have less to gain at this point. Let's say they get an extra couple percent of revenue split. It amounts to a few extra million per team, if that. It doesn't mean much to owners like Harris who care much more about what the team is worth, and it doesn't mean much for the Torontos or Dolans. After that who's really left?

 

It amounts to an extra few million per team PER YEAR.  And then consider the next lockout and the next one - it adds up.  Now what might happen is that the players threaten to kill another season and the owners believe them and they basically agree on the old CBA with cosmetic changes - but I don't see that happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, that just isn't true.  The Rangers signed McDonagh for 6 years.  The Rangers got 3 years of UFA.  When McDonagh is eligible for UFA, he is going to be due an AAV of at least $9M, and he is not as good as PK Subban.  The Habs got 2 years at 2.9M, now they will get 8 years at 9M.  They are paying more now, but they are saving later, as Subban would be eligible for at least an $11M AAV if he were signed to a $6M/6 year type deal like you are proposing.

 

The lockout is coming because the owners can.  A player like PK Subban is worth considerably more than Montreal is paying him.

 

They're the same age. Each drafted in 2007. Subban is better offensively. Mac has the edge defensively. It's close. I get your point about buying up UFA years. Eventually, McDonagh will be making similar money. Doughty has another 5 at 7. I consider him better than either. He'll be worth 11-12. In two years, Seabrook hits the market at 31. He's on a 5-year deal at AAV 5.8.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the devils are the feature over on nhl.com today, for the 30 teams in 30 days piece. 

 

theres a bunch of articles, definitely worth reading on a lazy sunday.  the reviews were actually pretty favorable, predictions that we make the playoffs.  go check it out, theres a video too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the devils are the feature over on nhl.com today, for the 30 teams in 30 days piece. 

 

theres a bunch of articles, definitely worth reading on a lazy sunday.  the reviews were actually pretty favorable, predictions that we make the playoffs.  go check it out, theres a video too

sweet thanks for the heads up when I get home later im going to take a look

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the devils are the feature over on nhl.com today, for the 30 teams in 30 days piece. 

 

theres a bunch of articles, definitely worth reading on a lazy sunday.  the reviews were actually pretty favorable, predictions that we make the playoffs.  go check it out, theres a video too

The pundits actually believe we will make playoffs....that really is a shocker.  Basically stating Schneider will carry us, and that the young defense has to do well with the minutes they're given.  They even liked the Cammalleri deal.  I love when they does these 30 in 30. 

I think Schneider will be great, the defense will perform well, but we're going to see some growing pains, and we've added offense without losing any. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The pundits actually believe we will make playoffs....that really is a shocker. Basically stating Schneider will carry us, and that the young defense has to do well with the minutes they're given. They even liked the Cammalleri deal. I love when they does these 30 in 30.

I think Schneider will be great, the defense will perform well, but we're going to see some growing pains, and we've added offense without losing any.

The only way we end up being a worse team this year is if the young guys on defense take steps backwards and I really don't think that's happening. I'm pretty optimistic about this upcoming season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yea they actually listed Gelinas as our X factor for the season, interesting.

 

all together though, that 30 for 30 feature really is a great way to give a lot of attention to individual fan bases.  its exciting, especially being that the devils aren't in the spotlight (smaller fanbase) that often

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did Craig Button weigh in yet? He always says we'll finish in like 11th place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did Craig Button weigh in yet? He always says we'll finish in like 11th place.

 

He can shove his opinion and his permed mullet up his backside. At times he seems to make sense and others he's freaking annoying as hell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did Craig Button weigh in yet? He always says we'll finish in like 11th place.

I couldn't find any projected final team ranking for the Devils in any of the articles unfortunately. Would have been interesting hearing where they should finish in the East considering how much parity there will likely be this year. I'm thinking 6th or 7th. Edited by Unthinkable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Del Zotto's like the left-handed starting pitcher who wins 15 games and is among the league's ERA leaders for one season, and gets chance after chance because of it.  Del Zotto will get some chances based off his 2011-12 campaign (77 GP, 10 G, 31 A, 41 Pts, +20)...a few teams will think they can "right" him.  Wouldn't surprise me to see him play for 3-4 teams over the next 4-5 years, on low-risk contracts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Del Zotto isn't bad, he's just not very good.  A few changes to his game and he could be a valuable piece.  I think the reason it took him until August to sign isn't because he didn't have offers before - he wanted to go to the right place to rehabilitate his career.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Del Zotto isn't bad, he's just not very good.  A few changes to his game and he could be a valuable piece.  I think the reason it took him until August to sign isn't because he didn't have offers before - he wanted to go to the right place to rehabilitate his career.

 

I mean it says a lot when a team like Nashville doesn't even give you a qualifying offer as a 23 year old, and after they gave up a solid NHL defenseman to get you in the first place. 

 

Can't say I paid attention to him that much, but he was absolutely putrid in the Devils/Rangers 2012 series, to the point that he made Salvador look like Nik Lidstrom. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean it says a lot when a team like Nashville doesn't even give you a qualifying offer as a 23 year old, and after they gave up a solid NHL defenseman to get you in the first place. 

 

Can't say I paid attention to him that much, but he was absolutely putrid in the Devils/Rangers 2012 series, to the point that he made Salvador look like Nik Lidstrom. 

 

Kevin Klein is not a solid defenseman - he's a 3rd pairing guy at best - and him not getting a QO was always a possibility - he had to be qualified at 2.9M (or at least 2.61M - not entirely sure of the rule).  A bit pricey for a guy who had played himself out of the lineup.

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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0