Say it ain't so, Pav...<crickets>

[AJgoal]

I don't know. Teams both front load and backload contracts. I think being able to make the numbers different in different years is beneficial both to clubs that are flush with cash, and those that are struggling. Struggling teams can backload deals to keep their players, hoping that their team improves and revenues increase. I think that making the salary flat across the life of the contract will do more to harm those teams than the ones gaming the system to get more under the cap. Not that I'm against the NHL dropping a couple of teams, but that's obviously not the way the NHL wants to go.

 

I wonder if they might want to consider adopting something similar to the NFL. Have the cap number be a salary set on a yearly basis, with any signing bonus pro-rated out over the length of the contract. For example: a player signs a 3 year, 12 million dollar contract with a 6 million dollar signing bonus, and annual salaries of 1, 2, and 3 million dollars. In year one, his cap hit is 3 million (1 + 6/3), 4 million in year two, and 5 million in year three. It would give teams greater flexibility in both salary structure and cap numbers. Of course, I have no way of knowing if this makes sense in the different economic climates between the NHL and the NFL.

[radoran]

3 minutes ago, AJgoal said:

I don't know. Teams both front load and backload contracts. I think being able to make the numbers different in different years is beneficial both to clubs that are flush with cash, and those that are struggling. Struggling teams can backload deals to keep their players, hoping that their team improves and revenues increase. I think that making the salary flat across the life of the contract will do more to harm those teams than the ones gaming the system to get more under the cap. Not that I'm against the NHL dropping a couple of teams, but that's obviously not the way the NHL wants to go.

 

And there are a lot of variables at play. That said, if a team is that close to the edge in terms of their salary structure, I'm not sure that even counting on "revenues increasing" in the latter years of the deal would make that much difference.

 

Backloading can also make sense as, for example, with Wayne Simmonds where his contract starts at $2.8M salary and ends at $5M - theoretically paying him more as his value to the team theoretically increases.

 

Having that for "under 35" players isn't such a bad idea under those circumstances. In the context of "over 35" perhaps having the CBA mandate that all "over 35" years are counted the same, for example?

 

 

[AJgoal]

Just now, radoran said:

 

And there are a lot of variables at play. That said, if a team is that close to the edge in terms of their salary structure, I'm not sure that even counting on "revenues increasing" in the latter years of the deal would make that much difference.

 

Backloading can also make sense as, for example, with Wayne Simmonds where his contract starts at $2.8M salary and ends at $5M - theoretically paying him more as his value to the team theoretically increases.

 

Having that for "under 35" players isn't such a bad idea under those circumstances. In the context of "over 35" perhaps having the CBA mandate that all "over 35" years are counted the same, for example?

 

 

 

I think that's a fair idea.

[BluPuk]

9 hours ago, radoran said:

 

Yes, if any of them want to jet off to the KHL or the Swedish Elite League, for example, they can pick their team and head out.

 

 

That's not what I meant. What if Americans want to play in their country? Or Canadians wanted to play in TO or Montreal?

Eh, nevermind....

[radoran]

51 minutes ago, BluPuk said:

 

That's not what I meant. What if Americans want to play in their country? Or Canadians wanted to play in TO or Montreal?

Eh, nevermind....

 

Sure, but Russians can't just willy nilly change KHL teams...

[SpikeDDS]

20 hours ago, radoran said:

 

The current system DOES punish everyone. It's DESIGNED to do that.

 

20 hours ago, radoran said:

IF all GMs and players were simply honest and played fair, they wouldn't need the penalty for the "over 35" player. As it is, they unfortunately do.

 

The Wings could easily have decided not to sign Datsyuk for three years. Datsyuk could have taken a lower term. Instead the Wings offered a three year deal paying:

 

$10M

$7M

$5.5M

 

to get a $7.5M cap hit. They benefitted from the length of the deal to get a player who "made" $17M over two years ($8.5M avg annual value) at a cap hit $1M/year lower. In that context, they were able to bring in a Jurco, Shehean, Larkin, Pulkkinen or Athanasiou this season because they were getting the benefit of an $8.5M player at a $7.5M cap hit..

 

That said, I could see the NHL deciding that they will void the cap hit in this situation and give the Wings a "cap recapture" penalty instead. Whether that's kosher under the CBA is another question entirely.

 

Yeah, so for example, in this case, since Datsyuk has had a 7.5M cap hit each year, if he walks after year 2, the contract should be recalculated such that anything a player was already paid should still count against a team's cap, but the rest of that year's salary should become available to find replacement players. In this case, Datsyuk was paid $17M, but his cap hit those 2 years was only $15M, so if he walks, we should still have a $2M cap hit and should be able to use the other $5M to sign other talent to replace him.

 

In the case of contracts where players are paid significantly more up front than their cap hits, with more cap hit planned for the back end, the gaming of the system will still hurt those teams. Since they already received the benefit of the cap vs. salary discrepancy, it would be time to pay the fiddler.

 

So let's look at the case of Johan Franzen's contract, a classic example of backloading cap hit:

 

YEAR		AGE	STATUS	BASE SALARY	SIGNING BONUS	INCENTIVE	CAP HIT
2009-10		29		$5,500,000	-	-	$3,954,545
2010-11		30		$5,000,000	-	-	$3,954,545
2011-12		31		$5,250,000	-	-	$3,954,545
2012-13		32		$3,073,171	-	-	$3,954,545
2013-14		33		$5,000,000	-	-	$3,954,545
2014-15		34		$5,000,000	-	-	$3,954,545
2015-16		35		$5,000,000	-	-	$3,954,545
2016-17		36		$3,500,000	-	-	$3,954,545
2017-18		37		$2,000,000	-	-	$3,954,545
2018-19		38		$1,000,000	-	-	$3,954,545
2019-20		39		$1,000,000	-	-	$3,954,545
2020-21		40		UFA

If Detroit didn't have that ridiculous cap hit hanging over them, Franzen would probably have walked away due to his concussion history--well if he was smart. But let's say he was, and he chose to walk away, to be honest, the right thing to do. Now, to that point, we had paid him almost $5.1M more than the cap hit we had used. So that unenforced cap hit should be enforceable. But to make us continue to be responsible for the remainder of his contract when he obviously has medical issues which prevent him from fulfilling his contract is wrong. I don't know what is fair as far as over how many years a team should be able to spread out that cap hit. I'd be fine with 2 or even 1. Maybe place a $5M per year cap ceiling? May not be necessary. But the fact is that we should not have to keep Franzen on LTIR just because we have the cap hit to wait out. He is obviously unable to play.

 

Obviously, the one thing Detroit DIDN'T do--thankfully (and I don't think they COULD do it back then)--was heavily weigh their cap hit toward the front of the contract (each year is an even $3,954,545 hit), thus lessening their cap recoup that they now face. Still a significant number though, and we do need to be accountable for it.

 

[WordsOfWisdom]

3 hours ago, SpikeDDS said:

If Detroit didn't have that ridiculous cap hit hanging over them, Franzen would probably have walked away due to his concussion history--well if he was smart. But let's say he was, and he chose to walk away, to be honest, the right thing to do. Now, to that point, we had paid him almost $5.1M more than the cap hit we had used. So that unenforced cap hit should be enforceable. But to make us continue to be responsible for the remainder of his contract when he obviously has medical issues which prevent him from fulfilling his contract is wrong. I don't know what is fair as far as over how many years a team should be able to spread out that cap hit. I'd be fine with 2 or even 1. Maybe place a $5M per year cap ceiling? May not be necessary. But the fact is that we should not have to keep Franzen on LTIR just because we have the cap hit to wait out. He is obviously unable to play.

 

I've never really paid much attention to this issue before because I'm not interested in what the players make, the details of the cap, or all the financials behind every deal. I leave that stuff to the Accountants. From what I see, the system is broken. Rather than express outrage (since the NHL thrives on controversy), I choose the path of indifference.

 

If the product sucks, I simply won't watch. If teams devise a CBA system that prevents them from changing their roster by restricting player movement and punishing teams with abusive and silly cap rules, I simply tune out even earlier in the season.

 

This is the NHL:

 

2015-16		35		$5,000,000	-	-	$3,954,545
2016-17		36		$2,000,000	-	-	$3,954,545
2017-18		37		$1,000,000	-	-	$3,954,545
2018-19		38		$1,000,000	-	-	$3,954,545
2019-20		39		$1,000,000	-	-	$3,954,545

This is me:

 

2015-16		35		$2,000,000	-	-	$2,000,000
2016-17		36		$2,000,000	-	-	$2,000,000
2017-18		37		$2,000,000	-	-	$2,000,000
2018-19		38		$2,000,000	-	-	$2,000,000
2019-20		39		$2,000,000	-	-	$2,000,000

 

This is the NHL:

 

GP-W-L-OTL-SOL-ROW-PTS

 

This is me:

 

GP-W-L

 

 

 

 

[AJgoal]

http://www.freep.com/story/sports/columnists/mitch-albom/2016/04/10/albom-wings-datsyuk-column/82835594/

 

Looks like it's basically official. 

[hf101]

There has to be a ton of weeping Wings fans this morning reading that lengthy Good-bye article -wow an emotional piece of literature there.  I can't disagree with anything Datsyuk is planning.  What a wonderful career he has had leaving with plans are to do so much more for youth hockey in Russia.  I wish all players over 35 were only able to sign one-year contracts -- they know where they want to play as it's either for the desire to stay with their team or not as per example by Lindstrom.

 

I don't even think the 7.5M cap hit will be that big of a deal for the Redwings next season.  They will just not sign B.Richards, and maybe Quincey for a cap total of 7.2M and bring up a couple of Kids for 2M with 5 million in cap space.  I think Holland has frustratingly planned for the last couple of years for this and this roster isn't in need of signing anyone next season to big money that there isn't space for.  -- Well done for sure.

 

 

[yave1964]

Well. Hell.

 

I am going back to bed now.

[OccamsRazor]

On 4/6/2016 at 1:33 PM, yave1964 said:

I think he will return for next season and then hang them up and go on a farewell tour of Mother Russia. Class act, just the press making something of nothing, IMHO.

 

 

“I’m thinking I go home after this season,” he said, in a long discussion at the Northville home of his agent and friend, Dan Milstein. “I may not be done with hockey, but — it is hard to say — I think I am done playing in NHL.”

 

http://www.freep.com/story/sports/columnists/mitch-albom/2016/04/10/albom-wings-datsyuk-column/82835594/

[WordsOfWisdom]

9 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

“I’m thinking I go home after this season,” he said, in a long discussion at the Northville home of his agent and friend, Dan Milstein. “I may not be done with hockey, but — it is hard to say — I think I am done playing in NHL.”

 

Just the kind of motivational speech you want to hear before starting a playoff run...  

[SpikeDDS]

1 hour ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

 

Just the kind of motivational speech you want to hear before starting a playoff run...  

You know, though, some of the players already knew. Albom's article, with the interview happening a while ago, even says that some of the players already knew his decision, so this is nothing new.

 

But I'll just bet there will be some motivation to give Pav a proper sendoff in these playoffs.

 

Me, I'm disappointed, but I understand. That man owes this franchise nothing, and if it costs $7.2 million in cap space for 1 year to have him for the two we have had, it was still worth it. The timing of his leaving is much better now than it was 3 years ago. Can you imagine Lidstrom and Pav both leaving at roughly the same time what it would have done to this team? You could kiss the streak goodbye for sure. It would have probably meant a complete rebuild.

 

But not only the streak, but we now have some very promising rookies who have now had the chance to develop and who have also had the privilege of practicing and playing with Datsyuk. Now that the truth is really known about his ankle and how injured it was AND STILL IS, and reflecting on the work ethic that these kids have witnessed, that can only help these kids put into proper perspective what it takes to become a winner. These kids weren't ready two offseasons ago. They are much more prepared to assume leadership roles, particularly Larkin and AA. I think to some degree we have to give a nod to Steve Yzerman. Pav playing with his ankle is direct homage to him watching Yzerman skate for years on a knee that had no business being skated on and what he learned from seeing that--the respect The Captain is given in Detroit, even as he GM's for our playoff rivals. This is not lost on Red Wings fans who remember.

 

Even Marchenko. What do you think it has meant to him being able to play with Datsyuk this season? He'll always be able to say that he did. And I'm sure, with Pav having better communication with his fellow Russian, that he might have learned more than a young American player has in the same year. I must say that I've been pretty impressed with Marchenko's rookie season. I will say without doubt that he is a better player than he would have been had Datsyuk already gone home.

 

Bottom line--and the article touches on it--is that Datsyuk, like every great NHL player, makes the players around him better. Datsyuk is clearly no exception. I'm absolutely sure that his numbers could have been better had he chosen to abandon his unselfish playing philosophy. But he didn't, and the Red Wings have been a better team for the most part because of it.

 

Finally, I'm glad Pav is going home for the right reasons. The difference between his departure and Federov's is day and night to me. I can only imagine Babcock validating that there is nothing more important than family. They are right. This is right. I appreciate that he stayed the extra year that he did. It says something about the Illitches that he did, as he cited his respect for them as his primary reason for not leaving us with a 2-year cap hit, but rather just one.

 

It's not the end of the world. Just the end of an era. We will miss him, and yes the $7M+ cap hit will hurt next year. And I hope the CBA can be renegotiated so that this stuff is minimized, because I think it's stupid (not just because it hurts ME this time). But as he skates away, we have a lot to look forward to, despite the fact that the Magic Man's magic act is almost over in the NHL. He will be missed, but that just means we will have to find new leadership. And we will, even though this stings a bit.

 

It'll be alright.