Leafs Abroad: Kulemin, Komarov, Grabovski coping well with lockout

Cam: I really like the NFL’s franchise designation tag. If Rielly is the stud we hope, then we sign him for whatever and get a key opportunity to keep him. This is one player per team per year with a max number of times the player can be designated. We develop Rielly, we have the advantage of keeping him. If he wants to go, he will go. Just like the flexibility.

Yup, see I’m okay with the contracts I just want contracts to not have a big fluctuation between year to year averages of the salary.

But Bettman gets shit for really reporting to 10 owners yet Fehr gets a “pass” because his constituency is 600 players strong…it isn’t….it is 25-30 strong and the rest STFU or get shit on a la Hamerlik.

BB I dont see what the leaques obsession is on these contracts. 

The only part I agree is that the average should count against the cap. They have the cap and the revenue split. If a manager / owner wants to go all in on a couple of players, then he has to pay the other 20 players less and deal with the consequencesThis is getting to Politburo like 5 Year PlanS.The next step will be the league pre-ordaining who gets the 1st overall pick. Oops I forgot , thats already been done

Zep: I agree. Owners-GMs  should have the flexibility to spend their cap anyway they want to, proviso being the contracts have to be :financially” appropriate (i.e. no back-diving, and have to have early retirement penalties).

Burke wants players to choose where they go based on the sales pitch, and not based on how ridiculously long the contract can be made out for.  

and any player who becomes rfa/ufa in the future.  So every player

For the same reason the Owners “have chosen this hill to die on…”. because it will be a drag on salaries.

Is McKenzie really that thick?

On the contrary, I think more will.  Look at a team like Anaheim the last time around.  Coming out of the lock out, the rich teams were pretty strapped as far as being able to add to their rosters.  Anaheim swept in and committed almost 18% of their cap to Scott Niedermayer.  I think you’d see the same thing happen a lot more often with this system, where players realize they can get more if they legitimately test the market, and not just try and manipulate it to go to the most stacked team. 
-
I think you’ll just get the star power more spread around, and as a result, teams will have to really try to bulk up at the dead line when they think they have a chance.  I think what happened gradually over the last CBA is that everyone became scared to do anything because there was no movement anywhere.  You couldn’t get a UFA, no one does trades at the deadline, and offer sheets were far too costly to realistically consider.  I think managers, and fans, need to feel like they can actually make changes to their roster in a significant way.

And just to add to that – when you only have to commit to five years, it means you have an out if something goes wrong, or your situation dramatically changes.  I think right now managers and owners feel like they can only even try to spend or acquire talent when they’re ready to try and win it. 
-
The new system will create more parity, but it will still reward managers who build their team patiently through the draft.  It will be possible to stack your team, it’s just that you’d only have a limited window, like Chicago did.  

I just want to see an end to the math manipulation by teams like the Buffalo Sabres. The team front loads contracts so that last year they were, what is it, $7 million over the cap at over $70-million in payroll (but OK on average cap space) and then post a loss of $10 million for the season. Give me a break.

I thought it was 80 million in payroll against a 64.3 cap.  It was pretty insane manipulation.