How it is that Fehr has convinced some of the NHL players that they should be willing to cancel a season vs. demanding the NHL have longer than 5 year deals is so bad for the players it is scary. - Eklund
Because like in many unions, the short timers or basement bargain constituents are always overlooked and left out in the cold. Fehr doesn't care about these guys, he's focusing on the top 25% of the players. The high profile guys who are more than likely the ones clamoring for longer contract deals because it's going to affect them the most speaking in high dollar long term contracts that are still somewhat cap friendly. They can't get that with 5 year 5% variance limits.
1) Talbot and Moen don't come close to that term if the max length is 5 years. They'd be lucky to get 3 year deals then. Its relative. If Shea Weber can only get 5 years do you think Jason Garrison or Dennis Wideman can get anywhere close to 5 as well? Nope. 3 year deals.
Also, 100 players "lost" their jobs because of natural transition and it had 2 years of retirees. Is their out rage when prospects usurp old players during non lockout seasons?
2) This is stupid. You listed 2 players. One a veteran bound by blood to his team, and a young player in his 2nd season in the NHL. Basically every star player in the league is on a deal longer than 5 years.
3) The more FA years a player signs away the more leverage they have to get more dollars. This is a common talk all the time and you even touch on it regularly when RFA's are in extension talk and say how it makes sense.
4) You more or less just proved a point against your own argument. - DTF69
I really don't get this argument. Why would 5 year deals be exclusively for star players? They would be for any (young) player that an NHL team wants to ensure they have on their roster for 5 years.
I would give a player like Wayne Simmonds or Brad Marchand or Max Talbot a 5 year deal to keep him on my roster.
I really don't get this argument. Why would 5 year deals be exclusively for star players? They would be for any (young) player that an NHL team wants to ensure they have on their roster for 5 years.
I would give a player like Wayne Simmonds or Brad Marchand or Max Talbot a 5 year deal to keep him on my roster. - niedermayer27
Agreed. People who think GM's would behave rationally if limits on contract length (or even limits in salary variation) were imposed forget how quickly they became irrational again after a salary cap was put in place.
Because like in many unions, the short timers or basement bargain constituents are always overlooked and left out in the cold. Fehr doesn't care about these guys, he's focusing on the top 25% of the players. The high profile guys who are more than likely the ones clamoring for longer contract deals because it's going to affect them the most speaking in high dollar long term contracts that are still somewhat cap friendly. They can't get that with 5 year 5% variance limits. - MnGump
Every comment you read from players, on the contract term limit. States that they're concerned about the middle class of NHL players. Why is that if Fehr is only focused on the top 25% of players? Why is pretty much every source you read state that the PA is concerned about the middle class of players?
Every comment you read from players, on the contract term limit. States that they're concerned about the middle class of NHL players. Why is that if Fehr is only focused on the top 25% of players? Why is pretty much every source you read state that the PA is concerned about the middle class of players? - MJL
