Register | Active Topics | Active Polls | Search
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
 All Forums
 Hockey Forums
Allow Anonymous Posting forum... User Polls
 Maximum contract length

 NOTICE!! This forum allows Anonymous Posting.
 Registered members please login above or input your User Name/Password before submitting!
Screensize:
Authority:  UserName:  Password:  (Member Only !)
  * Anonymous Posting please leave it blank. your temporary AnonyID is
Format Mode:
Format: BoldItalicizedUnderlineStrikethrough Align LeftCenteredAlign Right Horizontal Rule Insert HyperlinkInsert Email Insert CodeInsert QuoteInsert List
   
Message:

* HTML is OFF
* Forum Code is ON
Smilies
Smile [:)] Big Smile [:D] Cool [8D] Blush [:I]
Tongue [:P] Evil [):] Wink [;)] Clown [:o)]
Black Eye [B)] Eight Ball [8] Frown [:(] Shy [8)]
Shocked [:0] Angry [:(!] Dead [xx(] Sleepy [|)]
Kisses [:X] Approve [^] Disapprove [V] Question [?]

  Check here to include your profile signature. (Member Only !)
    

T O P I C    R E V I E W
Sensfan101 Posted - 08/02/2010 : 18:46:13
How many years do you think the maximum contract length should be?
4   L A T E S T    R E P L I E S    (Newest First)
slozo Posted - 08/03/2010 : 11:12:19
I am 100% with Irvine, and I have always thought this was the fairest (and by far the simplest) way to do it.

The consequences of such a rule (every year of a deal has to be of equal monetary value) would have the immediate effect of no such long deals . . . not even for the Crosbys and Ovechkins of the world. We know they will get old eventually, and we know the goal production especially drops off dramatically with age . . . so the longest deals I'd guess would be around 8, 9 years for guys like that, and it would drop downward from there.

The NHLPA would be 100% against it, however, while the owners would be 100% for it, so it'd be a tough one to put through.

"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
irvine Posted - 08/02/2010 : 21:48:54
I'm of the frame of mind that, a simple (quick) fix could be something in the lines of:

When a player signs a new contract, that contract must have a constant pay (of the exact same value) for every year of that contract.

Example: Ilya Kovalchuk signs with NJ Devils for 5 years. Each year pays Kovalchuk $9M per year. His cap hit, is then $9M per year. No fluctuating, no changing period. The Cap hit then remains the same, per season, no averages needed.

If the player is worth (to your team), $9M a season. So be it. But, do not say he is worth $9M this year, but only $7.5 the year after and $4 M after that.

I believe this will help keep the cap hit/salaries very straight forward, and no team can then circumvent the cap by averaging out the cap hit to be lower, by front/back loading contracts.

Seems simple enough to me... I dunno.

Irvine/prez.
Beans15 Posted - 08/02/2010 : 19:28:27
It really doesn't matter what people do. Max length, max cap, max number of salary years allowed on a team. Every single thing someone sets up to combat Kovalchuk type deals opens a door for a different way to beat the salary cap.

The CBA, as in anything else, is ruled by a single theory. Every time something is blocked it is saying that something else is open. Block the dollars, go to years. Block the years, go to something else.

Having a max length contract would completely useless in due time.
Sensfan101 Posted - 08/02/2010 : 18:47:22
I think it should be around 8 years.

You miss 100 percent of the shots you don't take Wayne Gretzky

Snitz Forums 2000 Go To Top Of Page