toby91_ca

Except the monies owed to the players is based on revenues, not net earnings.

There is a real risk in bringing a guy along too fast, much greater risk in that than the player getting frustrated and wanting to move on....most guys understand the process and benefit greatly from said process.

The philosophy isn't just a Wings' way, most teams do this. Having someone like Crosby come along and enter the league at 18 is a rarity. I think his year, he was the only player to play the year in the NHL right after being drafted. The fact is that the vast majority of players simply need further development. In Crosby's case, he'd play regardless of who drafted him, in other cases, it might be a matter of how desperate the drafting team is (i.e. Edmonton) - a lot of those younger players would benefit from more development. The Wings situation has been two-fold: 1) they aren't drafting top end talent due to draft position and 2) they haven't been desperate to inject new talent....things could change of course.

The firing was pretty bizzare, should have been done last year or given him more time this year, but I almost think the hiring of Berube is even more bizzare.

I was going to say the same thing. I honestly believe a lot of players that throw the biggest hits, really aren't the most effective hitters out there. The other point, as already mentioned though, is that hit stats are very flawed as it is, to the point that I pretty much ignore them (they are not accurate at all).

Brunner has a much higher ceiling than Weiss based on what exactly? Simply because he's more of an unknown....making it easy to make wild speculations?

What production are you expecting? I think any expectations should be tempered...he'll be 41 very soon after all and has already declined quite a bit from a production perspective.

1 - Salaries only inflate when revenues inflate, so giving out deals like this does nothing...the players will get what they get regardless (x% of revenues) 2 - I understand what you are saying about earning the raise, but the deal is done this way to avoid paying him a modest amount over the next 2 years and then have to pay him boatloads more than $6M in a couple years if he becomes one of the elite players in the league and the salary cap has gone up. It is purely a risk management decision, plain and simple. They'd rather pay him $6M for 7 years, then $3M for the next 2 + $9M for the next 5 years after that.

I wasn't referring to the thread title, was more thinking about the tweet....which is how the Devils described the deal.

I guess, technically, anything greater than 1 is "multi", but I'm not sure I'd refer to a 2-year deal as a mult-year contract. I'd generally say a 2-year contract, a 3-year contract and then once you get to about 4 is when I'd start saying "multi". Maybe it's just me? Sort of think of it like one, couple, few and several

I thought this news came out months ago

Not only that, but only 1 team with more than 100pts? That's absurd, there were 10 teams with 100+ points in 2012

Good thing this deal doesn't kick in until next season

I know we can point out the obvious....take the best idea they came up with in 20 years and now watering it down and ruining it.....BUT, if all of these games sell out quickly and sell for big $.....how stupid are they really? Some might say they'd be stupid if they didn't do it. I think the problem is they start with 1 a year and it's so successful and so many teams are wanting to participate they have a tough time keeping everyone happy, so will it work to have more? If it does, why the hell wouldn't they do it? Edit...forgot the big reason....the owners are business men, plain and simple. Go back to basic economics....supply and demand. The demand has been outweighing the supply on these things, so as long as the demand is there, they will supply it. If they don't, they wouldn't be very good businessmen.

Some may be surprised by the real reason behind the rule. The league isn't wanting to keep helmets on during fights do reduce injuries caused by getting punched in the head without a helmet on. The league is genuinely concerned about the potential for a player to "DIE" if they fall and hit their head on the ice. This is a real concern and they'd gladly take on the risk of hand injuries instead. That said, while the risk of death is real....what are the chances? There will surely be hand injuries..... Flip side to that is....it doesn't matter what the probability is, there is a risk and if it can't be avoided, do it. I really don't have much of an opinion on it myself. I'm not on the side arguing to keep fighting in the game nor am I on the other side, but my enjoyment of a fight wouldn't change from the players taking their helmets off.

Like I said....."not normally to this extent" - meaning, not as long term with as big dollars and there is a good reason for that.....they don't have any #1 overall draft picks on the roster. So...when you are dealing with lower potential upside, obviously the term and $ will be lower, but the Wings definitely have a history of overpaying intially in the hopes of overachieving before contract end.

Isn't this the type of contract the Wings normally sign guys to? Maybe not to this great of an extent, but the Wings normally aren't dealing with as high end talent. However, you sign him to this deal in the hopes that he reaches the lofty potential and the deal becomes a bargain in the long-term. When I first saw the deal, I thought it was way overpayment and it really is right now, but it's obviously a big risk that they are hoping will pay off (they've given similar deals to their other young players as well).

Fans don't like the commissioners, but the owners do. The key there is that the owners are the ones that actually pay the salaries and make decisions on employment. So, in Bettman's case, he's done a great job in the minds of his employers. To correct the orginal poster, it's not more than 90% it is actually around 99%, there are only a handful of guys out of 700 that make more than that.

Not that I think either will be there, but what does playing with Yzerman have to do with potentially attending Lidstrom's jersey retirment?

The comments about Kevlar vests stopping bullets is more of an extreme. I think most people would understand that there is still damage done from a bullet hitting the vest. What needs to be considered though is the significant difference between the size and speed of a puck and size and speed of a bullet, then the also significant difference between goalie equipment and a Kevlar vest. There must be somewhere in the middle. I don't want to see goalies out there wearing Kevlar vests, but let's not lose sight of the fact that goalie equipment today is not totally about protection. If it was just for protection, you wouldn't need 11" wide pads to protect legs that are 4-5" wide. People can point to sticks improving, etc., but if equipment was good enough to stop a puck going 90 mph, is it no good for 95 mph? Guys like McInnis and Iafrate were blasting pucks at over 100 mph back in the 80s. The bigger thing for me though, is that the equipment seems to have changed to protect more of the net, not the goalie.

I wouldn't call in one season. He basically missed a whole season last year, missed almost half the season the year before, 7 games the year before that, 8 games the year before that. I wouldn't look at playing 70 games a year as a good thing, that means you are missing 12 games a year (15%). If you look at his career (ignoring his first couple where he bounced between the NHL and AHL), he's played 10 seasons in the league, only 2 of those seasons did he miss less than 5 games. 3 seasons he missed between 5-10 games and 5 seasons he missed 10+ (a few of which were signficantly more than 10 games). Are there more injury prone guys? Sure, but pointing to someone that might be more injury prone doesn't make him not an injury concern....espcecially with him turning 37 in a few months. Also, just for the record, Lecavalier missing games is more of the exception rather than the rule (it just happens to be more recent). If you look at his stats, he has often played 80+ games a year.

I fail to see the link to potential groin injuries. To me, the only impact is that the 5-hole will now have a very small amount more of space when the goalie goes into the butterfly position. The shortening of the pads will not change a goalie's mechanics....or shouldn't. The only thing I can think of is this....if a goalie is concerned and wants to try and limit the 5-hold, it will mean he will not go as far into stretch as he used to be able to get away with....so perhaps less groin injuries (although I'm not sure that is too much of an issue for goalies since they are use to those movements). In terms of timing, pretty sure you hearing about this rule changes does not correspond to the goalies hearing about it.

In relation to Fleury, I haven't read the article, so not sure how he is tied in there because his going to see a psychologist has nothing to do with this news. I saw news of that a couple months ago at least I think. It is an obvious thing for him to be doing and I've wondered in the past why he hadn't done it (assuming he hadn't). He seems to have the physical skills, but has serious mental problems at times. What is really interesting to me is that he's been asked to do it in the past and decided not to? I think I disagree with you 100% as well, but I can't fully follow what you are saying....looks like there is a missing word, incorrect word, etc. in there. I'm assuming what you are saying is that the NHL is being too tough on goalies here, which isn't fair. In my mind, goalie's equipment has morphed over time into what we have today, which is just stupid ridiculous. The goalies will argue that it is a saftey issue, which is total BS. What I don't understand is why goalies would push so hard against limiting equipment? If it impacts all goalies, then it's not like they'd be disadvantaged and potentially lose their job. The only thing I can think of is the potential for their stats to not look as good, but so what, they already have a significant historical advantage in that department.

Ummm, by Detroit, do you mean Montreal? Otherwise, I think you should consult a map.

Well, I'm guessing the rationale of creating better performance is really there because there should be a real reason to re-design the jerseys. The real reason is to generate more jersey sales, but they aren't going to come out and use that in the media release.