Jump to content


StevieY9802's Photo

StevieY9802

Member Since 26 Jun 2002
Offline Last Active Sep 07 2011 09:58 AM
-----

#2206501 McCrimmon, Salei on board Russian plane crash

Posted by StevieY9802 on 07 September 2011 - 08:49 AM

Stefan Liv confirmed to have been on the plane.


#2019723 Is it too soon to worry about another NHL lockout?

Posted by StevieY9802 on 27 July 2010 - 01:58 PM

I too like the luxury tax idea - however there must be a "stiff penalty" in place if the owners do venture over the cap.

I am too. I posted the idea of a luxury tax in another message board and people didn't listen to my idea and just said "oh no it'll be just like MLB!" The rumor from Spector about $48mil scares me if there is no tax. I was having a good convo with him on twitter a few weeks ago about this. I mean so much of what the league promised would happen under a salary cap world hasn't. It hasn't controlled salaries. To an extent maybe it has but when Boogaard get 1.7 per and Finder got what 3.5 per and Kovy isn't gettin 100mil. Said it would help the small markets and yet Tampa has been sold twice, Fla has sold at least once post-lockout, ATL is for sale, CJB is bleeding money, the Stars are about to be sold and so on. Also I remember Brian Burke saying the Ducks finished in the red while winning the Cup in 07. So with a cap of 44mil and having like 12 more home games the Ducks still didn't make money? So I don't see what a luxury tax is such a bad idea. The big spending teams can but will get dinged for it and that money goes to the struggling markets.

The people who are against it think it'll create the Yankees or at the other end the Pirates, where they'll be sitting on the money they get. But I think a soft cap of around 48mil and the "hard cap" at 60 or so wouldn't be bad. It'll control teams but also tax them. Also I think keep the floor so that teams can't sit on their money. There would of course have to be regulations on the money the struggling teams get but still I think it's better. While competitive balance is good having teams have to lose players because they can't sign them doesn't work very well either. One of the people who didn't agree with me on the other message board was a Pens fan and he said the hard cap is better so I told him that in 2012-13 if the NHL gets a 48mil hard cap your team will have 3mil to sign 13 players so I'm sure he'll be happy when a lot of his team gets dismantled.

To wrap up am I worried about a lockout? Yes. I'm worried both sides are, well like the US Govt where they don't want to work together they just want what they want or don't want to give ground. If that happens and we get a lockout, even for a month, I think it could kill the NHL. Especially in the non-traditional markets. You want to keep them? Losing any time in that season won't let you.


#2019705 NHL Rejects Kovalchuk's Contract

Posted by StevieY9802 on 27 July 2010 - 12:43 PM

not being biased, but the only 2 deals that should have been approved are Zetterberg and Franzen. simply because their contracts end at the "generic" retirement age of 40. Luongo goes to 42 or 43 and Hossa goes to 42, which is ridiculous. the CBA should state that players can only sign multi year contracts to take them to the age of 40. anything after the age of 40 is 1 year deals until retirement.

the NHL should do away with front loading contracts. every year the player is under contract should be the same amount. if a player signs for 5 years 25 mil, it should be 5 mil/year. none of this 8mil, 8mil, 3mil, 3mil, 3mil contract bulls***. any contract like that should be circumvention of the salary cap. all of the ridiculous loopholes and cap rules and what not are digging the business side of the NHL into a very large hole.

I agree to an extent with you. I have no problem with a 40 year old signing a 2 year deal. I think saying someone like Mark Recchi can only sign a year at time isn't right. But I get what you're saying. I am with you that these longer term deals should stop at age 40. So if you are 31 you can go ahead and sign a long term deal but it can't be longer than 9 years. Most players start to decline a lot after the age of 37 or 38.

As for front loading I'm not against it. Zetterberg gets most of his money by 38 and I think that's ok but I wouldn't be surprised if the NHL changes that in the next cba. Pierre LeBrun mentioned that one GM said they were throwing around the idea of taking the highest paying 5 years of the long term deals and the average of those 5 years is what would be the cap #. That way you can front load all you want but aren't circumventing the cap.


#2019663 Antti Niemi files for arbitration

Posted by StevieY9802 on 27 July 2010 - 10:34 AM

well they already said sharp is staying (which could be bs i suppose). I think niemi will come in around $2mil. if they decide arbitration on performance alone he wont get a terribly favorable ruling because of the team they have in front of him. if they drop kopecky they could probably get someone up from their system who will be cheap, although im not really sure who they have down there.

After MacArthur got $2.4mil for scoring 35 points I'd be surprised if Niemi only got $2mil.


#2015256 RUMOR: Wings Offer 1-year Contract to Maltby

Posted by StevieY9802 on 15 July 2010 - 11:44 AM

same team i can see anothe early exit for the wings. i don't think hudler will make a diffrence. i see him as jason williams/ the following players need to move on


hudler (overpaid)
meech
williams
draper
maltby

Jiri Hudler's last two playoffs 9 goals and 26 points. Jason Williams last two playoffs: 0 goals. So yeah, totally the same. His last season here he had 23 goals so you really don't think that'll make a difference? As for him being overpaid guys who scored around 23 goals last year were Vinny Lecavalier, Brad Richards (who both make almost 8mil) RJ Umberger who makes $3.7mil Radim Vrbada who makes $3mil. So overpaid? Not really.

Williams is gone, Meech probably will be and at best Maltby is on a two-way contract, which I don't think he'll take. Kris Draper will be gone after this year.

So do you actually think things through or research them before you post them or no?


#1938397 Now that the regular season is over

Posted by StevieY9802 on 12 April 2010 - 07:29 AM

I genuinely wasn't expecting us to make the playoffs after all the injuries. Those guys surprised the hell out of me, especially Howard.

This ^ I thought they would be too far out when everyone got back in February and even when they came back and they were only in 10th, I didn't think they could put a run together that would move them up. Calgary was playing well right around the break and so were LA, Colorado and Phoenix so I didn't think they would do it. Mike Babcock said he was more impressed with December than he was with March and April because of all the injuries and I kinda am too. The western trip to start the new year was probably biggest thing to me. 3-1 on that trip against the Coyotes, Ducks (loss), Kings and Sharks.

Ozzie was a surprise too. Had they not had so many injuries and wouldn't have been fighting for their playoff lives I think they would have worked him in more and try to help him find his game but you couldn't risk it. Congrats to Jimmy. Now I hope he doesn't pull a Manny Legace and have a good regular season and then a below average playoff.