Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal

Redwings Resign Zetterberg To A 12 Year Contract...


gracie12

Recommended Posts

So Zetterberg signs a 12 year, $72m contract. He is a wing until he turns 40 years old.

Im torn on this one. An average cap hit of $6m a year for a point a game player with good defensive skills is good - but 12 years is a heck of a long time. He's a playoff warrior, so that has to be taken into account too...

I dont know which way I lean on this one. I do know that this probably spells the end of at least a couple of: Hossa, Franzen, Samuelsson (all ufa) or Hudler (rfa) for next year.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=264864&amp...s=secStory_main

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have cut the yrs in half deal. Here is a team that is Stanley cup champs and are having problems filling seats in Detroit. Detroit is in a bad economic state. Long term can come back and bite you .

Last Habs game there as many of you who do rd trips know. Tickets great seats no more then $50.00. There was plenty of seats at box for 26.50. Scalpers pumping same ticket for half price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have cut the yrs in half deal. Here is a team that is Stanley cup champs and are having problems filling seats in Detroit. Detroit is in a bad economic state. Long term can come back and bite you in the *****.

Last Habs game there as many of you who do rd trips know. Tickets great seats no more then $50.00. There was plenty of seats at box for 26.50. Scalpers pumping same ticket for half price.

Well Detroit's whole economic system runs on the automotive business, and the Big 3 are all in financial crisis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have cut the yrs in half deal.

But then:

a.) he may not sign

or b.) he'd demand a lot closer to market value.

It's one of those contracts where it will be a huge bargain for the first half or so, but will more than likely be a huge ripoff in the later years (some players keep it up past 35, but most see their production drop to almost nothing before they turn 40)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But then:

a.) he may not sign

or b.) he'd demand a lot closer to market value.

It's one of those contracts where it will be a huge bargain for the first half or so, but will more than likely be a huge ripoff in the later years (some players keep it up past 35, but most see their production drop to almost nothing before they turn 40)

Well and thats why im torn on this one. I agree that if they had come to him with a 6 yr deal at $6m a season he would have said no. The only way they could likely get him for that price is long term. He's clearly a vital part of their team, so resigning him made sense.

I suppose one way to look at it is that this way they have him cheap & if he starts to tank in the later years of his contract they can try to move him or buy him out. I know people say its impossible to move someone with a big contract but if the name is big enough, it can happen. Fedorov has been grossly overpaid since 2003 but he's been moved. Players can be moved if the other team thinks there's a possibility of him regaining his old form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Zetterberg signs a 12 year, $72m contract. He is a wing until he turns 40 years old.

Im torn on this one. An average cap hit of $6m a year for a point a game player with good defensive skills is good - but 12 years is a heck of a long time. He's a playoff warrior, so that has to be taken into account too...

I dont know which way I lean on this one. I do know that this probably spells the end of at least a couple of: Hossa, Franzen, Samuelsson (all ufa) or Hudler (rfa) for next year.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=264864&amp...s=secStory_main

The only reason this makes sense is (as it has been mentioned) that he can be moved later. I think we're seeing a new trend in the NHL where other teams will follow with regards to signing players long term. It's the Chris Chelios effect, now witnessed by Claude Lemieux, where players are so physically fit that they can play well into their forties.

It's become quite common nowadays where 40somethings are able to compete, unlike in the past where you were considered over the hill at age 35. There were always the exceptions, the Gordie Howes of the world, but it was more for sentimental reasons and marketing that some players played past their prime in the past. Today, 40somethings can actually compete with the 20 year olds of the league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theres a few things to remember here about long-term deals, firstly as pointd out, the player give a discount if he gets all those years, but consider the lifespan of a NHL GM.

If they're saving 2 million in the first 7 years and losing 4 in the last 5 in terms of value, they most likely won't be around by that time but the earlier part will boost their record and make them look better for their new job.

If someone signs a contract before the age of 35 and retires afterwards, the deal comes off the cap.

Most contracts are frontloaded, so that if a player is very ineffectiv at the end he may be bought out, EX: Zetterberg's last 2 years are worth 1 millionn each, not in cap hit which stays constant over the whole deal but the salary of that year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's become quite common nowadays where 40somethings are able to compete, unlike in the past where you were considered over the hill at age 35. There were always the exceptions, the Gordie Howes of the world, but it was more for sentimental reasons and marketing that some players played past their prime in the past. Today, 40somethings can actually compete with the 20 year olds of the league.

It happens, but I don't know that it's common. I'd say most players really drop off around the age of 35 compared to a few who can still play at 40. And even the two players you mentioned, Lemieux is nothing more than a fourth line player now and Chelios is a shadow of his former self: you wouldn't want to be paying these guys 6 million.

I suppose one way to look at it is that this way they have him cheap & if he starts to tank in the later years of his contract they can try to move him or buy him out. I know people say its impossible to move someone with a big contract but if the name is big enough, it can happen. Fedorov has been grossly overpaid since 2003 but he's been moved. Players can be moved if the other team thinks there's a possibility of him regaining his old form.

It depends, I mean you never know, but it's definitely a huge risk. I doubt anyone would take on Dipietro's contract even though they could get a good, young goalie for 4.5 million a season. It really depends on the individual circumstances, but it's a risk however you want to look at it.

Most contracts are frontloaded, so that if a player is very ineffectiv at the end he may be bought out, EX: Zetterberg's last 2 years are worth 1 millionn each, not in cap hit which stays constant over the whole deal but the salary of that year.

If they buy Zetterberg out when he's 35, that would be 10 years with a 2 million cap hit. At 38, it's still 4 years. I don't think buyout is a realistic option.

However, there are two good points with frontloading:

1.) Retiring: If the player is ineffective, there is less financial pressure to keep playing since they will only be getting 1 million. And he signed his deal under the age of 35, so retiring would take the cap hit away (this was the reason they added the "signed over 35: cap hit no matter what" clause - to prevent a big loophole, although I don't think the owners expected players to be signing 10+ year deals). Of course, this still puts the keys in the players hands, but he's much less likely to stay around than were he making multiple millions.

2.) Minors: When a player who signed the deal under 35 goes to the minors, his cap hit goes away. The big reason owners are reluctant to give GMs this option is it's very expensive (in actual dollars, not cap hit). But around the age of 38, almost all of the contract will have already been paid regardless of what happens in the last two years. His actual salary will be fairly low. 1 million is still high for a player in the minors, but paying 1 million to free up 6 million cap space isn't a bad deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...