Quote:
Originally Posted by neo45
You could be right on that actually I didnt check
But anyways this contract is bad and there are oppourtunity costs involved in signing it that people are choosing to ignore
|
Please explain what you mean by opportunity costs. Flames do not have to worry about any opportunity costs because they still have loads of cap room left, and very few free agents that would want to come here anyways. I think you mean 'consequences', not 'opportunity cost'. Opportunity cost is more in the line of "When I am in a relationship, I lose the opportunity to be in another relationship." Flames have cap room and contract space to have other relations
Flames over-paid - there is no question about it. However, they over-paid because of 3 factors:
1) FEW FAs are willing to come to a rebuilding team
2) Engelland (believe it or not) had multiple offers from teams looking for some form of competency in addressing their need of a physical presence.
3) Flames game him the money he was looking for in a 3 year deal to avoid any future cap implications, rather than increase the term and have his average go down.
I can understand that many people don't like this deal - he is over-paid.
What I don't understand is how much of an issue people are making it to be. The only real negative implication is that it MAY factor in on future contract negotiations.
1) As stated previously in other posts, UFA signings are not used in arbitration cases.
2) If a defencemen wants to point at this contract as a comparable in contract negotiations, then Treliving will just point at Giordano's contract over the last several years, or Brodie's re-signing, or Russel's, , etc.
Flames' owners have stated that they want management to sign players to fair contracts - not hold them hostage or anything. Pay them what they are worth fairly. If a player wants more than his fair share, then that player can find himself a new team. Engelland will not be the deciding factor at play.