Quote:
Originally Posted by ricardodw
I believe it is a basic truth in Hockey.... When a UFA signs with a team he is getting the best deal possible and that no other team wanted to offer him any more money or term.
A UFA that doesn't work out simply can't be dumped until the very end of their contract usually as a desperate playoff rental.
Try and come up with an example where a player that was signed as a UFA was traded for an upgrade.
When Cammalleri burnt his bridges in Montreal they had to take back the worst Flame contract... Bourque.
Brian Campbell who was a big UFA signing for Chicago and key to their first SC win .... The Hawks had to pay 10M of Olez's salary to move Campbell out of town.
|
We were originally talking about the possible need to make room in the roster sometime in the future, which is a very different issue than bad contracts you need to get rid of. Hockey trades, not cap dumps.
As for your examples, those contracts are on a completely different level. Froliks $4.3M is 2nd liner money these days. Mid-level UFA's get traded every year, even now when trades are becoming more rare. If Frolik ends up being more of a 3rd liner, he'll only be overpaid by something like $1.5M. Even if you want to trade him, that's not going to be a huge issue for most teams.
Most UFA's also finish their contracts without anyone ever worrying about them.
Besides, 95% of the time even bad contracts get you something like a low pick in return. Guys like David Jones and Jay Bouwmeester are examples that guys that underperform will have takers in a trade, as long as they're not completely useless. Frolik is not the type of guy that's very likely to become completely useless. The returns might not be much, but since we gave up nothing to sign Frolik the returns would all be gravy anyway.
IMO there's clear risk factors as to what kind of players become terrible contracts. I think the most typical ones are one dimensional players that were paid to put up points (Semins and Cheechoos), or older guys that are given retirement contracts and lose their speed before the contracts run out (Chara). Or guys that are paid like superstars but fail to deliver. (Heatley, Phaneuf.)
That's not Frolik.
Frolik will only be 32 by the time the contract runs out, he's reported to be a consistent performer, versatile, can put up some points and can defend. If you feel signing a guy like that is too risky, you essentially can't ever sign anybody. He can end being overpaid, but at 4.3M I really can't see that contract becoming a huge headache.
...I hope I didn't just jinx it...