Quote:
Originally Posted by StrykerSteve
Interesting, gets him to UFA in 3 years. Can't imagine MIN is pleased with that length.
|
I'm not so sure. UFA years are expensive, regardless of whether or not they're included in long-term deals. With the length being capped at 8 years, there's no discount given by players in this age group for UFA years. You can't slap on extra UFA years at the end to spread out the cap-hit of those prime UFA years anymore. So you're always paying slightly more in the earlier years to have a slightly lower cap-hit in the later years.
I understand the idea of wanting to maintain control of the player, but I think the Stamkos situation illustrates the modern era quite nicely. If you're a good player, and the team has good management, then the player will have a good relationship with the organization and will want to stay regardless of RFA/UFA status. The modern NHL is all about how organizations handle players. GMs and their relationship "equity" they build up with their players is important.
On the flip side, look at how Colorado handled the Stastny, O'Reilly and Duchene situations. Poor player/management/ownership relationships are toxic to the on-ice product and need to be handled correctly.