[Trade] Panarin (50% ret) to LA for cond 3rd, 4th, and Greentree. Signs 2x$11 mil extension.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

It looks like the league is going to have to save the owners/GMs from themselves regarding signing bonuses. They can't stop handing them out, making the contracts buyout proof. I don't know what the right call is, but a cap of say no more than 49% of the contract (51% annual salary) seems like a good starting point.

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

It looks like the league is going to have to save the owners/GMs from themselves regarding signing bonuses. They can't stop handing them out, making the contracts buyout proof. I don't know what the right call is, but a cap of say no more than 49% of the contract (51% annual salary) seems like a good starting point.

New CBA has capped SB to 60%, just hasn't kicked in yet

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

It looks like the league is going to have to save the owners/GMs from themselves regarding signing bonuses. They can't stop handing them out, making the contracts buyout proof. I don't know what the right call is, but a cap of say no more than 49% of the contract (51% annual salary) seems like a good starting point.

It is funny how all these owners when in one on one negotiations with players get rolled and give out signing bonuses and no-trade/move clauses like candy.

Individually they are all softies but when they hide behind Bettman to get the system changed they all become tough guys.

Also why players should flip out at McDavid taking his super discount. They end up giving back tons of benefits at the CBA time so they need to push the envelope as far as they can during individual negotiations. Players needed him to demand the max to set a precedent for other players so they could get it as well.

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

It is funny how all these owners when in one on one negotiations with players get rolled and give out signing bonuses and no-trade/move clauses like candy.

Individually they are all softies but when they hide behind Bettman to get the system changed they all become tough guys.

Also why players should flip out at McDavid taking his super discount. They end up giving back tons of benefits at the CBA time so they need to push the envelope as far as they can during individual negotiations. Players needed him to demand the max to set a precedent for other players so they could get it as well.

I don't know if McDavid taking less to play in Edmonton on a team that's spending to the cap is an issue. It's more when guys like Panarin or Raantenen turn down way more money from Carolina or Seattle to sign in preferred destinations. It's when players won't go to teams who want to spend, but end up not because they don't get the better players that results in less money for players. But with revenue splits and escrow, I don't think they're too worried about that. Seems to be a lot less talk about escrow deductions than there used to be.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

It looks like the league is going to have to save the owners/GMs from themselves regarding signing bonuses. They can't stop handing them out, making the contracts buyout proof. I don't know what the right call is, but a cap of say no more than 49% of the contract (51% annual salary) seems like a good starting point.

Here's a radical idea... you don't do that and instead just have an expectation that upper management of billion dollar companies won't do stupid things?

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

It is funny how all these owners when in one on one negotiations with players get rolled and give out signing bonuses and no-trade/move clauses like candy.

Individually they are all softies but when they hide behind Bettman to get the system changed they all become tough guys.

Also why players should flip out at McDavid taking his super discount. They end up giving back tons of benefits at the CBA time so they need to push the envelope as far as they can during individual negotiations. Players needed him to demand the max to set a precedent for other players so they could get it as well.

What choice do the owners have? Free agents just go elsewhere if their offers aren’t competitive.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Goriders

What choice do the owners have? Free agents just go elsewhere if their offers aren’t competitive.

That's the thing. It only takes one GM willing to do stupid things for the players to hold that leverage. ‘You won't give my client a huge signing bonus and a full NMC? OK, fine, I'll go talk to Desperate Dave. His job is on the line, he'll give us anything!’

[dino7c]

There are a handful of markets that have a massive $$$$ advantage and will use it any chance they get

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

That's the thing. It only takes one GM willing to do stupid things for the players to hold that leverage. ‘You won't give my client a huge signing bonus and a full NMC? OK, fine, I'll go talk to Desperate Dave. His job is on the line, he'll give us anything!’

They all seem to be willing to avoid paying over a certain salary. No one ever gets close to the max. So they clearly have some lines they won't cross.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

They all seem to be willing to avoid paying over a certain salary. No one ever gets close to the max. So they clearly have some lines they won't cross.

That's because you can't pay one player the max and still assemble the rest of the roster in a way that won't get you fired. The cap forces GMs to allocate cap with some degree of intelligence, but it doesn't save them from playing stupid games with signing bonuses (until next year) or trade restrictions.

Bad GMs go nuts in any way they're allowed to by the rules, and good GMs have to grit their teeth and match the offers.

[Party Elephant]

Originally Posted by Macho0978

During that time, they have developed or brought in some very good young pieces in Kempe, Fiala, and Anderson. They also did this while keeping very good veteran players they have continued to be good into their late 30s.

The Kings drafted Kempe in 2014

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Party Elephant

The Kings drafted Kempe in 2014

And Fiala was 26 when they got him. Not old, but not what I'd call a young addition.

I just think the Kings are on the downslope. And the contract term for Panarin makes me think they are of that view as well.

[simonsays]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

Drury completely took away whatever bargaining position he had by announcing that Panarin will not be re-signed. Conroy knew enough not to do that - it was always being leaked that both sides were 'talking' now and then, and perhaps it would be worth it to re-sign Andersson.


Drury is just an incompetent manager, and I hope that Conroy is able to make trades with him down the road.

I love that Andersson article that came out and he's talking about making sure that he's not hurting Conroy with this trade demands. Like, Boston had a trade but not a contract and he's getting a little ignored, and then when his 1st choice steps in he's still concerned about his buddy Craig getting value.


I also love that Conny and Drury were both Americans (roughly the same age) traded to a small market Canadian team, and they embraced it completely differently (many talks about Chris pouting before the trade to Buffalo). Drury became a far better player, but post on ice career they've followed similar paths. Except that Craig is Craig, and Drury is a tyrant. Forcing player trades isn't going to ingratiate you with the locker room when you're looking to acquire assets.


Panarin set his demands. Andersson kept his options available. One likes and respects his GM. The other, well Greentree and a 3rd despite being a far more valuable asset. Treating players like people the way Conroy does isn't always a negative.


These 2 guys are just polar opposites as to how they conduct themselves and do business.