It's not often that I agree 100% with Millbury, but this is one of those cases
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aicwKSikBeM
Mike Millbury on Ovechkin
posted at 2/28/2013 1:50 PM EST
It's not often that I agree 100% with Millbury, but this is one of those cases
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aicwKSikBeM
Re: Mike Millbury on Ovechkin
posted at 2/28/2013 7:38 PM EST
He backed up every one of his statements with video footage. Irrefutable!
Re: Mike Millbury on Ovechkin
posted at 2/28/2013 7:52 PM EST
Roenick must text Kieth Jones all the time "Having fun yet ?". That was absolutely terrible and Leonis, not Oates, should be the one to do something. Package that d00fis and rebuild with the picks n prospects.
Re: Mike Millbury on Ovechkin
posted at 2/28/2013 7:53 PM EST
In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
He backed up every one of his statements with video footage. Irrefutable!
Re: Mike Millbury on Ovechkin
posted at 2/28/2013 7:55 PM EST
In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:
Roenick must text Kieth Jones all the time "Having fun yet ?". That was absolutely terrible and Leonis, not Oates, should be the one to do something. Package that d00fis and rebuild with the picks n prospects.
Re: Mike Millbury on Ovechkin
posted at 2/28/2013 7:55 PM EST
In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:
Roenick must text Kieth Jones all the time "Having fun yet ?". That was absolutely terrible and Leonis, not Oates, should be the one to do something. Package that d00fis and rebuild with the picks n prospects.
Re: Mike Millbury on Ovechkin
posted at 2/28/2013 7:58 PM EST
Milbury might not always be right but on that clip he nailed it.
Re: Mike Millbury on Ovechkin
posted at 2/28/2013 8:20 PM EST
In response to jmwalters' comment:
In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:
Roenick must text Kieth Jones all the time "Having fun yet ?". That was absolutely terrible and Leonis, not Oates, should be the one to do something. Package that d00fis and rebuild with the picks n prospects.
No one is going to take on that contract....no one.
Re: Mike Millbury on Ovechkin
posted at 2/28/2013 8:22 PM EST
New Jersey is doing pretty well with lazy Kovalchuk and his reeeeetarded contract.
Re: Mike Millbury on Ovechkin
posted at 2/28/2013 8:23 PM EST
the new CBA should have a had a clause saying Russians cannot have contracts longer than 4 years
Re: Mike Millbury on Ovechkin
posted at 2/28/2013 8:26 PM EST
In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
New Jersey is doing pretty well with lazy Kovalchuk and his reeeeetarded contract.
Re: Mike Millbury on Ovechkin
posted at 2/28/2013 8:27 PM EST
In response to jmwalters' comment:
Re: Mike Millbury on Ovechkin
posted at 2/28/2013 8:34 PM EST
In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
You are correct. He's making $11.3M this year.
But a cap hit of $6.667 million due to his front loaded contract. Ovechkins cap hit is $9.538 million. Again, having almost one sixth of your cap space tied up in one player for next year is not enticing to too many teams
Re: Mike Millbury on Ovechkin
posted at 2/28/2013 8:39 PM EST
In response to jmwalters' comment:
But a cap hit of $6.667 million due to his front loaded contract. Ovechkins cap hit is $9.538 million. Again, having almost one six of your cap space tied up in one player for next year is not enticing to too many teams
I don't think the contract would hold teams back nearly as much as the asking price.
Re: Mike Millbury on Ovechkin
posted at 2/28/2013 8:44 PM EST
In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
And 26 of 30 teams currently have over $3M in cap space.
I don't think the contract would hold teams back nearly as much as the asking price.
Re: Mike Millbury on Ovechkin
posted at 2/28/2013 8:45 PM EST
it's not just that he has a hefty cap hit, he has a hefty cap hit until 2021. 8 more years of that 9.5 cap hit and paying 10 million a year is a lot to take on when the guys scoring totals have gone down every year since 2008 i believe
Re: Mike Millbury on Ovechkin
posted at 2/28/2013 9:52 PM EST
In response to bostonfan191646's comment:
Re: Mike Millbury on Ovechkin
posted at 2/28/2013 11:14 PM EST
It means that Russian players get complacent.
Re: Mike Millbury on Ovechkin
posted at 2/28/2013 11:25 PM EST
They owe him $80M over the next 8 years (well, $79M). If they used an amnesty buy-out on him, they'd owe him about $53M over...16 years? or 12? But he'd be off the cap. In theory, they could then re-sign him for $27M over 9 years and make his cap hit $3M, in which case, he's a steal!
Re: Mike Millbury on Ovechkin
posted at 2/28/2013 11:28 PM EST
and that's a funny clip - Milbury looks like he's going to have an aneurism.
Re: Mike Millbury on Ovechkin
posted at 2/28/2013 11:43 PM EST
In response to Bookboy007's comment:
They owe him $80M over the next 8 years (well, $79M). If they used an amnesty buy-out on him, they'd owe him about $53M over...16 years? or 12? But he'd be off the cap. In theory, they could then re-sign him for $27M over 9 years and make his cap hit $3M, in which case, he's a steal!
I've thought about teams doing that. teams that have great relationships with players. Like what if the bruins used an amnesty buyout (i believe in the amnesty buyouts the players get all but 900K a year? but i could be way off) with Chara and then re-signed him for the same length contract for 2-3 million so chara actually gets more but his cap hit is way down. My guess however is that it would instantly be nixed for cap circumvention
Re: Mike Millbury on Ovechkin
posted at 2/28/2013 11:53 PM EST
In response to bostonfan191646's comment:
I've thought about teams doing that. teams that have great relationships with players. Like what if the bruins used an amnesty buyout (i believe in the amnesty buyouts the players get all but 900K a year? but i could be way off) with Chara and then re-signed him for the same length contract for 2-3 million so chara actually gets more but his cap hit is way down. My guess however is that it would instantly be nixed for cap circumvention
I don't see any teams taking a flyer on him. He doesn't have the fire anymore, and he doesn't seem to have a winner's attitude. When Hunter tried to implement a defensive system last year, he shut down and wanted nothing to do with it. Had he bought in, they would have done very well; they were playing well minus their all-world player tanking it and becoming nothing better than an above average offensive player who contributed nothing defensively, all while eating up 1/7 of the cap.
What are the rules in hockey for re-structuring contracts to work around the cap, anyway? Are there any ways for players to basically do what Brady did?