Re: NTC/NMC: Kings have Zero
posted at 6/26/2014 6:26 PM EDT
In response to Bookboy007's comment:
In response to Crowls2424's comment:
In response to Bookboy007's comment:
I disagree, Crowls, about PC's strategy for re-signings. I think it's very calculated, and I don't think he's put them in a bad spot because of them. In almost every case, the dollars seem high to start and then quickly look good for the team. He's always gotten Krejci at a good deal; Bergeron's new deal seems about right now, and it will probably look better in the next few years. I'd say none of Chiarelli's deals look like he "won" the negotiations with the player, but the trade off is that he's put an end to the perception that the Bruins are adversarial when dealing with their players. The only two I look at are Kelly, which would look okay if he was a 15-20-35 defensive specialist as he was when the Bruins signed the deal, and Lucic, which is probably market value for him if he ever had a chance to try UFA, and was signed under the duress of an impending lockout that might have changed the RFA/UFA rules and cost the Bruins far more.
The NTC/NMCs are mostly modified, submit a list deals. I'm not overly concerned about PC's ability to make good moves with these guys if he needs to. More important is the message it sends to the whole team (and I'm sure they can all log on to Cap Geek) that the Bruins are trying to build a core and commit to them - so the players should commit, too.
The cap pressure comes from two directions - the lockout dropping the cap significantly (it's about $10M lower than it would be if there had been no lockout) - and the relatively flat age profile of this team's core with Bergeron, Krejci, Soderberg, Eriksson, Rask and McQuaid all at that magic 27 yr old threshold around the same time, and Lucic and Marchand headed there shortly. The "refresh" started last year on the D, and the salary flexibility from that is a huge boost; now they need to find a way to make it work up front.
The way it seems to shake out right now, I'm kinda sorta hoping Spooner follows the Marchand plan. Approx. 20 games one year, no goals. Next year, 20 goals. Also, I'm totally going to get that leprechaun's f---ing Lucky Charms.
Are you not entertained?!?!
Disagree with your disagreement. How's that?
Exhibit A: Sign Rask to make him the highest paid Goalie in the NHL for a material term of 8 years. Then give him an NMC for the 1st 4 years, modified NTC (8 teams) for the next 2, followed by modified NTC (15 Teams) for the final 2.
When you make a guy the highest paid player at a position, why the need for any type of NTC?
If PC held back, say $200k per NTC, he would have over $2M more to work with. Not insignificant, especially when you are in a crunch.
Maybe he did. Maybe Rask knew that Lundquist was about to get $1.5M more than him and wanted more, but took an NTC instead? Rask wasn't the highest paid. He got Rinne money.
Besides, year to year, it's still only $200K to work with against any year's cap. Like I say, there's messaging here, too - putting your money where your mouth is. Chiarelli got Rask to take below market for a couple of years and asked him to prove he could be a top #1. I'm guessing that the other half of that arrangement was..."and we'll pay you accordingly". Plus, the NTC tells all of the other players on the roster that you're not living up to the letter of the promise only to then screw the guy and deal him to Edmonton for picks because shupe says the team could win with OchoCinco. It says they'll be playing in front of a guy who gives them a chance to win every game for at least 8 years. That's got value, too.
How is Lombardi able to be successful with his "screw you over" approach? Zero NMC/NTC's?