Will the Kesler offer affect the Ducks?

''Crazy,'' one NHL GM told TSN. ''Just (expletive deleted) crazy.''

''I thought the DiPietro deal was the height of stupidity but this Kesler deal tops it,'' said one NHL GM. ''Does Clarkie actually think Vancouver isn't going to match? Every team will match. You have to. You have to protect your assets no matter what. All this is going to do is drive up the cost to do business. This is going to be ridiculously inflationary, even in the cap system we have. It's crazy.''

''So the going rate for a young 10-goal scorer in this league is going to $1.9 million,'' an NHL GM said. ''We're starting a whole new inflation spiral. It's going to cost every team in this league. It's bad for all us. It's really bad business.''



Many Canucks fans seem to think this is Brian Burke. After listening to Burke talk, I have no doubt. He likes to talk about hockey as a business and he isn't short on expletives either.

Back to topic. The Kesler offer sheet scares the hell out of me. If the gloves come off and GMs start to make offers sheets to young players, the Ducks could be targeted with young players such as Penner, Getzlaf and Perry. The Ducks have no choice but to match and this would definitely screw up our salary structure. Would a team extend these offer sheets to affect our ability to compete? What would have happened if Detroit offerred Bryz 1.9 million dollars? Or Kunitz? This could be a dangerous precedent that could affect the Ducks in the future.

I think it's Burke too, but I disagree with him. Restricted free agency is in place to assure fair market value. Fair market value can only be set by a number of teams putting forth what they think a player is worth, not one GM vs. a guy that has no incentives.

Keep in mind, the Kesler thing was a perfect situation for making an offer. Philly freed up salary with Primeau's retirement and was in a position to overpay for a guy for one year while only risking a second-round draft pick, which everyone agrees was a reasonable price. If Getz, Perry and Penner pan out, they're not going to accept $1.9M deals, meaning the RFA compensation will be worth one or more first-rounders.

Many Canucks fans seem to think this is Brian Burke. After listening to Burke talk, I have no doubt. He likes to talk about hockey as a business and he isn't short on expletives either.

Back to topic. The Kesler offer sheet scares the hell out of me. If the gloves come off and GMs start to make offers sheets to young players, the Ducks could be targeted with young players such as Penner, Getzlaf and Perry. The Ducks have no choice but to match and this would definitely screw up our salary structure. Would a team extend these offer sheets to affect our ability to compete? What would have happened if Detroit offerred Bryz 1.9 million dollars? Or Kunitz? This could be a dangerous precedent that could affect the Ducks in the future.

With the many excellent young players that more less arrived at the same time, yes, the Ducks are probably a good candidate to have some of their kids receive offer sheets if Burke doesn't lock them up before they reach rfa status. I wonder what Getzlaf will want to be paid, if Kesler is making $2 million.

Burke's not stupid, he will sign all 3 to long-term deals.

Kunitz? I won't cry if he's gone, good utility player but that's it.

Burke's not stupid, he will sign all 3 to long-term deals.

Kunitz? I won't cry if he's gone, good utility player but that's it.

How about Sami Pahlsson? Any tears?

Are you sure you want this thread to go that way? ;)

Are you sure you want this thread to go that way? ;)

lol

I think with Konopka safe in Russia, its going to be a one-sided argument. :yo:

I think it's Burke too, but I disagree with him. Restricted free agency is in place to assure fair market value. Fair market value can only be set by a number of teams putting forth what they think a player is worth, not one GM vs. a guy that has no incentives.

The problem with that is 1.9 million isn't fair market value. Its an inflated number intended to create a situation where Vancouver isn't willing (or able cap-wise) to overpay to keep the kid.

I thinks it bad for the league in general.

lol

I think with Konopka safe in Russia, its going to be a one-sided argument. :yo:

Hey, Konopka's an RFA. Screw the potential RFAiness of Getzlaf and Perry, Konopka is who we need to worry about right now. What happens if he signs a 1.9 million dollar deal?
We need to lock him up, 15 years, pronto!

I kind of get the feeling that this is kind of a "screw you" thing to the Canucks. But as an interesting discussion: assuming that a GM doesn't mind making enemies, and if he wants to win now, he could do this to put a team closer to the cap... then strike for the player he really wants. I think I recall some team trying to do this in the NBA a few years ago... like Miami making the Clippers match Brand, then took Odom or something.

Yes it'll drive the value of some players up, but in the end, with a cap, it doesn't make much of a difference. The roster has a cap. It just widens the gap between the high paid players (the ones people want and bid too much for) and the fill-in players, who will get minimum salary to compensate for overpaying for the top players.

Hey, Konopka's an RFA. Screw the potential RFAiness of Getzlaf and Perry, Konopka is who we need to worry about right now. What happens if he signs a 1.9 million dollar deal?
We need to lock him up, 15 years, pronto!

Should be let Wild Wing handle the negotiations? He's every bit as qualified as Charles Wang.

Should be let Wild Wing handle the negotiations? He's every bit as qualified as Charles Wang.

No way, Michael Leighton!

Trust me, Burke isn't the only GM who likes to toss around expletives, ****ing potty mouths.

Anyhow, judging from the reaction from around the league, I see this being an aberration rather than the start of something scary. The bottom line is that this actually isn't a very smart deal for the Flyers. 2 mil committed to a guy who could very well turn out to be simply a solid third liner isn't great asset management. GM's will stive to make good decisions that make sense for their club, and tossing a ton of money at any of our young guys before they're proven their doesn't seem terribly bright. If it does become an epidemic, it will simply put more pressure on GM's to get potential RFAs signed before they come up, much like UFAs.

But the 2 million isn't committing that much. It was only for one year, and I think he should be an RFA again next year. The question is how much would he resign for the next year. If he wants more than 2 million, then Clarke would have just upgraded his draft picks. Or he could try to resign him for a number more in line with what he should be paid, say 1.3 million.

But the 2 million isn't committing that much. It was only for one year, and I think he should be an RFA again next year. The question is how much would he resign for the next year. If he wants more than 2 million, then Clarke would have just upgraded his draft picks. Or he could try to resign him for a number more in line with what he should be paid, say 1.3 million.

Well, 2 million is a lot for a 10 goal scorer. However, you're right about the one year committment. I'm not following the upgraded draft picks though. If he wins the offer sheet, he gives up a 2nd rounder. If he loses him at the end of the season to RFA, would he get more than a 2nd rounder? How are the draft picks determined?

Well, 2 million is a lot for a 10 goal scorer. However, you're right about the one year committment. I'm not following the upgraded draft picks though. If he wins the offer sheet, he gives up a 2nd rounder. If he loses him at the end of the season to RFA, would he get more than a 2nd rounder? How are the draft picks determined?

Even in the old CBA, compensatory picks were only given out to teams with UFAs. I don't think Clarke gets anything for letting Kesler walk...if I'm understanding the discussion. Look it at this way, Burke gave up a 2nd round pick for 3 months of Jeff Friesen. I would gladly give up a second round pick for Kesler. However, I don't think Clarke or Nonis for the matter of fact will like paying a third line checker 2 million dollars. And no, I'm not taking a swipe at Rob Niedermayer.

But the 2 million isn't committing that much. It was only for one year, and I think he should be an RFA again next year. The question is how much would he resign for the next year. If he wants more than 2 million, then Clarke would have just upgraded his draft picks. Or he could try to resign him for a number more in line with what he should be paid, say 1.3 million.

Kelser has to be qualified at 1.9 million, why on earth would he accept less.

The roster has a cap. It just widens the gap between the high paid players (the ones people want and bid too much for) and the fill-in players, who will get minimum salary to compensate for overpaying for the top players.

And that in turn reduces the number of quality players a team can afford. That is not a good thing. I don't want to watch a team half full of Travis Moen types.

Well, 2 million is a lot for a 10 goal scorer. However, you're right about the one year committment. I'm not following the upgraded draft picks though. If he wins the offer sheet, he gives up a 2nd rounder. If he loses him at the end of the season to RFA, would he get more than a 2nd rounder? How are the draft picks determined?
What I meant about the upgrading is... since Kesler would be an RFA again next year, if Clarke qualified him, but he was signed to someone else's offer sheet for more than 2 million (the next threshold) and not matched, in effect he upgraded his 2nd round pick for 1.9 million dollars.

Kelser has to be qualified at 1.9 million, why on earth would he accept less.



And that in turn reduces the number of quality players a team can afford. That is not a good thing. I don't want to watch a team half full of Travis Moen types.
Well he would be qualified for 1.9, but he could sign for less for a long term contract.

And as for the second part, if ALL teams paid a lot for upper tier players, and were forced to lessen salaries for the mid to low range players, then total talent per team wouldn't change. Since all the players need a job, it means less desireable (but still quality) players will have to sign for less.

Many Canucks fans seem to think this is Brian Burke. After listening to Burke talk, I have no doubt. He likes to talk about hockey as a business and he isn't short on expletives either.

Back to topic. The Kesler offer sheet scares the hell out of me. If the gloves come off and GMs start to make offers sheets to young players, the Ducks could be targeted with young players such as Penner, Getzlaf and Perry. The Ducks have no choice but to match and this would definitely screw up our salary structure. Would a team extend these offer sheets to affect our ability to compete? What would have happened if Detroit offerred Bryz 1.9 million dollars? Or Kunitz? This could be a dangerous precedent that could affect the Ducks in the future.


Im not so worried because the players on the ducks that might be targeted are deserving of the higher offers eg. Perry, Getz and Penner
But those that wont because they are largely under the radar or underrated wont. eg. Kunitz or any others that pop up this year

And that in turn reduces the number of quality players a team can afford. That is not a good thing. I don't want to watch a team half full of Travis Moen types.

The Salary Cap levels the playing field. In baseball, the Yankees can have a budget 5 or 6 times that of the Royals. Everybody in hockey is contstrained by the identical limit.

While I'm not unsympathetic to your lack of desire to " . . . watch a team half full of Travis Moen types. . .", if it weren't for the implementation of the salary cap, you wouldn't be watching the likes of Scott Niedermayer and Chris Pronger. (Well, you might watch them, but only when the Devils or the Blues came to town.)

I don't think the Ducks, or most teams, will be "half full" of marginal players, atlhough, depthwise, there certainly is a dropoff in the new environment. I, for one, I can live with that tradeoff.

Many Canucks fans seem to think this is Brian Burke. After listening to Burke talk, I have no doubt. He likes to talk about hockey as a business and he isn't short on expletives either.

Back to topic. The Kesler offer sheet scares the hell out of me. If the gloves come off and GMs start to make offers sheets to young players, the Ducks could be targeted with young players such as Penner, Getzlaf and Perry. The Ducks have no choice but to match and this would definitely screw up our salary structure. Would a team extend these offer sheets to affect our ability to compete? What would have happened if Detroit offerred Bryz 1.9 million dollars? Or Kunitz? This could be a dangerous precedent that could affect the Ducks in the future.
Whoever said that is 100 percent correct, since when is a guy with 23 career points worth 1.9 million? You are just driving up the market, Lupul got 2.3 million, the GM's are just repeating what they did before.

At least Lupul has the production to back up his contract. This Kesler contract is crazy. I realize he has the potential to be a pretty good player in this league, but this was a stupid offer. Clarke says he doesn't care, but I think he will when he has tough negotiations with players comparing themselves to Kesler or if his team is in some cap trouble and a team signs one of his players to an offer sheet more than they are worth.

Well he would be qualified for 1.9, but he could sign for less for a long term contract.

Or he could take the Kariya approach and do a one-year deal each and every year. Given the little I know about Kesler he doesn't sound like the type to give back money next year. More like the type that will want even more.

And as for the second part, if ALL teams paid a lot for upper tier players, and were forced to lessen salaries for the mid to low range players, then total talent per team wouldn't change. Since all the players need a job, it means less desireable (but still quality) players will have to sign for less.

Communism is a great concept too. One that fails because people are greedy, selfish @ssholes.

I just think this whole thing is like that, where one team will find a way to F it up by beging greedy and selfish. Philly might be the one. Let's hope I'm wrong.

At least Lupul has the production to back up his contract. This Kesler contract is crazy. I realize he has the potential to be a pretty good player in this league, but this was a stupid offer. Clarke says he doesn't care, but I think he will when he has tough negotiations with players comparing themselves to Kesler or if his team is in some cap trouble and a team signs one of his players to an offer sheet more than they are worth.
And it's only a one year deal, so it's not like Clarke is giving a long term deal thinking he'll be worth it down the line..he's making 1.9 for the guy he is now..not who he might be.

Communism is a great concept too. One that fails because people are greedy, selfish @ssholes.

I just think this whole thing is like that, where one team will find a way to F it up by beging greedy and selfish. Philly might be the one. Let's hope I'm wrong.

I'm as big a capitalist as you'll find on this board. I'm all for free markets unfettered by government regulation. That said, sports, alas, is different. The essence of sports, at least at the professional level, is competition.

Hockey was barely surviving in the smaller-market cities (and, in some instances, it was only a matter of time before the franchises expired). It could not have survived without a salary cap. (I know most of the counter-arguments, but can you seriously envision an NHL with just one or two Canadian franchises? That's the direction in which we were heading.)

While I'm not crazy about what Clarke did, I'd argue that, in general, the Salary Cap makes it less likely than before that this type of thing will happen. (This one appears to have been prompted by the Primeau's retierment). Prior to the spending cap, teams like the Rangers could have engaged in a similar practice (on a wholesale basis) with impugnity.

Clarke fires back (http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID=177368&hubname=)

My Canuck friends up here are pretty choked, who can blame them?

This where the great Canuck tradition of lowballing young players ends.