An update on Joe Thornton’s future with the San Jose Sharks, plus a couple of clubs which could become destinations for sidelined Boston Bruins center Marc Savard’s contract.
Latest on Joe Thornton.
Joe Thornton is determined to remain with the San Jose Sharks.
NICHOLS ON HOCKEY: Sportsnet’s Elliotte Friedman reports he was told that when San Jose Sharks owner (Hasso Plattner) got involved in last month’s dispute between Sharks GM Doug Wilson and former captain Joe Thornton that the latter wasn’t going anywhere and will retire as a Shark. Friedman notes Thornton has said he doesn’t want to be traded. Friedman also claims when the issue came up last summer, Thornton said if management wanted to move him they would have to buy him out. Friedman doubts that’s going to happen.
SPECTOR’S NOTE: If Sharks ownership doesn’t want Thornton traded or bought out then it’s a moot point. Unless Thornton wants out, he will finish his NHL career as a Shark. He holds all the cards with his full no-movement clause. Have to wonder if this becomes an issue in the next round of collective bargaining. Team owners could use this situation as justificaiton to push for either non-guaranteed contracts or the right to have one opportunity to renegotiate a deal. Failing that, they could attempt to eliminate no-trade/no-movement clauses or impose limitations upon them.
Sabres or Coyotes destinations for Savard’s contract?
NICHOLS ON HOCKEY: Sportsnet’s Elliotte Friedman reports the Boston Bruins are looking at trading the contract of sidelined center Marc Savard, who will probably never play again because of post-concussion symptoms. Savard’s contract has two years remaining at an annual cap hit of $4.007 million, but it was heavily frontloaded and is worth $525K per season in actual salary, most of which is covered by insurance. That would make Savard’s contract a great bargain for teams in need of reaching next season’s salary-cap minimum. Friedman speculates the Buffalo Sabres and Arizona Coyotes could be possible targets.
SPECTOR’S NOTE: The Coyotes could be the likely destination. The Sabres currently have over $42 million invested in next season’s payroll. Assuming next season’s cap floor only rises to $53 million, the Sabres can easily reach the cap floor by re-signing or replacing their free agents. The Coyotes have over $35 million invested in payroll, though re-signing RFAs like Mikkel Boedker, John Moore and Mark Arcobello could push them closer to $40 million.
Ultimately, it will depend upon what players the Coyotes and Sabres add this summer via trades or free agency, as I suspect they’ll use their cap space to target free agent talent and to talk trade with clubs in need of shedding salary to become cap compliant, like the Chicago Blackhawks, LA Kings, New York Rangers and Philadelphia Flyers. The Bruins also need to shed salary, and the Coyotes and Sabres could attempt to squeeze them to add another player in the mix to take on Savard’s contract.
The Coyotes and Sabres could also have self-imposed cap ceilings. They might be unwilling to take on extra salary once they get comfortably over the cap floor.
If San Jose wants to move Thornton they can assign him to the minors. I doubt he would want to finish his career there, and would be inclined to accept a trade.
Jumbo Joe has a full NMC which guarantees he won’t be sent to the AHL!
Plus he has the owner on his side, Joe is never going to see the ice in the AHL ever again.
I don’t see the Coyotes taking on Savard’s dead cap space. The Arizona Coyotes only have 11 NHL contracts signed for next season and a new majority owner as well as over $4.5 million in dead cap space.
Such a total embarressment being a Sabres’ fan these days. Bottom-feeders all the way.
Punch Imlach mustbe break-dancing in his grave these days, wonder how this franchise every spiraled to such a bad state. Never mind the tank stuff and rebuild, the team is moving towards a losing mindset which will take years to shed. Next season won’t be much better, maybe the following one either.
Non-guaranteed contracts – similar to the NFL – is the ONLY way to go min the next collective bar gaining sessions, and this time the owners HAVE to play hard ball. Bottom line – you don’t perform in accordance with what we pay you – sayonara.
Never going to happen. Players will sit out 2 years in a CBA dispute rather than giving in on that.
Just like they swore they would never accept a salary cap…oh, wait…
As I recall, NFL players said much the same thing and were ready to “hold out” until someone reminded them that the alternative in many cases, considering their lack of qualifications to do anything else, was – to paraphrase the famous line by George C. Scott in Patton – “shovel s*^t in Louisiana.” They’d cave like a 10 cent accordion.
My comment to both you Lyle and george bellow. The BIG difference in why that won’t happen and why they won’t “cave” in so easily. The NHL salary is no where near what nfl players make. (Superstars aside). You can’t compare the two. Unless the owners are going to start paying even the role players more money. The nfl system won’t work here in the NHL. The cap would have to be raised significantly and run of the mill players paid more in order for the. “No guarantee” contract system to work. Agree?
I for one do not agree. I see your point, but everything being relative – the NHL salaries are hardly soup-line pay-outs. The NFL draws crows of 80,000-up at top dollar and get a fortune in TV rights compared to the NHL. What the NHL owners can do is exercise the old “divide-and-conquer” routine. The vast majority of NHL players are not at the superstar level – so if it comes to a long hold-out guess who’s going to cave first? The pluggers and grunts who toil for $2.5 mil down to the NHL minimum won’t have the bank rolls stashed away by the Ovechkins, Crosbys and Stamkos of the world and losing those pay cheques for any length of time – especially those who are getting a bit longer in the tooth – and the dissension in the ranks will grow. I have no doubt whatsoever that the owners could win any such battle.
I agree with George…there is no comparison between avg salaries,90 % of nhl players could not afford a 2 year layoff, and jobs overseas wont be as easy to come by the next time around…owners are likely to be in a way stronger position bargaining next time.
guarateed contracts will soon be a thing of the past in most north american sports, nvm the NHL, the NFL is pretty close to the model most leagues will want to follow.
Stand by my post-the removal of guaranteed contracts will never happen. Mgt can protect themselves by not offering NMC’s.
Yea its called forced compliance same tactic used by police, gov’t, law, business and society in general.
Sure you have a valid reason to complain…just fill out this 10000 page complaint form and we will look at it (someday, maybe)
Owners create the “problems” from their own greed — too many teams, salary, ticket prices, concession prices, merchandise, crappy players…all inline with the NHL to screw you the fan and then the players.
Why is there a salary cap era again?
Wasn’t it the owners that wanted it in the first place?
Ohh wait we didn’t expect to hit the cap so easy…wait lets change it again and again..
It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that Salary cap means bye bye hockey; hello money…
My suggestion is get rid of teams that can’t sustain, forget about players/salary parity and put an end to the constant changes to a heritage game or suck it up and stop complaining & trying to change the DUMB rules you’ve implemented. And I can’t wait until micromanagement (adv stats) become part of the next agreement — ummm yes mr. Gretzky you have won 5 stanley cups but you lost 50% off faceoffs in defensive zone starts on 5 on 2 play so we can only pay you 2.65987 million
The notion of trading injured / underperforming players should be followed up with lawsuits on breach of contracts or for attempting to intimidate into compliance (see SJ and Thorton situation)
If anyone should get any leverage at all, then it should be the fans. Oh your team sucks…money back….ohh we fired a coach and owe him 5 million…money back…ohh our star player sucks…money back
Once they do that, then I will agree with you.
Hardball?
The NHLPA will fight tooth n nail n won’t back down on non-guaranteed contracts.
The owners play hard ball every CBA n this time it won’t work. the NHLPA does not force GM’s to make deals n GM’s have always needed restrictions to keep from being idiots. Overpaying or stupid terms etc.
So the owners can make even more money?
I am all for guarnanteed contracts and hard caps on players salaries if they pass the savings on to the fans at the gate but that will never happen.
The people that cause thes problems are not the players but the GMs that give NMCs to everybody willy nilly.
A guy like Joe Thornton who has done what he has done and signed as an UFA has every right to a NMC. The GM asking him to waive it one year after he negotiated the contract. Ridiculous.
And with the player movement in the NFL, we want that?
I remember the lament was that nobody would stick with an NHL franchise for their whole career a few years ago and now that it is happening we want more player movement.
It is millionaires vs billionaires and the fans that watch them.
i am all for the players getting what they can because it is their bodies and their talent that is “property of”.
It’s laughable that the GM’s have to tinker with the CBA to protect themselves from their own stupidity. Last CBA it was a couple of one-time buyouts to get rid of bad contracts they willingly offered and signed. Next CBA it may be non-guaranteed contracts or a one-time opportunity to re-negotiate contracts. Here’s a thought – stop handing out no movement clauses to everyone and quit signing older players, whose game is in decline, to long term expensive contracts.
Makes you want to go the GMs’ meeting and yell out “just say no” to no movement clauses. No sympathy for Wilson in San Jose.
But shouldn’t they then expect performance in accordance with what they’re paying some of these stiffs?
In a perfect world, yes. But pro sports is not a perfect world!
Maybe it’s time pro sports was hammered between the eyes with a does of reality. Let’s face it, the ultimate suckers that keep the pot boiling are the fans, many of whom go into hock for the privilege of putting their butts in the seats, buying team paraphernalia and spending gouge prices for a warm beer in a plastic cup. THEY alone can force return to sanity. If they choose not to, and elect to paint their faces gaudy colors and throw money at the franchises – in ANY sport – then that’s a sad commentary on the human race.
Aye aye George exactly
Spot on. You don’t have to look beyond Sharks GM Wilson and how he handed out ridiculous contracts to Thornton and Marleau only to regret it big time less than 12 months later.
I have to disagree. Your looking at it from hindsight
SJ has made playoffs for ten straight years, Thorton and Marleau have been there for most of those seasons and led
They’re contracts expired before they are washed up (36 vs 40 yrs)
SJ did the right thing…extend contracts with NMC in return for dedication and commitment.
Sure they miss playoffs but show stability and respect to players, something future players will appreciate especially with the further suggestion to hinder there careers (no NMC…)
the owners didn’t play hardball last time? the players sign an agreement, the gm’s screw up and it is the player’s problem so the league needs non-guaranteed contracts? franson wanted more than 5 million a year from the leafs and now he is getting 3rd pairing minutes in Nashville. maybe the leafs were giving him a fair offer? just because sutter overpays phaneuf in Calgary the leafs give him a minor increase and now they are overpaying him and phaneuf has to take all kind of abuse for being overpaid. put phaneuf on nashville’s blue line and he becomes a #2 or 3 guy playing with weber or jones. there are too many silly or personal comments about phaneuf out there. people should look at the whole picture.
As I have stated previously, any player worthy of a no-trade or no-movement clause does not need one. As long as he is so valuable to his team that trading him will not improve the team, he will not be traded.
So we should do away with guaranteed contracts that a GM gives to a player. Nobody forces the GM to hand out money. they do it willingly. If a team wants a player and gives that player a big long contract then it is the teams fault, not the player for taking it. Not all teams are in the boat that San Jose is right now. So does the player have the ability to tear up a deal if he is having a great season for the league minimum? NO. The owners would never go for that. This is a storm of the owners making. They wanted a cap, which they got, and try hard at every turn to get around it. I do not feel bad for them. They are their own worse enemy.
With Savard, I don’t really know why the cap floor would be an issue for either the Sabres or Coyotes, or the self-imposed cap.
These teams can comfortably absorb a $4M cap hit and maybe only have to pay $250k in salary for that player. And let’s say they get a 2nd or 3rd-rounder from Boston for taking that cap headache off their hands.
Why would they care if their cap hit was $53M or $57M when the actual salary paid out was virtually the same? They have loads of cap space to play with and get a virtually draft pick free asset.
Why set a self-imposed cap that stops you from getting a free asset??
Additional Note I meant to add: “…when changing your cap doesn’t affect your bottom line”
Don’t mind NTC’s or teams trading players on injured reserve to help with cap. What I would like to see changed is that whatever you pay a player in a particular year, that should be the cap hit. None of these front loaded contacts but spreading the cap hits out evenly or at least that what appears to be happening with the Savard contract. Is this how it works ?
Its to stop circumventing the cap…old news. Book cooking days r gone.
I don’t understand the call to remove guaranteed contracts and I don’t believe they will be removed any time soon. A simple solution to the NMC would be if a player wants to be moved they have to waive their no movement clause and allow the team to trade them to anyone. If the team wants to move them then the team has to abide by the contract and restrictions of the no movement clause. If a team is foolish enough to sign a player to one then it only effects them and no one else. Unlike the Salaries. Which is why a Salary cap is needed.
Some teams can simply out spend another. No one can out no movement clause another. A players salary is based upon those of his peers which show comparable production. In a non salary cap world salaries can rise and lower market teams will be pushed out. If you agree with this fine, I don’t. Under the salary cap player salaries are better controlled even though I believe the cap to be to high myself.
Ideally if I were to set up a a league salary cap. I would cap it at 60 million. Then I would take the profits of the game and require the team to submit half of them to various charities or city improvements like paving the roads.
I know I am alone on this thought but I think the owners who are the ones who take the risk with their dollars are the ones to be making the money not the players. Although I realize the players are the ones the fans come to see so they should be well compensated and having 60 million to do that should well compensated a professionally athlete. This should allow most teams to make a profit and that profit can be used to better their fans cities.
Something crazy like that.
Oh wait that is too much socialism isn’t it?
Ok so Savard to a cap floor team who also only has to pay less than the $500k of actual dollars and the best part is insurance will cover most of that? Sounds great if it wasn’t for the fact that once you acquire him he’ll be on LTIR which means that cap hit won’t be a hit but a savings and if you don’t put him on LTIR you’ll have no claim on insurance. So why does it make sense that he ends up in a cap for team?
Salary only foesnt count with ltir if you are within that range of the ceiling…capfloor even if you ate at the floor it counts toeards the cap
I have a solution and different scenario to offer:
Teams can ‘franchise’ one player like the NFL. This player will not count against the cap and will allow teams to retain their best player. Only one per roster and cannot change that player unless he is no longer on the team.
NMC are automatically void if the player requests a trade. This will avoid the Heatley/Kesler/St.Louis situations.
Once every 5 years teams are allowed to buy out one contact with no cap penalty.
Contracts are still guaranteed. The NFL union is the weakest in all of pro sports. The NBA, MLB and NHL unions have much more power and the NFL tried to get replacement players that’s the only reason the union accepted non-guaranteed contracts. That would never happen in the other 3 sports.
A Franchise tagged player does count against the cap. If it didn’t everyone would just tag their QB which is typically the most expensive (guaranteed) position.
Not only does it count you have to pay the player an avg salary of the top 5 guys who play his position…The franchise tag is to stop large market teams from pillagin small markets younger (good) players for the most part similar to restricted free agency.
Sorry I should have clarified….this is my version of the franchise tag for NHL teams.
Say Stamkos is your highest paid player. …he won’t count against TB’s cap. The cap is basically for your entire team minus the most expensive player.
And Id argue that the NHLPA is/was perhaps the weakest union in prosports…probably the main reason they hired Donald Fehr, they wouldnt need to hire a guy like that if they were a strong union previously.
Franchise player may not count against the cap, but said player must be paid in the salary range of the top 3 at that position in the NFL. Hence the evil empire (Patriots–and I’m a fan) tagging their kicker–genius.
You can have non guaranteed contracts in the NFL because the players play 17-20 games a season max. You simply can’t do that in a sport where the physical duress is nearly the same, some would argue more, and have an 82 game schedule. Then another 2 months of play offs.
NHL players make a lot of money. But they play a lot. And get pounded. Who’d want to do it if they were signed to a 6 million dollar deal that could be thrown out after one injury plagued season.
never happen