Kovalchuk Nears Deal with the Devil(s)

[CatScrap]

Do you really think it will drop by a significant amount?

 

[Destroydacre]

Dark gave a good response to this, but I'd like to elaborate. GMs are free to pay up to the maximum to any player, of course, but every dollar they spend on Kovalchuk is a dollar they can't spend on anyone else. It isn't baseball, where the owner's pockets are the limit, either. The salary cap means that GMs need to get their money's worth. To judge if they have effectively done so, you look at the player's projected performance vs. the projected performance of similarly paid players. It's silly to say you have made a good contract if you are overpaying a guy $4 million dollars more than he is worth.

Now I understand that different teams have different needs, so a team like L.A. isn't willing to sign a goalie for several millions of dollars when they already have a bunch. And the fact that teams do have needs allows players to get better contracts than the league as a whole would generally offer them.

But Kovalchuk isn't so good that he merits $9 million - the upper echelon of current contracts - on his own, and I don't think the Devils are so hard up for forwards that they should spend $9 million on him. They could explore other options via free agency or trades.

Let's put it this way. For about 12 million, you could get Kovalchuk and Sean Avery. Or, you could get Mike Richards and Jeff Carter with a million to spare. You decide.

CatScrap's post is excellent explaining what a lot of people tend to overlook. Kovalchuk signing a contract today is not the same as Kovalchuk signing a contract 2 years ago, when Ovechkin and Crosby signed their contracts. Inflation and the continual rise in the salary cap (in addition to an increase in escrow) are all things to consider. If Kovalchuk gets signed for $10M per this year, it's not as valuable of a contract as Ovechkin's was when he signed his, despite the fact the dollar amount is more. If a team wants to give Kovalchuk $10M per, that's their choice and there's nothing wrong with that. Especially considering Kovy is pretty much the only superstar out there this year. But in no way should Ovechkin's or anyone else's contract set a bar that cannot be crossed. The only bar is the league maximum which is 20% of the cap.

 

[CatScrap]

CatScrap's post is excellent explaining what a lot of people tend to overlook. Kovalchuk signing a contract today is not the same as Kovalchuk signing a contract 2 years ago, when Ovechkin and Crosby signed their contracts. Inflation and the continual rise in the salary cap (in addition to an increase in escrow) are all things to consider. If Kovalchuk gets signed for $10M per this year, it's not as valuable of a contract as Ovechkin's was when he signed his, despite the fact the dollar amount is more. If a team wants to give Kovalchuk $10M per, that's their choice and there's nothing wrong with that. Especially considering Kovy is pretty much the only superstar out there this year. But in no way should Ovechkin's or anyone else's contract set a bar that cannot be crossed. The only bar is the league maximum which is 20% of the cap.

It is for these reasons That I support long term contract to players who are proven producers, Oveckin, Crosby, etc. Because they give the team a long term bargain on the player. Imagine what Ovechkin would fetch on the FA market today, I bet it would be more than 9.5 million.