markierung Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Mike Richards is reportedly close to signing a 10 year deal worth between 5-6 million a year with the Flyers!!! Talk about a monster deal for a third year player. http://spectorshockey.net/rumors.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMMR Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Mike Richards is reportedly close to signing a 10 year deal worth between 5-6 million a year with the Flyers!!! Talk about a monster deal for a third year player. http://spectorshockey.net/rumors.html He is the Flyers leader in more ways than one, not sure about long term deals but Rickky is playing well still in NYI Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMMR Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2007/...s_flyers_deal/ Sportsnet.ca -- The Philadelphia Flyers have agreed to terms with Mike Richards on a 12-year deal worth close to $70 million, Sportsnet has learned. According to sources the deal is still pending league approval. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Insane. They're so boned if he doesn't produce like he is now for his entire career. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smon Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Why? These are fairly smart deals - everyone laughed at Charles Wang and Garth Snow but they made a heck of a deal signing DiPietro to what they did. The Flyers are simply trying to copy their modus operandi, here. The cap's rising and players are getting insanely overpaid as UFAs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Why? These are fairly smart deals - everyone laughed at Charles Wang and Garth Snow but they made a heck of a deal signing DiPietro to what they did. The Flyers are simply trying to copy their modus operandi, here. The cap's rising and players are getting insanely overpaid as UFAs. And what happens if he blows out his knee this year and never regains his form? There is just too much uncertainty surrounding performance to spend this much money over such a long period of time. How many one/two year wonders has this league seen? What if one of these guys getting such a long deal pulls a Theo, or even worse, a Jim Carey? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbhatt Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Sure, it's a risk....but it's the only way to have a chance to have a stacked team in this day and age: make some gambles like this and have them pay off, allowing you to keep a strong core of talent in tact for many years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Nasty Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 I agree with Fanpuck...a bonehead move. Way too many uncertainties and for 5.7 M per season...when did he suddenly earn that kind of dough. That is Markov money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Stealth Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Agreed, that's just a stupid deal. Richards is a great young player but the amount and length overall is just silly. However, Richards is the type of player you could feel comfortable giving this kind of deal due to his work ethic etc as previously mentioned but still I think it's too much. This doesn'thelp their situation with Carter all that much. With Van Riemsdyk in the system, they might be ok with moving him but they may not have a choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 The idea is right except I don't know if Mike Richards is worth $5.7M and I'm not sure he ever will be. Sure, in 10 years when the cap is a lot higher and salaries are inflated, he might be worth it in his mid-30s but I think he's just about peaked as a player and if the Flyers are banking on him improving each season from now on, I think they'll be disappointed. Just like when Lowe offered 4.5M per season for Penner, I think this is the right idea but for the wrong player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brobin Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Long term contracts with no team escape clause are stupid. If you had 10 of these happen I guarantee that at least 8 turn out to be mistakes.. and these mistakes will be long term mistakes. People by nature can slack off when they don't have to perform. For the first few years they might play for pride, but eventually, the typical guy is going to get comfy. The players are practically untradable. The players can get hurt and never be the same. They can still play, but suck and they have 12 years of salary. One of the main reasons the cap is going up is because of the Canadian dollar. Most of the league revenue comes from the Canadian clubs and when our dollar shoots up, the league revenue looks way better. As our dollar goes down, the salary cap might very well come down, and significantly too!!!! What do you really gain? Many teams have been able to keep their top players by using 4 year contracts and if they get really really good, why not pay them for it. If they suck, you let them go or give them less. I don't think I would even give Crosby that contract. As people have said, if he blows out his knee, or get a bunch of concussions and turns into a dog (think Lindros), you are stuck with him and your team suffers for a decade!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markierung Posted December 13, 2007 Author Share Posted December 13, 2007 Also, Richards hasn't really earned this money. He had a mediocre rookie year. A horrible second year, and a great 1/3 of his third year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cataclaw Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 (edited) The Islanders decided to buy out the remainder of Yashin's contract in June 2007, according to a report in Newsday. The contract was bought out for $17.63 million, or two-thirds of the amount left on the contract. It will be paid out over eight years ($2.2 million a year). That's all i have to say. Good kid, good hockey player, but no one, i repeat no one, except maybe Sidney Crosby, is worth a 12+ year contract. Why? Because the more you try to look into the future, the more the future is cloudy. Injury, sudden deterioration of play, lack of motivation, other factos, and you're left with a huge burden for years. Edited December 14, 2007 by Cataclaw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxamillion Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 Also, Richards hasn't really earned this money. He had a mediocre rookie year. A horrible second year, and a great 1/3 of his third year. His points weren't great the last 2 seasons, but his play was. He's always out there doing his job and leading by example. they also didn't have him on a scoring line those 2 years. I think the deal is a little long, and i think we might have pulled the trigger a little early, but I think the kid has something special. he's a more talented Rod Brind'Amour, a guy the Flyers probably still kick themselves for losing. I don't know if we can rate this deal for another 6-7 years, though. he might turn it on and become a 100 point, strong +/- guy, or he may not. it's a very high risk, potentially very high reward situation. All I know is i'm glad he's going to be wearing the o&b for years, and i mean years, to come. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markierung Posted December 14, 2007 Author Share Posted December 14, 2007 His points weren't great the last 2 seasons, but his play was. He's always out there doing his job and leading by example. they also didn't have him on a scoring line those 2 years. I think the deal is a little long, and i think we might have pulled the trigger a little early, but I think the kid has something special. he's a more talented Rod Brind'Amour, a guy the Flyers probably still kick themselves for losing. I don't know if we can rate this deal for another 6-7 years, though. he might turn it on and become a 100 point, strong +/- guy, or he may not. it's a very high risk, potentially very high reward situation. All I know is i'm glad he's going to be wearing the o&b for years, and i mean years, to come. I just don't think that players should be paid on pure potential. Holmgren could have paid him less and sign him long term later on Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxamillion Posted December 15, 2007 Share Posted December 15, 2007 I just don't think that players should be paid on pure potential. Holmgren could have paid him less and sign him long term later on that's what i was hoping he would do, but what if he turns it up more every year? then we are forced to pay more. there's too many arguments for both sides simply because we don't know yet. like i said, in 6-8 years we will know if this was a good deal or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markierung Posted December 15, 2007 Author Share Posted December 15, 2007 i don't think it's being smart to take that big of a risk. Even Rick Dipietro was a proven starter when he signed his massive deal. And Di Pietro signed at below MArket value for a goalie at his caliber. Richards is being signed at top-centre money before he does anything Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxamillion Posted December 15, 2007 Share Posted December 15, 2007 i don't think it's being smart to take that big of a risk. Even Rick Dipietro was a proven starter when he signed his massive deal. And Di Pietro signed at below MArket value for a goalie at his caliber. Richards is being signed at top-centre money before he does anything I never said it was smart. I think it came a little too soon and at a very high cost, but at the same time it could turn out to be a huge steal in 4-5 years. we just don't know right now. can we at least agree that your avatar is awesome? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markierung Posted December 15, 2007 Author Share Posted December 15, 2007 can we at least agree that your avatar is awesome? ya definitely lol thx. I was in awe when i saw it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Harry Posted December 16, 2007 Share Posted December 16, 2007 (edited) Sure, it's a risk....but it's the only way to have a chance to have a stacked team in this day and age: make some gambles like this and have them pay off, allowing you to keep a strong core of talent in tact for many years. No there are other, less risky ways. The best one is to invest heavily in your scouting and development staff so that you have a steady stream of good prospects coming through the system. You can then afford to give your elite core good contracts, and have a steady stream of good young guys coming in ready to help. Maybe you can't afford to keep all of them when they get to UFA seniority, but even if you have to let some go you should have replacements in line. This is what the Red Wings and Senators have been doing for a decade, and now other teams like the Ducks, Sabres (and Habs) are catching on (and you also need a smart front office). It's less of a gamble than trying to lock in a player for a dozen years in the hopes that in 10 years you're paying him way under market value. As others have pointed out, for every Dipietro there is a Yashin or some other guy who wrecks his knees, is concussion prone, or just gets lazy/starts a family and loses his competitive drive. The few players who would be worth it are multi-year allstars who have also proven theyre truly elite, and not just just putting up great stats cuz of their good teammates. Edited December 16, 2007 by Dirty Harry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markierung Posted December 16, 2007 Author Share Posted December 16, 2007 i just don't see the point. This is his third year. He goes UFA in 4 years. Now let's say they sign him for 3 years at 5 million each. Then, if he does do incredibly well, they could easily sign him to around 6 million, which will still be less than what Thornton, Iginla, and Heatley make. I have no doubt that he won't be producing like those guys. So yes, they could have still saved money, and less risk with the length of the contract Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markierung Posted December 16, 2007 Author Share Posted December 16, 2007 they don't have to re-sign him long term to over 6 million. Even if they do have to give him 7 million, that one extra million a year is well worth not taking the risk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.