Islanders Sign Dipietro

[Athlétique.Canadien]

Why should a Vancouver fan be laughing at this?

Where did Vancouver get Bertuzzi from in the 1st place? And then by coincidental magic, they get Luongo.

Bertuzzi and Luongo - The Isles connection.

[RobRock]

There was an interesting theory put out there about this contract. It all hinges on the expectation that DiPietro will retire with long before the contract expires. If he retires with five years left on his deal, for example, then the remaining five years won't count against the cap – if I read the CBA correctly. That would in effect make it a ten year contract, with five years of deferred salary, something which teams can no longer do under the CBA. And by spreading the cap number over those five years, they get a $2 million cushion to use.

All that aside, I don't know why either side signed this deal. DiPietro gives up a chance to ever leave the team on his own, and should he ever develop into the player that Mike Milbury projected him to be, there's no doubt that he could generate a $5-7 million contract down the road somewhere. And for the Islanders, you already had a huge albatross around the team's neck with Yashin's deal, now you wanna carry around a bigger one? Talk about gluttons for punishment. There's now an immense amount of pressure on DiPietro to get this team not just into the playoffs, but deep into the playoffs, on a more regular basis. And if he can't do it, they can't move him, unless there's some way to tear up the deal. And I don't think DiPietro's side would be willing to do that. That would make a buyout out of the question.

[jetsniper]

I thought in terms of retirement, it depended on the age of the player? Because everyone wanted Turgeon to retire this offseason to open up cap room but his salary would've counted against the cap anyway.

[Athlétique.Canadien]

There was an interesting theory put out there about this contract. It all hinges on the expectation that DiPietro will retire with long before the contract expires. If he retires with five years left on his deal, for example, then the remaining five years won't count against the cap – if I read the CBA correctly. That would in effect make it a ten year contract, with five years of deferred salary, something which teams can no longer do under the CBA. And by spreading the cap number over those five years, they get a $2 million cushion to use.

All that aside, I don't know why either side signed this deal. DiPietro gives up a chance to ever leave the team on his own, and should he ever develop into the player that Mike Milbury projected him to be, there's no doubt that he could generate a $5-7 million contract down the road somewhere. And for the Islanders, you already had a huge albatross around the team's neck with Yashin's deal, now you wanna carry around a bigger one? Talk about gluttons for punishment. There's now an immense amount of pressure on DiPietro to get this team not just into the playoffs, but deep into the playoffs, on a more regular basis. And if he can't do it, they can't move him, unless there's some way to tear up the deal. And I don't think DiPietro's side would be willing to do that. That would make a buyout out of the question.

Yep, true true true. That's why the NHL is baffled across the board. Imagine being a Montreal fan and being stuck with Theodore for 12 more years at 4.5 a year.

I am not putting down Jose but I will use him as an example. Roy could even be used in this example, wanting to get out from that garbage. What do you do when the goalie has to go? If the goalie is unhappy he will suck. It's an elementary hockey law. It works like gravity. The goalie loses confidence. Jose couldn't stay after the slipping on the ice and the propecia incident. He needed a fresh start. Life doesn't always work in accordance with Wang like "Committee" thinking, especially for 15 years! What happens if DiPietro slips?

Gainey is the way. He'll gladly pay $3,52 a year to Huet over 2. :hlogo:

Edited September 12, 2006 by ATHLÉTIQUE.CANADIEN

[Peter Puck]

Look at the other side for just a moment:

DiPietro (despite what everyone says) was significantly improving as the year went on, and even if TSN says he hasn't arrived yet, I'd suggest there might be a good chance they just haven't updated that little blurb (then again, what does that little blurb mean). DiP *was* taken first overall, and there was a reason for that. At this point, after his seasons of work, you could never say he was a bust. While he may be inconsistent, he's certainly got plenty of talent and it's entirely possible this year he'll prove his worth.

...

<snip>

...

If nothing else, kudos to the Isles for working on something new in the game. Maybe this is the way to guarantee a little continuity in a sport where lowering UFA ages encourages less loyalty. While it's still early to make any kind of call one way or the other on the deal, it certainly bears more examination than the knee-jerk judgements pouring in right now.

I agree that this deal isn't neccesarily the disaster almost everyone says it is. Colin is correct that paying 4.5 million per year for DiP might be a great bargain in 5 years and might look terrible from Dip's point of view.

Clearly this is what the Islanders are counting on and it has a reasonable chance of coming to pass.

BUT, in the past when star athletes have realized their after a few years in a long term contract that they are receiving less than their current market value they just insist on renegotiating. With the exception of the Senators and Yashin the team has always caved in and given the player a new deal at market values.

Of course, this is the new NHL and we don't know whether teams will refuse to renegotiate or not. However, it will be hard to hype Dip as the franchise player to the fans and then to refuse to pay him market value if he holds out. This makes the upside for the Islanders much less attractive. The downside is still just as ugly.

Some team soon is going to find themselves paying a star well below market value during the later years of a long term deal. I am very curious to see if the teams will be willing to refuse to renegotiate. Yes it seems like a no-brainer, the team *should* stick to its guns but (with the exception of Yashin) the teams have always caved in in the past.

[RobRock]

I checked the CBA but didn't find anything, but the way I heard it explained was like this.

If a player 35 or older signs a new contract and retires before the term, the team has to carry that cap value for the life of the retired player's contract. If that's correct, then no matter when DiPietro retires, they wouldn't have to apply his contract against the cap.

[Peter Puck]

There was an interesting theory put out there about this contract. It all hinges on the expectation that DiPietro will retire with long before the contract expires. If he retires with five years left on his deal, for example, then the remaining five years won't count against the cap – if I read the CBA correctly. That would in effect make it a ten year contract, with five years of deferred salary, something which teams can no longer do under the CBA. And by spreading the cap number over those five years, they get a $2 million cushion to use.

Hmm ... not sure I understand this. It seems to me likely that the Islanders will not have to keep paying DiPietro after he retires. Thus I think if he retires after 10 years he will only receive 45 million.

Now if he was to receive his 67.5 million over 15 years with his salary decreasing for the last five years that might leave room for some cap trickery. For example if he were to get 55 million in the first 10 years and only 12.5 million in the last 5 and then he retires after 10 years he would receive 55 million but the Islanders would only be charged 4.5 million per year against the cap instead of the 5.5 million per year a 10 year contract of 55 million would yield. Thus they would have deferred some cap money and artificially raised their cap for 10 years (followed by artificially lowering it for 5 years).

[JMMR]

I checked the CBA but didn't find anything, but the way I heard it explained was like this.

If a player 35 or older signs a new contract and retires before the term, the team has to carry that cap value for the life of the retired player's contract. If that's correct, then no matter when DiPietro retires, they wouldn't have to apply his contract against the cap.

SO if he is under 35 when he signs the contract it will not cound against the cap when he retires??

[Fanpuck33]

SO if he is under 35 when he signs the contract it will not cound against the cap when he retires??

Correct.

[JMMR]

Thanks fan puck long tim no chat eh buddy!

[fromage]

From 15 years at 4.5 million per year to 1 year at 2.5 million per year. There's a turn-around.

http://www.rds.ca/cgi-bin/click?fu=376&amp...92&fp=28290

That article is from last year...

[JLP]

publicity stunt

[Colin]

So, if we add the cap situation to what I'd previously discussed, then this is really a win-win scenario - with both sides hoping the other loses. Confusing, but here's the explanation:

By signing DiP long-term, it means the Isles have their goalie, and presumably one of the better in hockey, locked up for the duration of his career. Not only that, but they have him locked up at a relatively modest price tag. The Isles will be assuming that DiP will retire sometime in his mid-30's like most other goalies, and that his career won't last as long as the best. Obviously, with injuries and wear and tear, that's not an unlikely happenstance. In this case, this deal is a huge winner for the Isles. They get their franchise goalie for a modest price and when he retires early, they scrub his salary from their books and suddenly have loads of cap space. Typical Wang with a typical business venture: risky, and yet with a huge payoff. And the odds would seem to be with him.

From DiP's point of view, he's signing for a modest fee for the duration of his career, but while he will be underpaid (when he's presumably one of the best) for a few years, before and after that he will be overpaid. Over the long haul, that's a winning situation for this goaltender unless the cap rises so much that the max salary in a few years is raised significantly. DiP is gambling on good health and a very long playing career and, since he's had no real problems in the past, and with the continual improvements in health care, he figgers he'll be able to hang on until he's 40. No real reason to believe otherwise. As a 35-year old playing competitive sports four times a week despite injuries etc, I see no reason why he can't make it to 40. Therefore, from his standpoint, this is a winning contract as well. It's a gamble too: he's assuming the cap level won't rise significantly over the life of his contract and he's assuming he'll remain relatively healthy for that time, but it's a considered risk and one that's probably worth taking.

Who will win this in the long run? Who knows. But at this juncture in time, I'm leaning more towards saying this is actually an intelligent signing from both ends. They may both be praying that the other side loses in the long run, but it's a risk both sides are willing to take at this point.

And again, if you combine all that with some of the points I made in my first post, well I think this might be something that other GM's look into very seriously over the next few years. Remember, everyone is still getting used to the cap situation. Right now it seems most GM's are looking at constant flexibility under the cap by signing one and two year deals, but with some of the players wanting some stability, this kind of contract might be used more often when there seems to be a solid mutual fit between player and team.

Something to think about anyhow.

[jetsniper]

That article is from last year...

Theres a huge section of the topic that explains that...

[The-Habby2919]

On SportsCentre tonight Wang said that his side chose the salary while he let "Ricky" choose the duration. And in an interview with Garth Snow, he looked like he was sweating bullets.... Looked completly unsure about what had just happend.

:hlogo:

[shortcat1]

and to think I turned down a 35-year $80 000 contract as a teacher... man... do I feel insecure...

:king: :hlogo: :king:

[ch_nl]

What are they thinking?!?!

There's a proverb in Swedish that goes something like this:

What differs the smart from the dumb is that the smart learns from his misstakes and have the abillity to think different today from tomorrow.

Yasin and DiPietro - The team, the duo, the oldtimers.

[Mont Royale]

By signing DiP long-term, it means the Isles have their goalie, and presumably one of the better in hockey, locked up for the duration of his career. Not only that, but they have him locked up at a relatively modest price tag.

From DiP's point of view, he's signing for a modest fee for the duration of his career, but while he will be underpaid (when he's presumably one of the best) for a few years, before and after that he will be overpaid.

But at this juncture in time, I'm leaning more towards saying this is actually an intelligent signing from both ends.

And again, if you combine all that with some of the points I made in my first post, well I think this might be something that other GM's look into very seriously over the next few years.

Wow. Did you have a straight face when you wrote this?

When did DiPietro become one of the better goalies in hockey? His save percentage last season was 26th best in the league! Yup, upper echelon guy, he is. In his career, he's had about 140 NHL games. Because you keep saying 'presumably', I guess you're presuming he'll become a top tier goalie. Maybe he will, but maybe anyone will. On what basis do you consider that likely?

And $4.5 million is a modest price tag? Since when? This makes him the 9th highest paid in the league - pretty decent for a guy who hasn't done much.

This signing is the opposite of intelligent, and there's no chance other GMs will begin doing this. Charles Wang is in a league of his own.

[Colin]

When did DiPietro become one of the better goalies in hockey?

How closely do you follow the Isles? Before the Olympic break, DiP was inconsistent, for sure. He showed flashes of brilliance, but also showed too much net to opposing shooters. However, at the Olympics, he was far and away the best American goalie. Blew Miller right out of the water - the same Miller that everyone says is one of the best goalies in the game.

Olympic Rick came back to the Island and hoisted the entire team on his shoulders and almost - against all odds - took them to the playoffs. Forget the lack of firepower that the Isles have, just focus on what happened to their defense corps and this feat becomes Herculean when examined closely. First, there was the fire sale at the trade deadline, and after that? Here now is a list of all the names that played on the blueline:

Zhitnik - who promptly got injured and missed the rest of the season.

Campoli - rookie

Grebeshkov - rookie who won't even play in North America this season

Gervais - rookie and late season call-up

Erskine - since released

Rourke - no-name who rode the bench

Caldwell - rookie with little hope of making the team this season

DiP finished the season with 30 wins and, as I said before, almost got the hapless Isles to the 8th seed in the East. I dislike the use of stats as the main tool to define how a player's season went because they don't show the whole picture. Sure, his first half wasn't so hot, but if you look solely at his *most recent* games, he's looked worth every penny of that $4.5M and more. The Isles finally have a goaltending coach as well - another reason to think that DiP will only continue improving.

If we took stats as the sole indicator, then Higgins would be considered a useful 2nd liner, but most likely a 3rd line player with good two-way abilities. His 20-some odd goals were good, but on a Cup challenging team, that would never be top-two line quality. But when you look at his season closely and discover that most of the goals were scored in the second half when he was electric around the net and played one of the most complete games that any habs has done in years, you can certainly say that he easily has 2nd line potential and could conceivably become a very talented 1st line player. Should we, however, just go with stats and say his upper limit is really just an exceptional 3rd line player?

I'm not saying the deal definitely *was* a winner, I'm just leaning that way. Only time will tell. What I am saying though, is that there's more to this that a series of numbers which are, quite honestly, very misleading.

[Mont Royale]

Sure, his first half wasn't so hot, but if you look solely at his *most recent* games, he's looked worth every penny of that $4.5M and more.

There was another goalie who was even better in the second half, but didn't have a lacklustre first part of the season (didn't play) - and also hasn't otherwise proven too much in the NHL. I assume then that you are positively incredulous that we signed Huet for only $2.8 million?

[Colin]

There was another goalie who was even better in the second half, but didn't have a lacklustre first part of the season (didn't play) - and also hasn't otherwise proven too much in the NHL. I assume then that you are positively incredulous that we signed Huet for only $2.8 million?

He's a lot older and has signed a very small deal - which leaves him the opportunity to renegotiate for a pile more if he continues to compete at such a high level. In fact, should his play continue to excel, then there's no reason to believe he won't be asking for a contract *exceeding* that of DiPietro's. Some thing we should have only paid about $2M for Huet, and already we're paying $2.8. Imagine the future. In fact, don't you find it shocking that salaries in the post-CBA world are rising rather quickly again?

You may note that the Isles decided to sign their *franchise* goalie around whom they wish to build their club. Can you say the same for the 31-year old Huet? Was Huet taken in the first round, first overall, because he was all that and a bag of chips? Was he dreafted at 18? Was he even considered by the NHL before the age of 25? In general, when do the best goalies mature fully into their prime? Is it at 25 or so, like DiP, or is it after 30 like Huet.

You don't have to agree. You also don't have to act like a pompous ass in your posts. We can have a debate without your tone indicating that you think I'm irretrevably stupid. In fact, they generally turn out better and we can learn a lot more that way.

[Mont Royale]

He's a lot older and has signed a very small deal - which leaves him the opportunity to renegotiate for a pile more if he continues to compete at such a high level. In fact, should his play continue to excel, then there's no reason to believe he won't be asking for a contract *exceeding* that of DiPietro's. Some thing we should have only paid about $2M for Huet, and already we're paying $2.8. Imagine the future. In fact, don't you find it shocking that salaries in the post-CBA world are rising rather quickly again?

You may note that the Isles decided to sign their *franchise* goalie around whom they wish to build their club. Can you say the same for the 31-year old Huet? Was Huet taken in the first round, first overall, because he was all that and a bag of chips? Was he dreafted at 18? Was he even considered by the NHL before the age of 25? In general, when do the best goalies mature fully into their prime? Is it at 25 or so, like DiP, or is it after 30 like Huet.

You don't have to agree. You also don't have to act like a pompous ass in your posts. We can have a debate without your tone indicating that you think I'm irretrevably stupid. In fact, they generally turn out better and we can learn a lot more that way.

Huet was a UFA, something DiPietro is not. That kind of bargaining power adds up to more money, and that's the reason we have to pay more than $2 million. Still a far cry from $4.5 for 15 years.

You're right - I don't have to agree. I haven't seen anyone who does. Virtually everyone commenting on the deal thinks Wang is out of his mind. But I don't think you're *irretrievably* (note spelling) stupid. No sirree.

[Peter Puck]

You're right - I don't have to agree. I haven't seen anyone who does. Virtually everyone commenting on the deal thinks Wang is out of his mind. But I don't think you're *irretrievably* (note spelling) stupid. No sirree.

1) It is not true that virtually everyone thinks Wang is out of his mind. Many think the deal is a mistake (possibly even Colin) but think it could work out well. Colin's point seems to have been that the many HW posters who were insisting Wang is out of his mind were completely overlooking the very real possiblity that this could work out as a great deal for the Islanders.

2) More importantly, there is no need to be rude in your replies. Colin makes a number of good points and you help no one (especially yourself) by being insulting.

Edited September 14, 2006 by Peter Puck

[dark_faerie87]

Does this mean I'm allowed to make 15 year deals now too? :king:

[jetsniper]

More importantly, there is no need to be rude in your replies. Colin makes a number of good points and you help no one (especially yourself) by being insulting.

Exactly, where was the point in that last comment?