This is the third offseason under the NHL’s new collective bargaining agreement, and we’ll continue to witness the evolution of unrestricted free agency – the scrambling period that begins for the Avalanche and all other league teams on July 1.
When free agents say it’s not (only) about the money?
Chances are stronger now that they really mean it.
Here’s why: The cap means that it’s far less likely for a team to completely blow everyone else out of the water with an “outlandish” offer to an elite, or perhaps even mid-level, unrestricted free agent.
The Rangers no longer can have an unlimited budget – and exceed it.
With the cap in play, even the “best” offers are going to be at least in the same arena as the others.
More often, players are going to be pondering the issue of whether it’s worth getting a few more bucks (and that’s a relative term, subject to individual definition) to go to a losing team.
We’ll see more cases of players saying, well, the most important things are to play where you want to play – whether that means the franchise or the city, or both.
The other issue is the NHLPA’s loss of credibility and power in the wake of the lockout means former union head Bob Goodenow’s stance that taking a “below-market” offer is treasonous to the NHLPA cause has been discredited.
As a matter of course, teams with the most cap room are going to be bad teams. That can mean they’re the still-comparably unambitious teams, or teams that have cleared out a lot of dead weight after terrible seasons. And as flattering as it can be for players to hear the sales pitch that they can be part of turning things around, the smart guys are going to be a bit cynical while evaluating that.
Let’s say you’re San Jose’s solid defenseman Scott Hannan, on the verge of unrestricted free agency unless you agree to terms with the Sharks before July 1. Or either of Buffalo’s co-captains, Daniel Briere and Chris Drury, who could be on the market as well and realize that the Sabres will have a difficult time fitting them under the cap – and most likely won’t be able to do it.
They probably could ponder what has happened with Adam Foote. The Avalanche offered him $12 million over four years in the summer of 2005, after the end of the lockout. Instead, he signed with Columbus for $13.5 million over three years. Yes, it’s easy for us to say, gee, that’s fairly similar money, and the math does work out to 50 percent more per season, at least in the three-year term of the Blue Jackets’ offer.
I’m not saying he was “stupid” to take the Columbus offer. I’m saying I bet he would admit now that it’s a case study all NHL players should keep in mind as the third season of the salary-cap game approaches.
Foote has had two tough seasons with a bad team, and he has heard the criticism that his hard-nosed game became archaic in the new NHL. And where is he going to be after next season? Teams won’t be falling over each other to sign him, perhaps even including the Blue Jackets, and his next contract might make the difference between the Columbus and Colorado 2005 packages even less significant.
This summer, the Avalanche will be in an advantageous position if enough coveted veterans hit the market – and now it’s up to Francois Giguere to take advantage of it. With Joe Sakic’s and Rob Blake’s bonus payments – a combined $4.6 million – coming off the books, and Patrice Brisebois and Pierre Turgeon at the end of their deals, Colorado is going to have a lot of room. Yes, the Avalanche missed the playoffs, but that 15-2-2 run was noticed around the league, and Denver remains highly regarded as a place to play. And that’s for all NHL players, not only those – such as Peter Forsberg and Drury – who played here before.
They’ll have a rare combination of enough room to make at least “competitive” offers, cause for optimism, and a recent tradition of winning.
Now we’ll see if they can get anyone to buy into it.
Terry Frei can be reached at 303-954-1895 or tfrei@denverpost.com.
