Huge contracts for Getzlaf, Perry and Semin and now, Phil Kessel, too? What are NHL GM’s supposed to do?

Now that so many hockey fans have earned advanced (if informal) degrees not only in statistical analysis but ‘capology’, economics, finance, business administration (and time as decision-makers at a senior personnel level in the sports industry), it’s easy to anticipate certain reactions when NHL teams sign players at these exorbitant salaries.  Because, well, we all think we're experts at these things nowadays, it seems.

For example, the Anaheim Ducks recently signed Corey Perry and before that Ryan Getzlaf to huge, long-term contracts.  The predictable response?  “Look at how stupid Bob Murray is—over-paying for those guys…how will he build the rest of his team?”.

The other expected criticism is, of course, that many of the same GM’s or owners who opposed the very idea of long-term contracts are now doing that very thing by signing these seemingly outrageous contracts. I must admit I was indeed a bit baffled when Carolina went to the well and signed Alexander Semin to a 5-year deal this week for big money (7 million a year, ouch)- when the guy could barely get a contract last summer.  But here we are.

And here’s the apparent reality:  the new CBA is what it is.  The owners, we recall, wanted five-year limits on contracts, which sure would have made sense to me—as a hockey fan.  Not only did I want to see the GM's and owners protected against themselves, but I trust no player to perform at a level worthy of huge money for seven or eight seasons- even five.  And whenever players can put themselves on the market, of course some team will step up and pay "more" than they should.  These GM's and owners are competitive people.  They're trying to win.  Should we criticize them for trying to build their team with elite players?

If they don't pay up, they'll be loathed by their fans- or worse, accused of collusion, if every team just suddenly decided this business of paying extravagant salaries had to stop. It's a no-win situation for the owners and GM's.  

The PA naturally fought and fought the five-year limit idea, and got pretty much what they wanted.

So the league is stuck with teams that need and want to stay competitive, with a gun held to their head.  Oh, I know people always say, “no one makes these owners/GM’s sign these ridiculous contracts…”.  And that is true.  No one made the Islanders give Di Pietro that money, or the Canucks give Luongo his deal.

But let’s be honest—and fair.  It’s a competitive and complex marketplace.  Teams need to survive, and in most markets, to do that, they need some bums in the seats.  This is hockey- not football.  So they need players with some pedigree to sell any tickets at all in many U.S. markets.

If the Maple Leafs had Getzlaf and Perry right now (and even assuming we had not won a Cup with them), would we say “oh, they are demanding 8-year deals at 8 million plus per…that’s silly, just let them walk….”?  I don't think so.  The fan base would go crazy, demanding we keep our "core" players that helped us "win".

As fans, we want and expect our owners to cough up to keep or attract great players. Mike Illitch has done it for years in Detroit, and everyone loves him- especially the players.  But so do Red Wing fans.  (Buffalo owner Terry Pegula tried to step up to the plate and spend big money two years ago when he came to town—amid universal fan and media applause—and it has been a disaster. Does that mean he should not have tried to improve the team?)

You might be saying, “hey, the Sabres made the wrong signings..”.  But wait, who knows what the “right” signings will be in advance?  Brian Burke was supposed to be a genius GM, but his free-agent signings in Toronto were simply awful.  He, like any GM or NHL owner, does their best to assess what they can "afford" and how a player will perform.  After that, all bets are off. Does that make Burke a bad General Manager because some of his decisions went south?

Anyone who follows VLM knows I’ve long, long believed that the money athletes receive nowadays is insane.  It has been for decades but it is seriously out of whack now. Way out of whack on every level.  But many disagree with me, and think professional athletes are actually fairly paid, or maybe even underpaid.  I don’t get it, but that’s their view.

So players hold out for every dollar they think are worth, or can get somewhere else.  If the Ducks did not sign those guys, what was the team’s option?  Let them go for nothing this summer?  How would their fan base feel about that?  Trade them for less than what they are really “worth”?  And, in reality, that’s almost always the outcome.  You never get what the true elite players are worth.  A bunch of prospects and ‘maybes’ and draft picks—if you’re lucky.

So I’m not going to unduly criticize teams if they “overpay” to retain their best players, given the reality of the CBA.   I don't get the Semin deal, but I'm not in Jim Rutherford's shoes.  Nashville did not really want to pay Weber what they did after losing Suter, but under the “rules”, they had to cough up once Philly stepped up last summer.  That’s business, I guess, whether I like it or not.

At least in the case of Perry and Getzlaf, they were drafted, developed and won a Championship together in Anaheim.  There is some history there.  They aren’t rentals or UFA’s just going to any other team only for big bucks.  They probably could have got similar deals in free-agency. At least they are showing (I sort of have to hold my nose as I type this) a kind of loyalty to their first NHL organization.

The only way to solve this problem is to have a different CBA—and that opportunity is gone.  As long as there is free-agency at ridiculously low ages in hockey, you’re going to have teams scrambling to find ways to pay their star players.

Here in Toronto, it means we’ll have to pay to keep Phil Kessel, right?  But here's a question: given where the market continues to go (forever "up"), would you, if you were Dave Nonis, pay Kessel 7 million a year?  8 million?  He has more points than Perry this season, and had more than Getzlaf last season, if that’s the measuring stick.

Let's not stop there:

Are you happy paying Grabovski more than 5 million a year to check?

Do you want to pay Bozak 4-5 million or more for what he does?

All those who like MacArthur, will you also like him at 5 million a year?

I raise these questions simply to remind ourselves that we get what we asked for.  People supported the players during the lockout, and the deal that was ultimately signed still allows for monstrous, absurdly long, guaranteed contracts.

As long as the winds tilt completely in the players' favour, this is what we will have.  Gazillion dollar players who, for the most part (there may be exceptions, I recognize), are simply not worth it.

It looks like hockey will follow basketball and baseball and football.  There will now be constant talk of having to get rid of “bad contracts” in hockey, too.  Yes, the same ones “stupid” owners and GM’s signed.  But I’ll say it again: sure, no one held a gun to their head, but if they want to survive in a competitive marketplace, you have to retain your best players.  That’s what GM’s and owners are trying to do.  If the “system” encourages players to seek the max at every turn, they will of course do just that.  What can teams do?

People would gladly pay (and I did, many times) to go see Bobby Orr, Bobby Hull (right), Gordie Howe, Wayne Gretzky, Guy Lafleur, Mario Lemieux  and here in Toronto, Keon, McDonald, Salming, Sittler, Clark and Gilmour.

In the present day, I'm sure most fans would gladly pay to see Crosby and some others.  It’s like LeBron in basketball. You're willing to pay big money for tickets to see the very best.

But when it comes to many of the rest of the NHL players, we often wouldn't recognize the difference between them and any replacement part.  Yet in the crazy world of hockey, they are worth millions, including some of the Leafs I mentioned above.

My point?  I hate it, but I'll say it: let’s not complain if the Leafs end up paying Phil Kessel 8 million a year for 8 years by the time he hits free-agency.  In today's absurd hockey world, it may be that—or get virtually nothing of value in return.