![]() Pittsburgh, Pa. |
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
Inside the NHL: Precedents forecast costly Fleury
Sunday, September 28, 2003 By Dejan Kovacevic, Post-Gazette Sports Writer
The Penguins cannot be certain until they begin negotiations with the agents for Marc-Andre Fleury how much it might cost to sign him. Talks could begin as early as tomorrow, but no more than pleasantries have been exchanged to date.
Still, a picture can be formed for what Fleury's agents might seek based on precedent for other No. 1 picks in the NHL Entry Draft, and it is one that figures to be intimidating for the cost-conscious Penguins.
Ever since the Boston Bruins made Joe Thornton the No. 1 pick in 1997, the first year of the NHL's rookie salary cap, his contract has served as the model for how performance bonuses were structured for all the No. 1s who followed. Modifications have been made based on position, and there has been slight escalation in value each year, but the model has remained intact.
The two examples which figure to have the greatest influence in the Fleury talks are those of Rick DiPietro with the New York Islanders in 2000 and Rick Nash with the Columbus Blue Jackets last year.
DiPietro's deal is relevant because he is the only goaltender besides Fleury to be drafted first. His terms called for the rookie-cap maximum $1.075 million salary over the mandatory three-year span, plus a package of incentives which could multiply that by five with little difficulty. Bonuses could be earned for each of these six requirements: 20 victories, 3.25 goals-against average, .890 save percentage, 1,800 minutes, four shutouts or a top-three finish in voting for the Calder Trophy as rookie of the year. He would receive $400,000 for each bonus achieved and -- this is the kicker -- a $4 million bonus if four of the six are achieved.
That would set his ceiling at $5.075 million per year.
Nash's deal is relevant, too, because it was the most recent. His rookie-cap salary was $1.185 million, and he had an incentive package that more closely resembled the Thornton model because both are forwards. Bonuses could be earned for each of the following: 20 goals, 35 assists, 60 points, .73 points per game, top three on the team in plus-minus rating or a top-five finish in Calder voting. He would receive an estimated $500,000 for achieving one of those six requirements and the full $3 million bonus for achieving just two. In his second year, the Calder requirement is replaced by one relating to ice time.
Neither DiPietro nor Nash was successful in getting his full bonus in the first year, and no No. 1 pick under the Thornton model has been able to collect his full bonus in all three years of his rookie contract.
But that knowledge likely will do little to make the Penguins less nervous about the size of the investment.
Fleury is considered by many scouts to be the best goaltending prospect in a decade, and he has shown every sign in this training camp that reaching a below-average bar such as the one mapped out in DiPietro's contract is more than plausible, if not now then soon.
Can the Penguins get creative? They probably will try, given Patrick's long-held preference for making players work to earn their next salary rather than operate on bonus clauses. They might also count on Fleury's eagerness to play in the NHL right away to influence his agents to sign the best offer made.
In all likelihood, though, the Thornton model will remain intact. Fleury's camp has projected that talks should be simple and the final product little different from those of DiPietro and Nash. There also is some leverage on their side, as the current Collective Bargaining Agreement allows Fleury to become an unrestricted free agent in May 2005 if he is not signed.
Doug MacLean, Columbus' general manager, said it is not a simple process to sign a No. 1 pick despite the Thornton model. Nash was signed on the final day before he would have to be returned to juniors.
"It's a challenge. There's no doubt about that because there are a lot of dollars involved," MacLean said after his team played Friday at Mellon Arena. "But I'm sure Pittsburgh, like we did, is thinking about development as No. 1 and what's important for the kid. They'll decide if they want to keep him based on what's important for the kid, not the money. That's the right thing to do."
Icy chips
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Search | Contact Us | Site Map | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Advertise | About Us | What's New | Help | Corrections Copyright ©1997-2007 PG Publishing Co., Inc. All Rights Reserved. |
||||||||||||||||||||