by mikey287 on Thu Mar 22, 2012 1:25 am
The NHL used to have a messy system for unrestricted agency compensatory picks which led to a lot of silly deals at midnight before July 1...it was stupid. Unrestricted free agency was at age 31, which is really unacceptable for the players - they really only got to hit UFA status once in their career...
Then they made a sliding scale down to 27 because the league needed to impose a salary cap (baseball had pre-existing, correct? NFL had pre-existing, correct? NBA had pre-existing salary cap, correct?) - you gotta pay to play, you can't just impose a salary cap without giving up something. NHLers can come in at 18...can't in football (~22), can't in basketball (at least 20, right?), can't in baseball (don't know the average starting age of a career...22?)...
Restricted free agency provides for as many as four 1st round picks...does any other sport? (serious question, I don't know the ins and outs of the other sports nearly as well)...
Hockey probably lasted under establishment, ownership rule for the longest (free agency almost a non-factor until the late 1970's and early 1980's, salaries weren't made public until I think the early 1990's, reserve clauses, anti-union "terrorism", etc.)...the players have gotten a lot in the last 20 or 30 years...owners are still doing alright...
Zach Parise gave 7 years to the Devils...what's the expectation for a career of a good player? 15 years? That's about half. Is that unfair? The Devils have the right to acquire assets for him at any point in that time, they may keep him if he so chooses...I mean, I'm rarely on the players' side, but I'm not sure I see exactly where you're going here yet...