Faceoff Factor

Isn't This What We All Wanted?

C.J. "Stoosh" Jiuliante | National Hockey League

Jul 2, 06:02 PM | Hype this story!

Buffalo Sabres Nation has all the cheer of a morgue today after Sabres fans got to spend Sunday watching Daniel Briere and Chris Drury – the Sabres’ two co-captains this past year – spurn the Sabres for huge pay raises elsewhere. Drury left Buffalo to move across state and suit up for the New York Rangers to the tune of a five year, $35.25 million deal. Briere broke the bank and then some with an eight year, $52 million contract with the Philadelphia Flyers.

Sabres General Manager Darcy Regier and Managing Partner Larry Quinn met with the shellshocked Buffalo media today. When asked how the Sabres could let these two players go, the Sabres brass responded by…blaming the marketplace. There was so much bellyaching going on with these two, I would’ve started looking for Bryan Murray behind the table as well.

With all due respect to Darcy Regier and Larry Quinn – as I’m sure they’re highly educated men and Lord knows they’re much richer than me – but can this same old “big market vs. small market” distinction still exist? Can it still be there despite the existence of a league-wide salary cap AND salary floor?

I agree with Regier and Quinn on one point. Some of the money thrown around at these players on Sunday was ridiculous. But this happens every year and this year, the Sabres got victimized (or did they? More on that in a minute). The teams that all (over)spent for some of these players yesterday were teams that mostly had tons of cap room to spend. That’s the way the system is designed to work.

First off, let’s ignore the fact that Chris Drury and Daniel Briere have only been talked about as potential top unrestricted free agents since about the same time that Darcy Regier sitting down to his Thanksgiving dinner. And you can bet he was well aware of this situation long before that. This didn’t exactly come out of nowhere, and at least one of these guys could’ve been extended and kept in town if Sabres owner Tom Golisano decided to loosen the pursestrings a little. Only thirteen teams in the 30-team NHL spent less on payroll than the Sabres last season, so let’s not pretend there wasn’t room to lock at least one of these guys up. The Rangers and Flyers may have overpaid for these two, respectively, but don’t fault the Flyers and Rangers for the fact that Sabres’ ownership dragged their own feet getting these two signed to extensions that would’ve pulled them off the market.

Let’s look at the bigger picture. I don’t see how there can be this “big market vs. small market” dichotomy anymore – not with a salary cap and a salary floor. It’s not like the Rangers are able to spend $40-50 million more on their total payroll than the Sabres, Blue Jackets or Pens can. This isn’t like it used to be before the lockout.

There is a gap that still exists, but the gap is much closer. Last year, the New Jersey Devils led the league with a $49.6 million payroll. The Pens brought up the rear with a $26.3 million payroll. That’s a difference of $23.3 million. That’s almost like saying the Milwaukee Brewers and Cleveland Indians are “big market”, high-spending clubs as compared to the Pirates or Royals.

It’s gotten worse. I’ve recently heard Penguins fans complaining about the current CBA, saying that it’s going to have a potentially-detrimental effect on their abilities to keep their core together several years down the road.

Damn straight, I say, and I’m glad that’s the case. And it’s funny, too, coming from Pens fans. For years, we all cursed the old pre-lockout system and I wondered how Pens fans would react if the economics were ever corrected. Now that we’ve got a nucleus chock full of franchise-caliber players and a new arena on the way with a billionaire part-owner who has hinted at getting more involved, the new system sucks? How’s that work?

Here’s a perfect example of the ridiculous nature of this argument. Can anyone name the second highest-spending NHL team in terms of payroll 2006-07 according to USA Today? It’s none other than those “large-market”, high-spending, money-falling-out-of-their-pockets, keeping-the-little-man-down….Calgary Flames. Not exactly the first team to come to mind when people talk about those high-spending teams in the NHL, eh?

And those small-market, woe-is-me, what’s-gonna-happen-when-Dany-Heatley-comes-up-for-UFA-status Ottawa Senators that Regier supposedly talked about today? They were eighth in the league in payroll last year, merely $100,000 behind the big bad Philly Flyers and the Boston Bruins (yep, those same Bruins that ponied up the money for Zdeno Chara last summer when Ottawa decided to invest that money in Wade Redden instead).

This is ridiculous. THERE IS A SALARY CAP. EACH TEAM CAN STILL ONLY SPEND SO MUCH and that limit is the same for every team. Teams can operate on self-imposed spending limits set by ownership, but it’s not like there’s this gigantic gap between the lower-spending teams and the free-spenders…not like there used to be.

Several teams cleared cap space in preparation for free agency…the same thing happens in the NFL and people love the NFL because of the parity it helps to create. It might not be the same teams next year spending the money; that all depends on what teams clear cap space as the upcoming season moves on.

Does the current system prevent some general managers from losing their minds and throwing about $7.5 million a year for the next seven years at a glorified third line center like Scott Gomez? No way. But guess what? The Rangers have to live with that deal now, and that deal will likely prevent them from entering the fray with same guns blazing next year…not unless the clean out cap space elsewhere in the interim. The same thing happens in the NFL, too (look at the money thrown around to some very average offensive linemen and defensive backs this NFL offseason).

The cap system by its nature is going to force every team to identify core players around whom they wish to build. There may come a point where Mario Lemieux and Ron Burkle may only be able to keep two of the likes of Evgeni Malkin, Jordan Staal and Angelo Esposito and some tough decisions are going to have to be made. But somewhere down the line, the Pens will also be able to enter the market and probably even sign a few players because other teams will have to make the very same decision with their own players.

These large-market versus small-market distinctions no longer hold in this system. Is the system perfect? No. Could it eventually cost us a franchise player or two? Sure. But is it worth going back to the disaster that was the old system?

Hell, no.