The Washington Capitals have called a news conference tonight for 8.30 pm ET to announce the re-signing of superstar forward Alexander Ovechkin to a 13-year contract worth over $124 million. It will be the richest deal in NHL history.
His new deal should break down as $9 million per season against the
Capitals salary cap, but it remains to be seen if it's front-or-back
loaded. That would see Ovechkin earning more per season more than his
rival, Pittsburgh's Sidney Crosby, who'll start earning $8.7 million
per year in 2008-09.
If that's seems pricey, consider that Ovechkin would've received
considerably more via offer sheet from a rival club if he were still
unsigned as of July 1st, when he would've become a restricted free
agent.
With the NHL salary cap expected to increase to as much as $54 million
for 2008-09, Ovechkin might've commanded offers up to $10.8 million per
season, the twenty percent maximum allowable for a single player to
earn under a $54 million cap.
Better to pay him $9 million per than be forced to match and pony up considerably more.
This is obviously a good move by the Caps to retain their franchise player, the only right move. It'll also put to rest those stupid notions of Ovechkin being traded. As team owner Ted Leonsis stated earlier this week and has frequently stated since Ovechkin was drafted, the Capitals love the talented Russian.
He's the foundation upon which their rebuilding has been based since 2005-06, and it was folly for some obviously bored pundits in Montreal, Toronto and New York (who really should've known better) to suggest it was perhaps in the Caps best interest to trade him for a big return.
Ovechkin is obviously happy in Washington, obviously enjoys playing for the Capitals, and obviously has no intention of asking out. The Caps may still be going through growing pains in their current rebuilding phase and the playoffs are not a certainty this season but that doesn't seem to bother Ovechkin.
Since elevating Bruce Boudreau to head coach several weeks ago the Capitals are a different team, playing with more confidence and energy and as a result winning more often. That improvement obviously means a lot to Ovechkin, as it's a clear sign the club could be on the right path.
Ovechkin's been a big reason for that improvement. He's presently leading the Capitals in scoring (for the third straight season) and is on pace for a 61-goal, 99-point season. The last time a player scored 60 goals in an NHL season was Mario Lemieux back in 1995-96.
I know it's not done yet as of this post, but count me in among those who will be glad to have this "story" out of the headlines once the ink is dry. Nearly all of the rumors and innuendo surrounding Ovechkin potentially leaving the Caps are asinine, and had McPhee or any other GM allowed him to leave town, they'd be run out on a rail. It's not like Washington has anything better to do right now...
Agree, MPH. I'm sick of it as well. Larry Brooks IS the one who will get the biggest pie in the face about this because he's the one who pushed the hardest to have Ovechkin play in a bigger media market (read: in a Rangers blueshirt) and completely forget about DC.
Good to hear it, It just said on TSN that there will be an announcement made at 7:30 est, Good deal even tho i would have expected that the Caps would push for a longer term. It may have been Ovie's doing tho to have a 6 year, so he can book it in 6 years as a FA.
Yup glad Ovechkin is gonna stay at Washington. He's a goal scoring machine and if you surround him with talent, watch out Eastern Conference! With him around and if the Capitals get another bonafide scorer it'll be watching Adam Oates and Bondra all over again.
Forget what anyone else is being paid, $9.5 mill a season is just too much. I'm happy he's staying in Washington, I've grown to like them ever since he came into the league. But come on, 9.5, that's going overboard I think.
I like the fact that this signing will put the trade rumours to bed, but it also puts to bed the notion that Ovechkin wants to win.
If he truly was all about winning and not about money, like many have suggested in the past, then he would have taken a more cautious route and signed for 5-6 years. That way if the Capitals remain a poor team, which is likely, then he could go to a contender.
All this deal shows is he is more interested in money than winning at this current time. We could end up seeing a Sundin situation here. Where in 12 years time, when Ovechkin's worth is on the decline and he won't command the same money, only then will he look to move to a winning team.
He was set apart from other Russians and their alledged money first attitude, but now that has to be put in doubt. Maybe he's not so North American after all.
21-year deal Wayne Gretzky signed with the Edmonton Oilers in 1979 for hockey. The longest deal in major North American pro sports is the $25-million, 25-year deal Magic Johnson signed with the NBA Lakers in 1981.
Seems like a selfish move by Ovechkin. Crosby, Lidstrom, and Iginla all took less so that their team could build a winner around them without taking up a 5th of the cap. Maybe in year 8 when the cap is $75 million (if you believe that revenue will rise by 50% in the next 8 years) then this deal looks smart, but right now it looks like a great deal for Ovechkin (long term deal, close to the max) and a bad one for the Caps (long term deal - what if he gets hurt?, and max money with little cap flexibility).
My question was whether any long term NHL contract worked out? Most of these examples are new, and we don't have a verdict. The only conclusive case is Yashin, and that was a disaster. Dipietro is average at best (16-14, 2.5 gaa, .912 sv%, ranks in the high teens in the NHL). Isles are stuck with him for 8 more years (he is no Luongo!!!)
Long terms deals seem to handcuff teams more than anything else. Not to mention what this does to player motivation.
I really am hoping someone could come up with some examples of long term contracts that have worked out in the NHL cause I would really like to know.
Contracts are a joke nowadays anyway.
If Ovechkin ever wants to leave, he'll get out.
Players get out of their contracts all the time.
Not sure why he would want to anytime soon though.
Damn, 9.5 mil, that's a lot of tacos.
Lidstrom and Datsyuk are looking like bargains now.
Salaries are starting to get ridiculous again.
I wonder, with these long term contracts being given, are some of these players going to lose motivation once they hit the lotto? I mean, we all know how a lot of players play in the final year of their contract.
Not saying Ovechkin would slack off, and most players I think are professionals and are highly motivated to win. But..... I don't know, I just think maybe it might happen to a select few.
Washington had to make this move though, and I guess it was a wise one.
My smartass brother called me and told me Boston signed Ovechkin. After I was done crapping myself I found out my Caps signed him. Good thing, I woulda pulled up stakes and moved to Boston. Ovie deserves it. If you watch him play regularly, you know he's worth it.
P.S. he said they traded him not signed him.
Last edited by whitedevil on January 10th at 7:51 PM.
"He was set apart from other Russians and their alledged money first attitude, but now that has to be put in doubt. Maybe he's not so North American after all."
Of course, if he was really about the money, Ovechkin would sign a deal that ended early in his UFA status, so he could cash in when he was in his prime as a player. Instead, he took a deal at his current market value ($9 million a year, with a $1 million bump in the seventh year of the contract) that locks him in with the team that drafted him for perhaps his entire career. That's more than a committment to winning--that's a committment to winning with his team, not for himself. Ovechkin always has talked about building Washington into a winning franchise; this contract proves he was serious about it.
Last edited by MuffinsCap on January 10th at 9:08 PM.
I don't cotton as a rule to any horrendously trite barbs about anyone's heritage being indicative of their desire to make money, so I wasn't really banking on those comments anyway. Both Crosby and Ovechkin are getting paid, as they should, and the idea that they are somehow guilty of something by singing a long-term deal that, as mentioned, can actually end up impacting their financial situation in the long term is patently ridiculous. Anyone who followed the protracted CBA and its fallout recognizes that the economic slate has changed. Iginla and Lidstrom are not solid comparisons in my view, because these are two players who were already elite and making buckets of money when they signed those lucrative deals. That's not to discount the idea that a player should be commended for discounting himself to stay where he is, something that I think lesser lights in this league do ALL THE TIME to much less press, but simply to say that Ovechkin's signing of this deal for most of his professional career is way more loyal than anything else he could do.
As a final point on this, didn't anyone else find it interesting that despite all the commentary about how Ovechkin would want to play for "a winner," you didn't hear any of that noise coming from his camp? Not a peep, even during what has been a fairly disastrous season. There's a big reason for that. Instead of questioning his motives or assuming that all Russians are money-grubbers, look at the facts and understand this is how deals are now done in today's NHL.
Looks like a slightly backloaded contract, $9 million for the first six years and then $10 million for the rest. After a few years a limited movement clause kicks in so at the beginning of each season he can pick some teams that he can't be traded too.
Great job by Ovechkin to score this contract, not a bad job by a 22-year-old representing himself! My only slight concern is that there's no way of knowing what the cap is going to look like next year, let alone 6, 7, 8 years down the road, so you just never know what sorts of situations you might run into. Even without a cap I'm not sold on the super long-term deals, but the Caps obviously had to make this signing and they were smart to lock up their star through his prime and beyond!
1) We weighed in today on our blog the long term deals that are now apparently common.
2) In relation to the Sid-AO comparison: While Sid will be gettting less than AO for the next 5 years, its almost a done deal that when Sid's contract expires in 5 years(he'll only be 25!) he will get MUCH more than AO.
3) We like the deal if for no other reason than Ovechkin plays hard and isn't a whiner. A leader by example. The only negative we can see is that the way he plays he may be prone to injury(especially as he gets older)
4) All in all it a positive day for caps fans.(Until they get their ticket invoices for next season) ; )
Again, why did we lose a year of hockey years ago ? Oh, right, a salary cap and other money issues. Does anyone else think that the owners are insane to be throwing money around like this ?
Obviously this is another risk taken by Leonis. However, if it works out it will look like a great deal because in 6 years Crosby will sign a contract that dwarfs Ovechkin's. (10 yr/$150M?)
It's proving to be very interesting to see how teams are being built under the cap.
When you're paying a guy $9.5 million under (let's assume) a $53 million cap for the 2008-09 season, that's 18 percent of your payroll tied up in just one man. That leaves you $43.5 million to round out the other 22 players on your active roster, plus allow some fudge factor room for injuries, etc. In other words, every other roster spot on your team averages out as to less than $2 million per player, and essentially you're going to need fourth line guys with $500,000 contracts to give you a little more cash to flesh out your top line.
But term is key in the Ovechkin deal. Assuming a 5 percent annual increase in the salary cap over the next 13 years, Ovechkin's contract drops from 18 percent of the Capitals' total salary cap to just 10 percent in 2020-21.
Surround Ovechkin with cheap emerging talent today, and in theory under this contract you'll be able to afford to keep that talent five to ten years down the road as it matures.
How long till Ted Leonsis starts whining about losing money? I hope this turns out better than the Jagr and Lang deals did for him. I am a huge fan of Ovechkins, and I am happy he got this deal (sans the agent) but we are going back to 2002 all over again. Crosby will get 150 million plus on his next contract. How long is it till agents like Scott Boras and that #### Rosenhaus start infiltrating hockey and having top talent hold out for top dollar, and hockey players start having egos like basketball and football players do?
I'm slightly irked by the monetary complaints here. Sid Crosby and Alex Ovechkin are the two biggest stars in hockey today. Combined they'll make what, $17m next year? How much did basketball's single highest player make this season? Football? Baseball? Arod made $25m last season alone. One player, 50% more than the two best players in hockey. Quit crying about money please.
This deal had to be done. Leonsis made it clear he wouldn't let Ovechkin leave. As Spector said, it's better to sign him now and not pay through the rear even more six months down the road. I don't understand the complaints. Hockey's stars make less than the top stars in the NBA, NFL, MLB, and NASCAR. Build a bridge.
And to expand upon what Chaas is saying, players are only making 55 percent of overall hockey revenues. For every $17 million player, there are a lot of guys at the $500,000 minimum because we're dealing with a single pot.
With a $50.3 million salary cap per team, and assuming every team at the salary cap maximum (which is not the case), that's a total league-wide payroll of $1.5 BILLION dollars spread between 850 some odd players. That's an average contract of $1.78 million.
Look at it another way: the NHL is a $2.75 BILLION industry today. If the players were receiving 75 percent of the revenues (which was the case prior to the strike), that would work out to a league-wide payroll of $2 BILLION ($500 million more than the salary cap payroll), with an average contract of $2.43 million among the 850 players.
Consider: As well as some of the players are making out, the owners have $500 million more in earned revenues that USED to be going in the player's pocket. I wonder where it's going now...
Last edited by Matt_McCallum on January 11th at 2:01 PM.
The CBA and salary cap were instituted by the NHL to prevent the Rangers and Maple Leafs from continualy over spending and getting no results. also to prevent Bobby Holik from making ten mil. a year!
This Ovechkin deal will look like a bargin five years from now, when inflation hits the US. and the salary cap will be either non existent or at 100 million dollars. which is equivlent to todays 50.2 million cap. and then Ovechkin is only 1/10 of the teams cap.
How many people out there like the current cap and how many out there would perfer to have no cap? I'm no Karl Marx, but i would perfer no cap and institute a luxury tax on heavy spenders. I like to see the Leafs and Gers spend with no effect. I bet the Leafs and Rangers have spent over billion dollars since '67 and can only claim one Stanley Cup.
Thanks Lyle for the vote of confidence on that post. I'm glad I've managed to learn a thing or two here. I was definitely waiting for Matt to chime in on this, and as usual he did not disappoint. I think the financials make perfect sense for Washington, and while there's always a chance for any long-term commitment to go sour, the deal makes sense in the long run and prevents any thoughts that one of the best players in the league now and in the future was headed out of town. I personally wouldn't have an issue with the "no cap," but I just don't see it happening. I think the parity we've seen since the last CBA does count for something. And clearly teams aren't scared to spend money under this one either, they just need to be a mite more creative about it.
This deal is a bargain for Ted and will keep Ovie in borscht for the rest of his life. Those who note the lockout was useless are correct, but not for the reasons claimed. Everyone knew (wink wink) salaries were going to be rising, as the GAME took on some more popularity and folks started coming to the arenas and merchandising went up and (though no onw knew it then) the C$ to US$ exchange rate improved dramatically.
I've been a Caps STH since 1995 (well, 94-95, but there wasn't a "94" that year because of the last strike). I've seen empty arenas (or more exactly, "Come dressed as a blue seat" nights) and I've seen it packed. It's getting better this year in DC with Bruce in charge (though I liked Glen personally).
I usually don't agree with you very often Spector, but the Caps had no choice but to sign Ovechkin, he is their franchise. Without him they would be looking to relocate. I watch a lot of hockey, and I think Alex is in the top 2 or 3 talentwise in the league. Their are nights he makes Crosby look like a pee-wee. He could possibly be the best. He not only can make you look bad by going around you but he can also knock you down and go through you. Good move by the Caps. We just relocated about 45 minutes from D.C. and although I am a diehard Wings fan I can see myself paying to see him play, he is worth the price of admission
"The CBA and salary cap were instituted by the NHL to prevent the Rangers and Maple Leafs from continualy over spending and getting no results"
Uh, no. The salary cap was instituted by GARY BETTMAN to help out the Bettman-belt teams, all of which claimed they simply couldn't afford to compete with the big markets (because most of them aren't large enough to hold an NHL franchise!). So now we have Bettman's favoured parody; we're coming up to the trade deadline and no one is out of the playoffs yet. 29 of the 30 teams are within 20 points of each other. This is absolutely retarded. At the same time, those formerly whining Bettman-belt teams now have two Stanley Cups, are spending up to the salary cap and are having their big wins paid for by the big markets, who are now expected to fund their rivals as well as their own teams.
And I like the shot at the Toronto media in this story. Funny, I didn't see any Ovechkin stories in any Toronto news outlet, and I usually check hard. Are you sure it wasn't just the Montreal outlets and you don't want to admit it, Lyle?
Incidentally, long-term contracts are stupid; it's predicting that a player will still be playing at full capability in 15 or so years. A hard prediction to make.
Mike Brophy of the Hockey News was among those calling for Ovechkin to move on. He's based in Toronto.
Incidentally, Larry Brooks of the New York Post, Bruce Garrioch of the Ottawa Sun and Jack Todd of the Montreal Gazette were the others either suggesting Ovechkin move on or insinuating that he might.
You make several excellent points. The path to a Stanley Cup is much more clear with a superstar that without one. It is a very sound business move to keep a one a decade talent like Ovechkin on the roster for as long as possible.
Leonsis doesn't owe Montreal or New York a superstar, he owes his fans a chance at watching their team win a Cup.
Leonsis did the right thing. He saw the deals made last year. Vanek is making how much? and producing how much? Dustin Penner pulled off what can only be likened to a bank robbery in broad daylight.
If Ovechkin had made it to July without a new contract, you would've been seeing some really insane numbers dangled in front of him via the evil.. the awful... the OFFER SHEET! With this contract, ole Teddy can dump Alex anywhere at any time, in the first six years. Then things get sticky: AO can specify any ten teams he DOESN'T want to be traded to, in the last seven of the deal. Poor Leonsis... only 20 options (or more, with the microscopically small possibility of expansion).
This contract is a win/win. Alex looks like a player who is dedicated to Washington. Leonsis gets approval from the Caps fan base for locking up their star player for many, many years. I believe Ovechkin is being used as bait to attract up and coming young players who WANT to play alongside a bona fide superstar (as previously stated by Matt). As you know, many players in the NHL are as good as they are BECAUSE they play with great players.
Props to Spector for actually popping his head into the discussions, and chiming in, about his articles. Seems like other contributors just toss a grenade onto a message board and don't check back in to assess the carnage.
I'm Lyle Richardson, also known as Spector, Foxsports.com 's "Prince of Pucks".,which is based on the fact I live in Prince Edward Island, Canada and I couldn't think of a better byline. I've been an NHL hockey commentator since 1998 on my website, Spector's Hockey, and I'm a contributing writer for Foxsports.com , The Hockey News and Eishockey News. I'm also a regular on The Faceoff Hockey Show and a frequent guest on "The Late Crew" on The Team 1200 Ottawa.
