'Nucks IceMan

Mason Raymond

Written by: Larry “The Nucks IceMan” Johnson

I realize that the NHL and the players’ salaries are constantly evolving but what has happened to the days of players having to prove their value before they are rewarded with a huge increase? I can’t think of any profession other than sports, where you can be making $600,000 one season and then receive a raise of close to $2 million the next, based on another player’s performance.

One of the areas that you see this increase is with the Restricted Free Agent (RFA). Now this article is not meant to single out Vancouver Canucks Mason Raymond, he just happens to be one that I am familiar with.

I’ll start with Raymond’s first three seasons with the Canucks. His stats were 9G, 12A in 49 games in 2007-08, split between the Canucks and the Manitoba Moose. The 2008-09 season saw his points increase to 11G, 12A in 72 games and then his breakout year in 2009-10 in which he posted 25G, 28A in 82 games.

That season Mason’s NHL salary was $760.000. He then became an RFA at the end of the 2009-10 season and was rewarded with a new two-year contract worth $5.1 million, or $2.5 million for the first and $2.6 million in the final season.

So far this season Raymond has 10G, 15A in 42 games and will be lucky to finish with 43 points, or 10 less than his career year.

The Canucks who have similar contracts are Mikael Samuelsson – $7.5 million (3 yrs), Manny Malhotra – $7.5 million (3 yrs) and Alex Burrows – $8 million (4 yrs). The length of NHL experience for the above is nine years for Samuelsson, 13 for Malhotra and six for Burrows. Burrows is 30 years of age, Samuelsson is 35 and Malhotra is 31.

Raymond is in his fourth NHL year and is 26 years of age.

All of these players’ recent contracts are the largest they have ever earned in their careers. So how did Raymond, after having one career year, warrant a contract increase of $1.7 million? That just doesn’t make sense.

This Raymond example is seen in virtually every one of the other 29  NHL teams.

I understand that if an NHL club does not want to pay a particular player a certain amount, that at the RFA level it can go to arbitration and the amount that is awarded is still contingent on the NHL team accepting and agreeing to pay it.

There have been many examples recently where teams have walked away from arbitrator’s awards. Many of these have had to do with salary cap restrictions.

I get that the teams do not want to lose a player in whom they have invested time and money grooming him for the NHL  That makes perfect sense to me. What I don’t understand is the huge increase awarded after only one of the three years was of exceptional performance.

To me, it would make more sense to have  a minimum salary for a player that has played x number of years in the NHL and the additional amounts earned on that salary would come in the form of performance based bonuses. This could be the result of points, plus/minus, NHL awards and rankings, leadership and so forth.  

Will it ever happen? Who knows, but one thing is certain, as the salary cap and its restrictions become more prevalent, and a new CBA on the horizon, something creative will have to evolve.

To catch all the news, updates and new articles as they occur, along with the Canucks farm team, the Manitoba Moose, you can follow me @twitter.com/nucksiceman.com  (I love this tweeting because it’s like small 140 character articles).

Related posts:

Filed under: Vancouver Canucks