Behind the frenzy of hockey’s free agency

Toronto Maple Leafs general manager Brian Burke will be able to tell anyone about the thoroughbred details of free agency, the frustration and downright insanity of it all when it comes to simply attracting a player’s signature.

Some of those players don’t even have to be in the same league, as he went to incredible endsincluding two trips to Swedento persuade Jonas Gustavsson and have him eventually join the reformation of the Leafs.

Former Leaf Borje Salming was called upon to court the young 23-year-old netminder, among other current Leaf players who were deployed to list off the benefits of erecting a career in Toronto. Burke even proposed to attend the funeral for Gustavsson’s mother, who had passed away during the off-season.

So his attempt to sway the goaltender’s selection was nothing short of intimate.

However, for those who pose the most alluring qualities within North America, the arms races immediately begin. There aren’t as many flights overseas for modern NHLers, as Burke could attest to, but the lengths required to compromise a deal with a wanted player can seem just as trying.

“What happens is there are five or six guys teams are interested in,” said James Mirtle, a desk writer for the Globe and Mail and head blogger of From the Rink. “The player goes to the highest bidder and all the teams and agents are well aware of that.”

To establish a benchmark, it takes a single signing. The value of one player is contingent on the worth of another, and if one is dashed off a list of unrestricted free agents, the next best prize is fought over in a vigorous or often vain tussle.

[php snippet=1]

Not only is there the cap ceiling to consider, but there is also the term of contractor the number of years one dedicates to a particular city, should he not later be traded. We then subsequently see players request eight, nine or 10 years to ensure their position as a staple in that franchise.

But this comes to us as common sense. We understand the market can be irrational and fickle. Yet the way in which the public and teams perceive the notion of the long-term deal can be just as indecisive.

On one hand, Detroit Red Wings general manager Ken Holland was lauded for signing forward Henrik Zetterberg to a 12-year, $73 million contract, given the fact that the Swede is locked up and at a reasonable cap hit for his capabilities.

When Chicago Blackhawks GM Dale Talon made the swoop for Marian Hossa at a 12-year, $62.8 million deal, criticism flew like confetti.

Zetterberg, 28, and Hossa, 30, will both be in the twilight of their careers and have little to offer by way of goal scoring efficiency upon the expiration of their contracts. How a round of applause is audible for the former while a cautionary flag stands aloft for the latter is very peculiar.

Reconfiguring the collective bargaining agreement is one route Mirtle suggests, as the league could consider curbing the number of years to which a player can be subjected under a single contract.

“Basically, what the Blackhawks did with the Hossa deal was in the last years of his contract, it goes down to about $1 million a season. And the only reason the contract is structured like that is for the cap hit,” he said.

“The league should have foreseen that and put in a limit on the length of contracts; it’s really an oversight that they didn’t have one. There’s no real need for contracts to go over seven or eight years.”

And when Rick Dipietro was handed a 15-year, $67.5 million chain to the New York Islanders in 2006, the deal provoked massive outcry as the second longest signing in sports. The decision made by GM Garth Snow wasn’t ridiculed for the enduring payment, but the risk in vesting so much in a goaltender that, in retrospect, has been plighted by injury.

But Mirtle believes Dipietroor any other play that may fall into the same categoryshouldn’t bear the butt of all dissent.

“When he got signed to a contract like that, everyone is up in arms. When you sign a good player on a contract like (Zetterberg), it doesn’t get as much criticism. But I think it should; it has the same problems with the deal. So let’s say Zetterberg gets injured, he can still play but not nearly at the level where he can perform well… If he hurts his knee like Dipietro did, you still have the cap hit,” he explained.

“I don’t think anyone should get a huge contract that extends into their late 30s because they just break down and can’t perform the way they did previously. It’s unfortunate; I think seven or eight years from now they’re still going to be aroundand yes, the cap could be much higherbut they might look terrible.”

These binding agreements could have the effect of a legendary player who continues to play in spite of his or her inability to maintain the pace or execution the sport demands. It’s the easiest way, however, to stray from the insecurities of relying on free agency as a port to garner talent.

That was the inevitability confronting the Montreal Canadiens this summer, a team that lostor added10 players to the crop of UFAs. It put them in a position to spend a lot of their cap space in order to compensate for the number of bodies cast away.

The innate danger in that, as Mirtle interpreted, is the possibility of compiling a roster of underachievers, which may turn out to be a pressing issue for the Canadiens.

“They went out and made the biggest splash. I’m not sure it necessarily makes them a better team, but they’re going to be much different than they were last year,” he said.

“I’m not sure what (Canadiens GM) Bob Gainey’s options were. You can’t build a championship team through free agency alone, and when you have 10 players leaving, it’s hard to keep some sort of a core together … especially because UFAs are so expensive. You look at the contracts he gave Brian Gionta (a five-year, $25-million deal) and Mike Cammalleri (at a five-year, $30 million hit) and even a guy like Jaroslav Spacek, they’re big contractsand long ones, too.”

Then again, these players could prove to be fundamental assets in the Canadiens’ quest to become a legitimate contender. As the Boston Bruins did two years ago, general manager Peter Chiarelli was able to identify some key players around whom a competitive team could be built.

The Bruins had dismal prospects immediately after the lockout. They failed to qualify for the playoffs from 2005 to 2007, finishing 13th in the Eastern Conference two consecutive years.

Despite an eventual loss in the conference semifinals this year, the Bruins are certainly no longer considered a goat. Their unexpected rise to powerhouse status is indicative of what could be hatched from toiling in free agency, coupled with some scrupulous work at successive drafts.

But a bit of fortune doesn’t hurt the process.

“When Boston signed Zdeno Chara and Marc Savard (in 2006), no one said, ‘this team is going to be a contender or the top team in the East.’ Boston’s been lucky and they’ve been good in other ways,” Mirtle said. “They drafted a guy like Phil Kessel, and they drafted him with a sixth overall selection … If your player is then scoring 30 to 40 goals two or three season later, that’s pretty good. They also got a Vezina trophy-winning season out of Tim Thomas, who is 35 years old.”

As for the general proceedings that have occurred so far, a net total of $500 million was spent after a single day of free agency alone. Even the ominous clouds of these recessionary times failed to cut hefty expenditures, not causing so much as a stir among the league’s 30 teams when it came time to actually make an effort to economize salary.

But this is proving grounds for so many general managers, a time where the clock becomes as significant a factor as it is in sudden-death overtime.

In Burke’s case, the interim price was jet lagan afterthought by the end of it all.

[php snippet=1]