Bill Zito, Antti Niemi's agent, said on The Score (AM-670) Wednesday morning that he preferred not going to an arbitration hearing July 29 with the Blackhawks.
"I always think a negotiated settlement is best," Zito told morning hosts Mike Mulligan and Brian Hanley. "We have a pretty good case, but there is always a risk. Did O. J. really not do it?"
I like this guy. Not afraid to resurrect the moldy image of Simpson sitting in prison serving penalty box time for the wrong infraction rather than spend every moment shamelessly promoting Niemi as a prisoner to Chicago's handcuffed salary cap.
Simpson would fit right in with the Hawks, who like sending the wrong guy to the box when they can get away with it. But as far as I know Zito is not his agent, nor was he lobbying the Hawks to pick up The Juice on waivers to make a much bigger free agent splash than Ilya Kovalchuk will.
I must take exception with my Chicago Now colleague Jay Zawaski, the producer of Mulligan and Hanley's show. He posted the headline on his blog that claimed Zito said in the interview: Hawks Would Be "Crazy" To Let Goaltender Go.
Context is everything here. Zito was reacting to a Hanley question in which he was asked if the Hawks may be free to walk away from an arbiter's decision if it went against them financially or if it's binding.
"The team can walk away," Zito responded. "In this instance is a team going to walk away from a 27-year-old goaltender who won the Stanley Cup? You're crazy...You'll make a trade first."
So rather than talk about the team trading Patrick Sharp, Brian Campbell or pick your personal favorite trade to open salary cap space, what are the chances that the Hawks just trade Niemi to fill in some blanks on their team and reshape from there?
While Zito personally believes the Hawks would be better off to keep Niemi, let's be clear. He never said the Hawks would be crazy to let him go. He said they'd be crazy to let him go without getting anything in return.
Who can't agree there? That's like getting everyone to agree the sky is blue and George Steinbrenner will be praised and damned through a pinstriped eternity as Judy Collins sings "Both Sides Now" in the background.
Zito spoke of knowing GM Stan Bowman for a long time and he used the word "onus" twice in different ways.
"The onus is on the Hawks now to figure out what they want to do," he said.
That could mean two things. The Hawks have to figure out if they want to meet the terms Niemi is asking--probably at least $4-$5 million for several years or it is also possible the Hawks need to figure out if another goalie makes more sense for their financial needs short-term and they are working that out.
Zito warned that there may not be a lot of fallback spots for Niemi.
"There's not that many teams out there looking for goaltenders," he said.
There's a goaltender glut on the market. So that gives rise to believing that the Hawks could easily sign another goaltender, trade Niemi and insist everything can still be peachy keen next season. As long as they can find a team willing to take Niemi at his numbers and give them equal worth.
What seems most logical? To me, it's what Zito said about preferring a negotiated settlement. And his second onus.
"There's a number of different ways to go," he said. "I guess the onus is on us (both he and Bowman) to figure a way to do it. Antti would like to stay and be a part of this thing."
With two weeks until the hearing, Zito is doing what every good agent does. Just treading water and seeing what floats and what sinks, before D-Day.
"My perspective is to sit and wait and see what happens," he said. "We have to hurry up and wait."
Giving the Hawks time to perhaps lean a little more toward Zito's proposed money and term package.
Giving Bowman time to see what other goalies are out there at his cap price and whether he has a trading partner for Niemi.
Giving Bowman time to remember how much he praised Cristobal Huet as a goalie in the past and how he might pull out some of those lines again and tell us exactly how much Cris learned on the bench at the end of the season.
There wasn't much news in what Zito offered. He turned down a chance to give any parameters of the deal he is seeking.
Maybe his best point of the interview was: Did O. J. really not do it?
Gives me something to ponder while I wait for either the puck or Niemi to drop first.
Filed under: 2010 offseason
Tags: agent bill zito, antti niemi, Blackhawks, Cristobal Huet, GM Stan Bowman, NHL, trades
Mike, as the onus is always on you to come with evermore captivating headlines...and you deliver...no doubt your colleague Joltin' Jay Zawaski, thought he'd "Do A Kiley" by offering up his own lurid lead-in.
Young Jay should know better than to try and steal a march on you, eh.
Now 'onus' sounds a whole lot like 'bonus'. Maybe Billy 'Bandido' Zito is trying to put some Freudian spin on his latest schtick, and hondle a bonus for Andy. Like say, one of those new Blackhawks Special Edition Camaros so Antti has a cool ride when he's cruising the main drag back in Vantaa.
But then, Jerry Kayne probably knows what's REALLY going on. And we could just ask him.
I think the salary cap will equalize hockey in quality and parity. But it will also kill the veteran's chances for a long career with entry contracts growing up into super contracts. There can't be a 15-20 year career anymore if salaries only go up. Modano has a worth today. He's already collected tens of millions in his 20 year career. He may have more to give but teams don't have more to give him. Same with Turco and several others.
I'd like to hear Mike's and Mark's (and Dave Morris's) opinion on the projected future of hockey with salaries, cap, & CBA. I'd like to initiate the discussion. I'd love to hear what nuckle, guitar, and powowow think too. I'll hang up and query my Magic 8 Ball while I wait for your thoughtful response.
I know what I know and I know what I don't know. I don't know salary cap. I do know people will bitch about the salary cap, especially after winning the Cup and breaking up that old gang of mine. I do know bitching.
I wish I had some grandiose plan to change the cap that made sense. Alas, I only have a bunch of old baseball caps. I defer to the smart crowd.
Not surprisingly, I'm largely on the same page as Puck / Nuck with all this. In fact I was just talking to a friend tonight about something Nuck pointed out as well - the basic dividing lines of the players these days: the 5+ mil stars, the 3-4 mil core players, and then the 1 mil or less fill-in guys.
The general concept of a cap seems to be wise, but I hate the way it's set up. Someone mentioned the greed in today's game in a previous post and I have to agree. Cap or no cap, the big guns are all still getting paid excessive salaries, and sadly there seems little concern among them (or their agents) for the integrity of keeping a winning team together. There is no positive element to this scenario as far as the fan base goes. The frustrating thing is, deep down you know the players love the game and would still play for a fraction of their salary if they had no other choice. But their agents do the talking and don't give a hoot about the game, so loyalty and team-concept are replaced by selfish demands. And the teams encourage it by paying out big numbers because the current system allows it.
And then you get a guy like Kovalchuk holding out when he's already been offered 10 mil per year by several teams (yeah, that's almost $200K per week!) and you know things are definitely out of whack. Send him to Russia. Maybe a better cap system would incorporate a reasonable limit on how much any individual player can make per year along with the team total. Or how about a lower salary cap and then individually earned bonus and incentive money for all players based on performance... ? Yeah, I know it probably wouldn't work, but guaranteed we'd see more action in the regular season games - and there would be no more complaints about an overpaid star not producing. (I won't mention any names.) Hey, it's not unheard of. There are many sports where you get paid according to how well you play...
The obvious positive of the cap is spreading the talent. It sucks when you're on top, but it's a dream when you're in the basement. The Senators would never have given up Havlat in '06 had there been no cap. Now it's going the other way for the Hawks, but teams that need a lift are getting some better players.
Nuck pointed out one other thing which has bothered me about the cap, especially with the recent trades. That is, even the talent you wisely draft or trade for, and then develop in your system will quickly walk away unless you can sign them to big numbers. We essentially saw that with Versteeg and Buff this year. They finally came into their own for us (more-or-less), but now they're gone. Somehow it feels like there's a fundamental flaw in the system there. And with the length of most of the contracts in the Blackhawks "core," even the young Hawks coming in this year will be in danger of getting shipped out soon if they show any good promise over the next couple seasons.
Last January we were all discussing the pros / cons of trading Versteeg and Buff (and others) immediately to get Kovalchuk for a one-shot run at the 2010 cup with him on the team. I think a lot of people (myself not included) really wanted to see that happen. You wonder what the outcome would have been had they done that? More and more these days, teams are trading away their longevity for a quick-stab at a cup run. Just more fall-out of the cap system that hinders teams from maintaining their own depth for more than a few years.
Now that the Devils have landed Kovy, you wonder if it will pay off for them.... and how strapped they'll be in the coming years with a staggering cap hit, and if it means they'll have to give up Parise after this season.
I just watched Game 5 of the Chicago/Nashville series again on the NHL channel.... yes, the one where Kane scored the shorty with 13 seconds left to tie the game or they would have gone down 3-2 in the series. That has to be the biggest "what if?" moment of the whole season.
The NHL is apparently going to reject the Kovy deal, does that mean he's a free agent again? If so it would make for some great drama if he signed with LA (although I hope that doesn't happen because the Kings with Kovalchuk would be my pick to win the West next year).
But besides that, my next biggest question is what the Hawks are planning to do before the season gets under way? On the Hawks website if you click on the depth chart there is no 4th line or 6th d-man. Modano is preparing to make a decision and from the looks of it the Hawks have zero interest. Besides him I couldn't even name another free agent I would be excited to land.
I know it's way to early to start making any sort of predictions but does anyone else fear how normal the Hawks may be next year? LA, Vancouver, Detroit(w/Modano), San Jose, etc. will all be improved. Unless Kane and Toews can combine for 200 points (which I don't think is out of the question) I could easily see the Hawks being the 5th best team in the West.
I think it's safe to say the Hawks will make the playoffs and compete again for a title next season but all this waiting is making my mind wander and I don't like where it's going.
If NJ tries to renegotiate a similar, but shorter-term deal with Kovy, they probably lose Parise next year. I don't see them as as a team being willing to do that unless they're interested in putting all their chips in for one big season.
Going along with that, I personally think Marty Brodeur's best years are well behind him, but maybe they're thinking he can come through for one more all-or-nothing season - especially if he can get a little more rest with Hedberg on the roster this year.
Jerry, I'm going to defer to Mister Mike and Master Mark on this one, as I started watching hockey back when players had to shuck corn and deliver beer in the summertime to make ends meet.
Those were the days when Rudy Pilous and Punch Imlach wore hats behind the bench; and training camp consisted of twenty pushups and making sure you brought your golf clubs.
I think if the owners have their way, the salary cap will fit like a skull cap and the only ones playing will be kids who don't know any better and vets who don't care any more.
If Dandy Don Fehr becomes head of the NHL Players' Association, there will be a strike and Fehr will collect his multi-million dollar salary for telling the players to 'hang tough'.
But that's just me. And I'm Canadian, so what do I know, eh.
Im not really sure how I feel about the cap. It seems like one of those things which you just have to accept. There is a lot of ambiguity with it. From what I understand it was created by the owners and seems to favor them the most. Now, I don't really care about the owners pocket books. But, It allows teams who are successful to rack in more money and not have to pay out, and also allows for the not so great teams to rebuild easier and keep hockey going in their city when no one cares. The cap is a balancing mechanism in some ways. In one way, it keeps players from the great contracts, but in another, it forces players to take fair contracts that portray a love for the game. It can keep salaries from getting out of hand (if you don't think 4 mil is out of hand) and keep the sport true to the game.
Plus, as we have seen with Hossa and Keith, you can still find a healthy contract that is also somewhat fair. It would seem that giving players the kind of money Campbell received would be out of the question with such caps, but it still happens.
Of course, as of now, I wish the cap was just a few million higher, but I also wish that players would stop playing for more than they are worth and show some humility. Maybe they need to remember the feeling of being that prospect who would give anything just to play a game in the NHL.
Also, in the perfect world, teams would fork over that extra cash flow to the city that helped build that team. Call it a city discount for the fans. With all of the extra money that will be created this year for the Hawks, seems like it might be able to help out the failing schools or maybe fix some roads, or keep public transportation affordable. Once everyone is payed fairly, there should be lots of money to go around. I know this is crazy, utopian talk here, but to a logical and progressive mind, it seems to make sense. How much more would people enjoy supporting their team when they knew that some of that money would help pay for such things? Could be a very positive reaction to the cap.
I kind of expected the league to slam the Kovy contract since they made a stink about the lesser Hossa deal last season (which, as Nuck pointed out, looks innocent in comparison). You gotta admit, the NJ contract terms are laughable with Kovy getting virtually all of the money in the first 10 years. If the league accepts that, teams would be creating all kinds of crazy extended deals to avoid cap hits. The league already investigated Hossa's contract, so I can't see them revisiting... but I think Nuck may be correct that Hossa's scenario could have been a turning point for the NHL to negate those types of deals.
Yeah Paul, the situation for the Hawks is a little unnerving. They have a great bunch of guys that any team would envy, but their depth doesn't look anything like we've grown accustomed to. Bowman's latest statement of, "as of right now we don't have a solution..." doesn't offer much assurance either. Let's hope the "core" stays out of injury trouble or it could be a very long year. Thank goodness they seized the moment and won the cup or we'd all be really pissed off for this entire summer.
Speaking of the Cup, did anyone get the Hawks 2010 DVD yet? (I'm in New England, so I can't really buy it at the local store.) Any initial reviews?
Greetings!
I was wondering the same.....
I guess we can only assume that no one has any groundbreaking commentary on this week's pivotal trade of Marty Reasoner for Jeff Taffe...
I know this sounds sarcastic (HINT:its not)
but did Bowman ever actually "praise Huet"...?
obviously, i dont mean the John Scott garden variety" ... (as if he would say John Scott/Huet does NOT belong on this Team")
Nklhd, Are you enjoying the last four days of Niemi era?
I'm enjoying the benefits of being roughly half way between Vancouver BC and the Bay area. Fishing,hiking and giving the needle to all the Shark and Nuck fans I know.
I spent a week in upstate NY where a large majority of the vacationers come from the NJ / Philly area. Needless to say, I had a lot of fun wearing my Hawks championship shirts and driving around with the giant Indian Head logo on the spare tire cover on my Jeep.
BTW, to answer my own question about the new Hawks DVD... I got my copy a couple days ago and was really disappointed. It seems like every single highlight they show is taken from a series of odd ice-level cameras so you can't ever really see what's going on. They never let you see the play unfold in its entirety from the traditional TV angles. Very frustrating. Like for Versteeg's nice rush in game 5 of the finals where he swept in and cut across the middle of the zone before burying it with a long wrister, all they showed was one second of the puck going in the net - from a camera angle behind the goal. Basically all you see is Leighton's fat ass. They also miss a bunch of the big highlight plays like Buff taking down Pronger in the corner, etc. Save your money and watch the highlights on NHL.com.