ForumNamePending
Registered User
- Mar 31, 2012
- 2,674
- 1,031
The difference is that all the NHL drafted players will bring their teams a guaranteed figure, where as the same can't be said about the players going to KHL. Basically the players previously below the radar in a breakthrough/career season (like Teemu Ramstedt) can expect to fetch their teams any kind of decent transfer money, the players that know they can expect to play abroad in the future will have included a KHL clause in their contracts that guarantees them either a free or a very cheap exit (most SM-Liiga players have this clause already).
True... But I don't think the fact that in certain situations players transferring to the KHL for nothing changes my original point that the NHL's MO when dealing with European clubs/leagues/federations hasn't exactly been great for European hockey or its fans. At the end of the day though I am in NA and should just step away and let you guys debate what is and isn't good for hockey in Europe. Besides... vorky has me a bit confused. I was under the impression that the KHL was going to 'save' hockey by placing teams in every European (and Asian) capital but now it appears based on his last post it is going to be done by overhauling how international transfers are conducted.
At this point it would seem hockey will continue to be a bit of a disorganized mess. It's almost like in despite of itself the sport has found a way to survive and even in certain places at certain times thrive and grow.