Fantomas
Registered User
- Aug 7, 2012
- 13,626
- 7,245
RW Matvei Michkov - SKA-1946 St.Petersburg, MHL (2023 Draft)
- Thread starter Flynn84
- Start date
- Status
He's a 2023 draft , people should stop worrying about contract termination etc until around the time that it's a possibility , just relax and watch the kid play for now
lawrence
Registered User
- May 19, 2012
- 16,477
- 7,375
last thing I want the NHL to become is a European Football style of recruiting and brining in players, since all know European Football is one of the most corrupted sports in all of sports. I've never seen anything like this before, and quite frankly I think it's corrupted and broken. What SKA did was savvy as shit, bull crap, and quite frankly something I don't agree with. Obviously this young player is going to miss out on 3 years of NHL time. feel free to tell me "just enjoy watching this kid". Vorky you are all for "keeping your own players in your own country" I am personally all for seeing the best players in the best leauge regardless of where they are from. What SKA did was literally take ownership of this young player by signing him to a 5 year deal, this kid is the next great Russian born player, sign him long enough so whoever drafts him with the high pick will have no choice but to wait 3 full years, or "pay" the SKA to have him transfered over. Again, Soviet style bull shit of trying to own a player. Love it. Keep it up KHL.
vorky
@vorkywh24
- Jan 23, 2010
- 11,503
- 1,323
At the same time, I will reply to @BMann as well in this post.
You (@lawrence) do not understand how sports business works. You are bringing "Soviet style", but do you know that all football rules/principles in European football have been created/invented by the European courts, especially the European Court of Justice? So, Russians, Soviets have nothing to do with it? You should study the topic to understand all details.
You can think about football whatever you want, but it is working very well. The rules are protecting the small/poor clubs & leagues over rich & wealthy clubs who can not just simply take any player for free. There is a whole mechanism of financial compensation & solidarity from wealthy clubs to poor clubs.
1.FIFA/UEFA obligate clubs to pay a development fee for any player under contract and even without a contract, if he is younger than 23 and is transferred to a new club. So, a small club developing a player since his 12 years, is getting some financial compensation.
2.Another payment is a transfer fee when a player is under contract and the other club wants him. This is exactly Michkov´s case. So, both clubs agree on a sum of the transfer fee, then a player is released from his previous club & singing (usually a long-term) contract with a new team. Tell me one reason why this can not happen in hockey? I do not accept a reply "because I do not want the NHL to be like European football." According to the European court, the club having a contract with a player has all right to demand financial compensation in case of his transfer, this compensation (its sum) includes the value of his sport talent, his marketing & business value. So, if a player is a very talented & potential (super)star who will be making huge marketing revenues for his future clubs, his original club can demand more money as a transfer fee. Once again, it is a principle created by the European court, Russians & Soviets have nothing to do with it.
3.I will not write about all details of solidarity payments in football. Basically, rich clubs paying poor clubs. Why? Because the rich clubs depend on small clubs who are developing players. If these small & poor clubs bankrupted, no new players would be raised. Your rich club just can not take a player from the poor club without significant compensation. And it is happening in hockey, resulting in the dying of the European club hockey. Many posters here are asking why Slovakia & the Czech Republic are not able to produce more & more top-tier players anymore. Because both countries were robbed by the NHL in the 1990s, the NHL did not invest huge money via transfer fees into Slovak & Czech hockey to support the clubs to develop better & better players. So, the clubs do not have money ...
Ad "keeping your own players in your own country" - that is not true. All I want is the NHL club to directly negotiate about a transfer fee for every player with his European club. When agreeing on a transfer fee, which can be a million or two or ten of a hundred million dollars or whatever, then a player can move to the NHL.
People here like to talk about assets, how the NHL GM should protect his assets (draft picks, RFA, prospects etc). Michkov is an SKA asset. I see nothing weird if SKA wants to protect their asset by signing a long-term contract with the player. And SKA has never said that they would not release him earlier if having a serious offer, guessing with huge of money on the table, from the NHL club. So, I recommend you to demand from your NHL GM to come with such an offer. It is very easy to do.
Pool party didn't learn NA hockey that well, so had to go back to Finland. And he's now scoring for Edmonton.
On the other hand Guryanov played 3 years in the AHL, and he's now good.
On the other hand Guryanov played 3 years in the AHL, and he's now good.
I'd consider Michkov to be a bit greater a talent than Kaprizov, Puljujärvi etc.
However, if Michkov would struggle in NHL immediately after being drafted, it's true it might be better for him to play in Russia rather than playing in NHL without being NHL ready and without being sent down, simply because he was a high draft pick.
But, I also think that if it's confirmed that he can't play in NHL until 2026 or something, his draft position might sink. Not that far of course, but he might go from first overall to third or fourth overall, who knows.
However, if Michkov would struggle in NHL immediately after being drafted, it's true it might be better for him to play in Russia rather than playing in NHL without being NHL ready and without being sent down, simply because he was a high draft pick.
But, I also think that if it's confirmed that he can't play in NHL until 2026 or something, his draft position might sink. Not that far of course, but he might go from first overall to third or fourth overall, who knows.
Gold Standard
Registered User
- Sep 7, 2018
- 2,385
- 2,285
Caser
Moderator
Yeah you're right, and I guess it works both ways ; a KHL team can't sign a player with a valid NHL contract. But couldn't the NHL team that drafts him just get him to "retire" from the KHL before signing him to a multi-year deal? Then again, that would seem damn near criminal wouldn't it? ... SKA would never do such a thing. ...... hmmmmmm... I seem to remember some guy with a long term contract in New Jersey.
Caser
Moderator
I think a lot of discussions here are going into offtopic.
@vorky, for the transfer fees to be possible NHL needs a new CBA, not to mention that SKA wouldn't really be interested in any sort of money.
@WRC , I'm not exactly sure how it is done in the KHL, but in the NHL that kind of "retirements" need an agreement from the management, so all the questions to Lou there on that particular case. If we're applying the same rules to Michkov, then SKA would need to agree on the "retirement" the same way.
I think it should be pretty obvious that both of these cases are pretty much impossible scenarios for Michkov, so I'd suggest to not go there anymore.
The only possible scenario is Michkov wanting to buyout his contract himself, but he needs to give around 1.5 years notice before that, which makes practically only the last year of that contract possible to be bought out. And it kind of doesn't make much sense too.
@vorky, for the transfer fees to be possible NHL needs a new CBA, not to mention that SKA wouldn't really be interested in any sort of money.
@WRC , I'm not exactly sure how it is done in the KHL, but in the NHL that kind of "retirements" need an agreement from the management, so all the questions to Lou there on that particular case. If we're applying the same rules to Michkov, then SKA would need to agree on the "retirement" the same way.
I think it should be pretty obvious that both of these cases are pretty much impossible scenarios for Michkov, so I'd suggest to not go there anymore.
The only possible scenario is Michkov wanting to buyout his contract himself, but he needs to give around 1.5 years notice before that, which makes practically only the last year of that contract possible to be bought out. And it kind of doesn't make much sense too.
vorky
@vorkywh24
- Jan 23, 2010
- 11,503
- 1,323
Yes, it works both ways.
The KHL by-laws do not know the term "retirement." It is evident, you are referring to Kovalchuk. And you need to know that this retirement was done on purpose because Ilya needed to be without a valid contract in the NHL. Then, he could sign with SKA.
Yes, if the NHL worked like the sports league of the 21st Century, NJD would agree on a transfer fee with SKA. So SKA would pay a few bucks to NJD, then NJD would release Ilya from his contract & he would sign with SKA. But, because the NHL is living in the Middle Ages, this scenario was not possible, so Kovalchuk had to retire from the NHL.
But, if you want SKA to pay NJD, you need also want all NHL clubs to do the same with all the players they are getting from Europe. You need to ask your NHL teams why they are not doing it.
vorky
@vorkywh24
- Jan 23, 2010
- 11,503
- 1,323
It is up to the NHL to sort their homework.
I know that SKA´s owner is wealthier & more influential than all NHL owners combined, but even here is a sum when SKA would consider the thing. But yeah, it would need to be a lot of money on the table to even start the talks.
kp61c
Registered User
It is not like Michkov signed the deal under the barrel of a gun and wasn't aware of the consequences his actions entailed. Your criticism towards Ska and the KHL here is misplaced.
Same as if I would rant and riot when Ovechkin signed his 10 years contract. "Oh now they own him. What a bush league."
(Even more fun because IRL Ovechkin played 1,5 seasons in Russia due to lockouts in the NHL being under that contract)
What I actuallly do rant and riot about and with good reason is the NHL not releasing players for the Olympics. Something the KHL would never do.
Kovalchuck's retirement was done under the valid CBA. Nobody ever questions it. Michkov and SKA, both parties can do whatever they feel like under the valid KHL rules. Nobody questions that. It's not like Kovalchuk's retirement was a clause invented on the go just to make Kovalchuck's move happen. Your example fails.
Vasilevskiy
The cat will be back
This is how it works in europe and in all sports dude. Football, basketball, cycling, etc.
If any NHL team wants him earlier they pay whatever they own and it's a no brainer really, he will return way more than what the team will pay for the contract termination
vorky
@vorkywh24
- Jan 23, 2010
- 11,503
- 1,323
Ad NHL & Olympics and IIHF events. We know why the NHL behaves like this. But I do not understand the stance of the hockey federations in Sweden, Finland, the Czech Republic etc who signed the transfer agreement with the NHL which is not bringing any benefits to the European clubs. So, these hockey federations should have two principal & basic conditions while negotiating with the NHL - 1.NHL clubs will honor the players' contracts with the European clubs, 2.NHL clubs are obligated to release the players to the IIHF events & Olympics. The question is why the hockey federations in Europe did not demand these two basic conditions from the NHL.
SannywithoutCompy
Registered User
- Dec 22, 2020
- 2,502
- 4,652
We also know the answer to that question. They accepted their role as NHL's farms, just as their countries accepted the role.
vorky
@vorkywh24
- Jan 23, 2010
- 11,503
- 1,323
Good for SKA, KHL and Russian hockey.
European leagues and hockey federations are complete cucks to the NHL. But it's probably part of a bigger geopolitical picture (European countries pretty much being satellite states for US) that just translates into hockey as well.
Isn't the only fee NHL clubs pay to European clubs set at something like 250k? It's laughable and absurd.
But the KHL is pretty terrible for European leagues and hockey too, so there's that.
European leagues and hockey federations are complete cucks to the NHL. But it's probably part of a bigger geopolitical picture (European countries pretty much being satellite states for US) that just translates into hockey as well.
Isn't the only fee NHL clubs pay to European clubs set at something like 250k? It's laughable and absurd.
But the KHL is pretty terrible for European leagues and hockey too, so there's that.
SannywithoutCompy
Registered User
- Dec 22, 2020
- 2,502
- 4,652
There is literally no incentive for the NHL: can't use the clips to promote anything, take on all the risks of player injuries
- Status
