HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Polls - (hockey-related only) (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=72)
-   -   Favourite team pay cut (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1297215)

saskriders 11-23-2012 11:18 PM

Favourite team pay cut
 
If you were among the best in the league (we'll say top 10), would you play for your favourite team for the minimum NHL salary (about $500 000) or play for a team you are indifferent to for the going rate for a top 10 player

laundryman 11-23-2012 11:53 PM

Minimum.

I get that athletes want to make money and make a living and whatnot, but I don't understand why players don't take pay cuts. If the team has more money to spend they can field a much better team. It's easy to nitpick on the difference between millions from the outside, I suppose.

CanucksSayEh 11-23-2012 11:55 PM

Play for the hometown for cheap. Would win lots of cups and trophies, if i needed money later in life i'd do a subway commercial or some crap.

The Nose 11-23-2012 11:57 PM

Money because I doubt I'd be different than any other professional athlete.

Vankiller Whale 11-24-2012 12:14 AM

It depends, have my made my millions already, or would it be for my entire career?

SnowblindNYR 11-24-2012 12:18 AM

I wonder if I played for other teams before this offer. Seems like players are more loyal to teams they played on for a long time than their hometown team. So if I get drafted by the Pens and play for them for 10 years, maybe I'm more loyal to them than the Rangers and I'd resign with them even if the money were even.

Yashintangibles 11-24-2012 12:20 AM

A top 10 guy playing for the minimum salary ? :laugh:

Corey Perry* 11-24-2012 01:11 AM

I rather play for 8 million or so on a team like the Flames or Rangers than play for 500,000 on the Ducks. That's a ****ing 7.5 million dollars difference. I'm not THAT big a Ducks fan to throw away over 7 million dollars per year.

Gritzky98 11-24-2012 01:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hampeus (Post 55994579)
I rather play for 8 million or so on a team like the Flames or Rangers than play for 500,000 on the Ducks. That's a ****ing 7.5 million dollars difference. I'm not THAT big a Ducks fan to throw away over 7 million dollars per year.

No ones that big a fan of there team.

LPH 11-24-2012 01:22 AM

The NHLPA would kill me, also since a career is so short, I would only really take a huge discount at the end of it, when money isn't an issue

saskriders 11-24-2012 01:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hampeus (Post 55994579)
I rather play for 8 million or so on a team like the Flames or Rangers than play for 500,000 on the Ducks. That's a ****ing 7.5 million dollars difference. I'm not THAT big a Ducks fan to throw away over 7 million dollars per year.

$500 000 is lot of money. Most of the population get's by with a lot less. What do you need the extra 7.5 for

Wrath 11-24-2012 01:54 AM

Give the extra 7.5 to charity then if you don't need it, unless you're saying that you'd rather help your team by letting them sign another star with the money they saved rather than helping people who actually need the money...


Really though, it makes no sense to get paid for less than you're worth in any profession. If you wish to be not-selfish, or altruistic, you can allocate your earned money in whichever way you choose.

Big McLargehuge 11-24-2012 02:56 AM

I'd find to make a place like Anaheim or Florida work for 1500% the salary...


Now Philadelphia...I'd rather just retire.

Corey Perry* 11-24-2012 02:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saskriders (Post 55994857)
$500 000 is lot of money. Most of the population get's by with a lot less. What do you need the extra 7.5 for

Would you really pass up an extra 7.5 MILLION dollars just to play for a team you like a bit more? $500,000 is a lot of money, but wouldn't you be able to do a lot more with an extra 7.5M? You can live a very nice lifestyle for the rest of your life after only 1 season, and you wouldn't have to work another day in your life. With $500,000, you'd still have a lot of money, but if you only played one season, you couldn't live the rest of your life on that without working, unless you like living on 30K a year. And you probably wouldn't be able to help many family members, since that isn't a crazy amount of money. With the extra 7.5 million, you'd be able to buy a house for all of your relatives, you'd be able to make sure everybody has everything they need, and you could also help out a lot of people in your community, etc. with that money. Also, with that extra money, you'd be able to buy pretty much whatever you want. Even though that sounds greedy and selfish, wouldn't you love to have a really nice home, car, boat, etc that you normally couldn't have in real life? Why should mother ****ing Gary Bettman be able to make millions and millions of dollars just to destroy a league, while you work your ass of doing whatever you do for an average salary? Why shouldn't YOU be able to finally live large?

And let's say you play 10 years, what will your total earnings be after 10 years:

With $500,000: You'd have 5 million after 10 years
With 8 million: You'd have 80 million after 10 years

Would you seriously pass on 75 Million dollars just to play with the Senators instead of a team like St. Louis or something? Seriously, all that money traded for a different colored jersey. At the end of the day, it's really just another jersey.

WTFetus 11-24-2012 03:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saskriders (Post 55994857)
$500 000 is lot of money. Most of the population get's by with a lot less. What do you need the extra 7.5 for

It's definitely a lot of money, even considering tax is going to take away half of it. But you're risking your livelihood (chance of concussions), and a hockey player's career isn't very long. People can make 100k+ after taxes, and that's working until their late 60s. Hockey players play until their late 30s at best.
You take the extra 7.5 million to allow yourself and your family to live comfortably for the rest of your life, and possibly the rest of your kids' lives.

I honestly wouldn't care what team I played for. I'd make that team my new favorite team. Aaron Rodgers and Tom Brady both wanted to play for the 49ers, but both made their respective cities their homes and are very successful and happy.

Dellstrom 11-24-2012 09:26 AM

500,000, even after taxes, is quite a bit more than the average... You can certainly get by.

Also if you're a top-10 player you shouldn't have much trouble finding a sponsorship. Plus you get to play with your hometown team.

But honestly I take a different team. It's really not worth ~7 million a YEAR just to play for your hometown team, and you can still get a sponsorship, you're still a top-10 player... Like WTFetus said, someone like Tom Brady came to New England and now he's more or less of a God here. I think it'd be fun to move somewhere and make a living and legacy.

When it comes down to it, do I take sentimental value or an extra 7-8 million in the bank every year? Not too hard for me to choose there. If you play 15 years, we'll say you average 7 million a year route A, average the ELC/raises/whatever, consistent 500,000 route B.

In your 15 year career with your favorite team, you would make 500k more than you would in ONE YEAR playing on an indifferent team. 7.5m total, 98 million less overall. Tell me sentimental value speaks that much, even if you don't care for the money that much.

bp spec 11-24-2012 09:28 AM

Favorite team.

Exit Dose 11-24-2012 09:29 AM

I misclicked. My vote should've been to follow the money.

1972 11-24-2012 09:33 AM

get real to people who would play for minimum salary

AD1066 11-24-2012 09:43 AM

The gap is too pronounced, although I like the idea of the poll. I would definitely take a pay cut to play for the Wings, but if we're talking $8m vs. 500k, that's about a 93% discount.

ricky0034 11-24-2012 09:45 AM

hell no

eklunds source 11-24-2012 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by live playoff hockey (Post 55994653)
The NHLPA would kill me, also since a career is so short, I would only really take a huge discount at the end of it, when money isn't an issue

The NHLPA doesn't care. Their members take home 50% (or whatever the percentage ends up being), and it doesn't really matter to them who it goes to. Before a salary cap, sure, but not anymore.

1972 11-24-2012 10:12 AM

more realistic would be, take 6 for your faviourite team or or 7.5 for another team, NO player would take a 93 percent paycut... ever

Also good luck getting an agent to take a 93 percent pay cut.

SnowblindNYR 11-24-2012 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saskriders (Post 55994857)
$500 000 is lot of money. Most of the population get's by with a lot less. What do you need the extra 7.5 for

Most of the population also works till they're in their 60s. If you're an athlete you work until you're like 40 at best. Also, you're set with 8 million a year for life if you're smart, 500,000, not so much. I never understood the masses counting rich people's money and asking why they need so much.

Sureves 11-24-2012 11:47 AM

I'm willing to bet anyone saying "favourite team" would experience a very different decision-making process if both options actually presented themselves.

Hell, I'd play on any team in the NHL instead of Ottawa so long as I got $1M (up from $500k): let alone top 10 money.

Where it gets more interesting is when you can play on your favourite team for 8M or a "meh" team for 10M. I'd still take the 10M, but it's a more realistic question.

All that said, if I ever made it to the NHL, Ottawa wouldn't be where I'd want to play in the first place. New York, LA, Philadelphia, Boston, San Jose, Anaheim, Florida, Chicago would all be places I'd easily go instead of my "favourite team".

But in reality I'd go wherever Karlsson was playing for free :sarcasm:


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:51 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.