View Single Post
08-29-2004, 02:53 PM
Veni Vidi Toga
thinkwild's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,546
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by I in the Eye
Right now, the owner is expected to guarantee a player high compensation, yet the owner has no guarantees if the player will actually produce the expected results season to season... While it is reasonable, IMO, for the owner to absorb some of the risk
Its reasonable for them to assume all of this risk. They are the risktaking capitalists. The players are the employees.

Im still a little fuzzy on the distinction you are making between a variable cost and performance bonus.

How will this variable cost be determined? Sounds like you are saying by a judgement of what its worth, except in terms of a % of revenues.

How is this overpaying for someone now, that you are referring to, manifesting itself? I know that in Ottawa for example, we had 28-29 yr old Bonk and Lalime coming due for $3-4mil contracts on the salary track we had them on. It was decided they werent worth it. We allowed their salaries to get ahead of their worth to us. We were paying them for performances that went undelivered.

Since they were RFA's, we had to continue qualifying them at this level. If only we knew for sure they would reject the qualifying offer, we could make it and be off the hook. We could just let them sit until someone gave us a good trade. But they likely wouldnt, so we walked. Got 3 and 4th round picks. We have a farm system, and young players that can shift to take new roles. No Sens fans are really crying too hard over these. We probably would of a few years ago, lamenting the injustice of it all , oh the humanity for us all poor small markets.

But now we know we can find good role players we need for that price on the UFA market, so if we are missing something we'll get it. We dont deserve to get compensation for the RFAs we allowed to become overpaid underachievers. And Im not sure we really feel threatened because some other team is willing to take them from us.

If they were UFAs that were no longer performing 2 years into a 5 year contract signed after they poached this player from another team not thinking he is worth it, I really dont see the problem or where sympathy is coming from.

Originally Posted by I in the Eye
Now assume after the season, the Canucks achieved a fifty point season, last in the NHL, and Bert scores 30 points while floating around the ice virtually every game... Bert's compensation for the year - $5 million... he deserves it, and the money is there to pay it to him - even though the Canucks didn't generate a lot of money for the season...
You'd be willing to pay $5mil for that? I think you would be better off trading Bertuzzi for the next Chara-Spezza before they are proven and go on a long term rebuilding program to develop a youthful core to get a team that can compete into a playoff spot and have a shot at growing into a champ. It may be a nice warn fuzzy to have the games elite powerforward playing cheaply on a develpoing team, but why would owners or players want to provide incentives for that unnatural event to occur.

thinkwild is offline