View Single Post
09-11-2004, 10:20 AM
Registered User
Slats432's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,636
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by pld459666
well over 200 million in their initial offer a joke?

If the players initially offered a roll back of 5% in salaries across the board they would more than likely roll back upwards of 10%, in all probability more than that.

I don't understand why we have to take responsibility out of the owners hads for agreeing to some of these outrageous contracts and start blaming the current situation on the players for asking for as much as they want. Isn't it still the owners responsibility to run their business making sound financial decisions?

Bottom line is that the offer was a good offer if you are looking to negotiate in good faith, it's only a joke offer if you are looking to force an agreement on the players.
pld, you aren't getting it. Many people don't. If the Rangers give a guy $5 million or Detroit gives a guy $5 million...every comparable player in that category wants the same cash. Those teams can afford the money, so in truth aren't doing anything wrong.

And with the ridiculous arbitration system, agents use the highest paid comparable to achieve the best possible award. It is an inflationary system.(You can imagine the number of guys using Marty Lapointe as a comparable for arbitration. :lol )

So in effect, the problem doesn't lay with Holik getting a large contract because the Rangers can afford is the salary pull on every other comparable player on every other team(Especially the lower revenue stream teams) that causes the problem.

Slats432 is online now