View Single Post
Old
09-17-2004, 09:53 PM
  #57
I in the Eye
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country:
Posts: 4,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_Benjamin
I don't think so. I think it reflects the actual market. The Flyers don't think about Gagne in isolation. They look at the money guys like Tanquay and Legwand and Lecavalier are getting. They decide where Simon fits on that scale and makes an appropriate offer. The player agent looks at the same comparables and tailors a demand. Disagreements usually happen because one side thinks the player is close to Lecavalier and the other side thinks he is closer to Malhotra.
Salary is an interpretation of worth, based on what 'comparables' are earning - the GM interprets the players worth, as does the player agent... Each of the parties offer their 'suggestions' as to what the player's compensation should be - until agreement is reached... My idea arms the GM with the NHL's 'suggestion' as to what the player's worth should be... It offers the GM a formal 'league perspective' during contract negotiations... As you say, the team doesn't think about the player's worth in isolation... Salaries and determination of worth do not occur in a vaccuum - and neither does it's impact... Each player's contract has a direct impact on future NHL salaries (as salary negotiations do not occur in isolation)... It affects comparable players in comparable situations... IMO, the NHL should at least have it formally known their opinion of player worth in the market... Even if the player agent and the individual GM choose to ignore it... Because things don't occur in isolation, IMO, the NHL deserves at least a say in decisions that will have an impact throughout the league...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_Benjamin
Nobody on either side would even dream of mentioning Martin Lapointe when negotiating Gagne's contract.
I agree... Where did I say that Lapointe's contract has an impact on Gagne's contract?? I'm talking about comparable players, comparable situations... For players of 'comparable' talent to Lapointe, in a 'comparable' situation to Lapointe, IMO, his salary then comes into play... Lapointe's salary becomes a precedent - a benchmark... You argue that as an UFA, his contract has 'almost' no impact on anyone else... At this point, from the best that I can tell, this is just your opinion...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_Benjamin
This comment reflects a basic ignorance of the way the old CBA worked. I don't mean to be insulting, but it really reflects on your credibility.
No insult taken... I never claimed to be an expert in the business of hockey... Nor do I think I am... I'm simply a hockey fan trying to make sense of what is going on - why it is going on - and offering ideas about how to solve it... Just like I enjoy discussing 'the hockey game' (and some on the Canucks board will agree, I am sometimes ignorant in that subject as well)... I'm finding that I enjoy discussing 'the business of hockey' (I find it fascinating and I want to learn more - thus why I am on this board posting - and sometimes making an ass of myself through my ignorance)... I am not a credible source for the subject, and I don't take myself too seriously here... May this be a warning to other posters - when reading my posts on this subject - DO NOT take it too seriously... If you, Tom, would rather discuss things with those who are not ignorant in the subject, I suggest that you simply ignore my posts and questions... I'm here for a good time... not a long time... as I hope that hockey starts up sooner rather than later...

I in the Eye is offline