View Single Post
Old
11-28-2004, 12:09 PM
  #75
thinkwild
Veni Vidi Toga
 
thinkwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,285
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quat
The thing is, the guy that bought the Sens is a billionaire who loves hockey and is intersted in winning. If the team had have been purchased by someone who was really concerned with the bottom line, then the Sens would certainly going in a different direction.
All teams are owned by billionaires interested in the bottom line. But their bottom line is often not the operational profit and loss statement from the revenues and expenses they have allocated to the team. The reason being a billionaire helps isnt because he is willing to lose money, its because he invested his own money in the team, not borrowed money requiring interest repayment.

Quote:
It's not so much that they need to spend like the the Leafs or the Rangers, but the fact is they are very much effected by how the Leafs and Rangers spend... as is the rest of the league.

Hossa, Alfredson, Chara, Redden, Philips, et al are all players that in the very near future will be at the top percentile in earning. If New York can't drive up prices, then there is a very good chance that a fair number of these players will stay playing for the Sens. If not, most would be gone in a couple of years.... under the spending conscious management you were talking about.
Alfie already signed with us as a UFA for significantly less than Holik cost. Under a cap, any team accumulating that much talent will be forced to be broken up. because no team is allowed to accumulate that many good players under a cap. Under no cap, we can keep more of them if we can afford them. i.e. we are winning. I like our chances better that way.

The Sens are not going to be signing every player who reaches UFA to a contract, only the selected few and only if they keep us winning. For many that is years away. No system will allow us to keep all of them indefintely through their UFA years. Only a non cap gives us chance to keep players who help us win and afford a higher than average payroll.

We already lost Bonk and Lalime this year. Sens need some help lowering salaries to survive, but not a cap. What good is keeping all our expensive players if we are losing and cant afford them. Why should we be forced to cut some if we are winning and can afford it?

NYR only set high prices for UFAs. Why would the Sens care about that market. They could of signed Alfie for more. They have no comparable for Hossa or Havlat or Spezza. Even if they did, why would they pay them more than the values that the small markets have set?

thinkwild is online now