View Single Post
11-12-2012, 11:19 PM
Kriss E
HFB Partner
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 27,386
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
I'm sure Malkin, Kovalchuk, and Ovechkin are making more in the NHL than they would in the KHL.
Who knows for sure. It depends on which team they'd sign with.

Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
1) It's not hard to see that if you have 40% more income you might have 100% more savings or something. Your costs might not go up as high as your income.

2) Some players get more than they deserve, some get less. That's what happens when contracts are signed before the work happens, which is the norm in all industries. Yes Gomez got more than he deserved, but Pacioretty and Subban got less.

3) What the NHL asked on day 1 was a 25% roll back, so Kovalchuk would lose 25 million. He would then lose even more in five or six years when the next lockout happens, losing more money due to lost playing time, and whatever the next rollback is that Bettman has in mind. The players should not set a precedent of losing 25% every five or six years.

The players offer includes a demand for more revenue sharing. This reduces the probability of future lockouts, and almost certainly delays them. It's a great investment for the players to hold off.
How did MaxPac get less than he deserved? 4.5M a year for 5 years was it? For scoring 30+Goals once in the NHL? I'd say that's more than fair, and it shows you just ridiculous some deals have become. If MaxPac was entitled to more than that for the little he's proven, then there's a problem.
PK didn't even sign anything.

Yes, that was their first offer, and everyone knows, you don't accept the first offer. You pitch high, bring it down a bit, little by little finding a just middle.
Right now, the numbers I said stand. Agrees to the rollback, he loses 11M over 13years. Loses the year, loses 11M. Lockout in another 5-6 years? Maybe, maybe not.
If there is one and rollbacks are yet again part of it, I'm pretty sure a clause will be in it that states how contracts that were signed prior to the last CBA (this one) would not be affected by a rollback.

Kriss E is offline