View Single Post
11-13-2012, 04:08 PM
Registered User
DAChampion's Avatar
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 10,139
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
It's not me not understanding, it's me not agreeing with your take.
I don't think MaxPac got paid less than he deserved. He was having an interesting season but got his head destroyed. 1.5M was more than enough for a guy that played 37 games. Based on his previous seasons, he hadn't earned that much.
He did great work and got rewarded for it. That's how it works every where. You get paid for your past experience and your future potential. It's not just about your potential.
No company will give out huge salaries to employees without them having earned experience elsewhere and proven themselves to be a valuable addition to the companies after being interviewed (on more than one occasion).
I'm not whining about Gomez making more than he deserved. You're the one that said players end up losing money because of rollbacks and a possible future other lockout. I said there's plenty of players in the NHL that don't deserve their salaries, and there's a much higher number of players undeserving of their contracts than some that are underpaid. The only underpaid players are the young stars coming in that are unproven, and that's arguable because it's either their first or second deals, no need for them to be making huge amount of cash right off the bat.

The players get exactly 57% of revenue. That means every time a player is overpaid by an amount, other players are underpaid by exactly that amount. For example, if New Jersey overpays for Kovalchuk, that means they're not spending money on other players they could have, which lowers the demand for other players, which lowers their eventual salary. At the end of the day the players get exactly 57%. If one player is overpaid, then others have to be underpaid, it's that simple.

The reason you don't see this is that you're approaching the subject from the point of view of moral ethics, which are always imperfect (not just yours personally), rather than from a math standpoint. The latter is appropriate, as numbers is what everything involves comes down to. Numbers. That's all.

Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
You prove your worth and potential, then get paid for it. That's how it works.
A lot more players making more than they should than players making less than they should. No question about that. If you think otherwise, we can stop talking about it as we'll never agree.
You can't disagree with math, you can only be wrong.

And on this note, I suspect that if a player is overpaid by 2 million dollars, you have two players being underpaid by 1 million dollars each, but I'm not sure how the distribution works in terms of number of players. I just know that in terms of total dollars, overpayments equal underpyaments. That is guaranteed by the CBA.

Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
I really don't get what's so hard to understand here. You're too busy trying to sound smart that you forget the most simple things.
I'm not trying to sound smart. The principle I brought up was commonly known in the 19th century, it is not some advanced thing.

Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
No, this does not guarantee a lockout. This only means that negotiations will need to happen again. A lockout means no agreement will be reached before the start of the season and they start cancelling camp+games. The only thing you have to base yourself on is that Bettman went through some before, but in no way does that guarantee a work stoppage.
You assume that the renegotiation of a future CBA six years from now automatically means work stoppage. It doesn't. Simple as that.

You can fire Bettman next year for all I care. Who knows what happens within 6 years. Time will tell.
As long as the league doesn't fix its economic problems, there will be more lockouts.

You are right that the players could just capitulate to anything the owners demand before the season starts, but I don't see this happening. Note that the players learned a lesson this time. If they had capitulated early they would have lost 25%. Instead they are losing 12% at the most and getting some concessions (deferral payments), they now know that it is worthwhile to delay.

DAChampion is online now