HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

NHLPA Proposal (PDF)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-10-2004, 07:00 PM
  #51
Tom_Benjamin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,152
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wint
But the most interesting part of the document, IMO, was pg. 15-17, a set of 3 examples of prior arbitration hearings (Martin Biron, Ruslan Salei, and Ruslan Fedotenko). The pages detail the comparables used by both the teams and the players in the hearing, and I could not believe the comparables used by the teams. NOT ONE of the team's comparables was at or below the salary award they requested from the arbitrator. In fact, of the 14 comparables listed by the teams, only 1 was not also used as a comparable by the player!why the league is bleeding money if this is how teams behave in arbitration cases?
All this shows is how easy it is to find the comparables. There are never more than a handful of players in the same general class, age and position. I would assume that Buffalo was 1) lowballing the offer in arbitration and 2) argued that among the five goalies, Biron had accomplished the least and earned the least.

As i said in another thread the most interesting thing about the cases are the comparables and the teams that signed the contracts with the comparables. Bettman poodles who claim that big money teams set the market in arbitration can't make their case with these examples, that's for sure. These arbitration awards weren't driven up by the Rangers, Red Wings, Stars and Leafs were they?

Tom

Tom_Benjamin is offline  
Old
12-10-2004, 07:18 PM
  #52
thinkwild
Veni Vidi Toga
 
thinkwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,298
vCash: 500
Another thing, when you look at Birons award, it looks like they pegged it perfectly.

thinkwild is offline  
Old
12-10-2004, 08:40 PM
  #53
wint
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Inside
Posts: 720
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_Benjamin
All this shows is how easy it is to find the comparables. There are never more than a handful of players in the same general class, age and position.
Dunham was used as a comparable by the Sabres even though he is not the same age as Biron(5 years older), he's not in the same class (his SV%, GAA, and wins are significantly worse than Biron's, especially last year but also over their careers), and he's vastly overpaid at $3.6million. Why would the Sabres use him as a comparable when there ARE goalies of Biron's age and class that make considerably less (Luongo, Denis, Esche)?

wint is offline  
Old
12-10-2004, 09:58 PM
  #54
Tom_Benjamin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,152
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wint
Dunham was used as a comparable by the Sabres even though he is not the same age as Biron(5 years older), he's not in the same class (his SV%, GAA, and wins are significantly worse than Biron's, especially last year but also over their careers), and he's vastly overpaid at $3.6million. Why would the Sabres use him as a comparable when there ARE goalies of Biron's age and class that make considerably less (Luongo, Denis, Esche)?
I don't think the other players are arbitration eligible. Their salaries are still governed by the entry level rules. There aren't very many first string goalies in the age group 25-30. He can't use the likes of Turco or Theodore because they've accomplished significantly more. That pretty much leaves Dunham and the others.

This kind of case comes down to the quality of the argument. I think it is easy to dismiss Dunham as a comparable - on the arguments you make - and perhaps Buffalo included him to do exactly that. They might advance his name merely to point out that at Biron's age, he looked like the best thing since Swiss cheese, too, and he ended up being vastly overpaid as a result of being overpaid at Biron's age.

In fact, they would argue, the entire class of goaltenders is overpaid. They are too close in pay to the elite group in the age class. They might be worth the money but they haven't proven it by doing anything in particular. The market is changing.

It isn't a great argument, but it is an argument. If I was to criticise the Sabres on the data we have, it is with the offer. It's just too low. They aren't fooling anybody here. I'd offer at least $2.5. I could do a decent job of defending $2.6. But $2.2? I think that is almost an insult to the arbitrator.

They should construct an argument that points to the low end of market value for the player. The agent should construct an argument that points to the high end of the range. Best argument wins. When they lowball like that, they don't help the arbitrator at all.

Tom

Tom_Benjamin is offline  
Old
12-10-2004, 10:00 PM
  #55
Kruschiki
Registered User
 
Kruschiki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 13,941
vCash: 500
here's a txt copy for those who want to cut and paste

go to post #64 in this thread for the attachment


Last edited by Buffaloed: 12-11-2004 at 05:46 PM.
Kruschiki is offline  
Old
12-10-2004, 10:37 PM
  #56
djhn579
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tonawanda, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,747
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_Benjamin
I don't think the other players are arbitration eligible. Their salaries are still governed by the entry level rules. There aren't very many first string goalies in the age group 25-30. He can't use the likes of Turco or Theodore because they've accomplished significantly more. That pretty much leaves Dunham and the others.

This kind of case comes down to the quality of the argument. I think it is easy to dismiss Dunham as a comparable - on the arguments you make - and perhaps Buffalo included him to do exactly that. They might advance his name merely to point out that at Biron's age, he looked like the best thing since Swiss cheese, too, and he ended up being vastly overpaid as a result of being overpaid at Biron's age.

In fact, they would argue, the entire class of goaltenders is overpaid. They are too close in pay to the elite group in the age class. They might be worth the money but they haven't proven it by doing anything in particular. The market is changing.

It isn't a great argument, but it is an argument. If I was to criticise the Sabres on the data we have, it is with the offer. It's just too low. They aren't fooling anybody here. I'd offer at least $2.5. I could do a decent job of defending $2.6. But $2.2? I think that is almost an insult to the arbitrator.

They should construct an argument that points to the low end of market value for the player. The agent should construct an argument that points to the high end of the range. Best argument wins. When they lowball like that, they don't help the arbitrator at all.

Tom
Hmmm....

If a team tries to be financially responsible and fit a player into their budget, they are wrong and are insulting the arbitrator.

You have also argued that if a team offers players too much and lose money, they are incompetent...

djhn579 is offline  
Old
12-10-2004, 11:02 PM
  #57
Tom_Benjamin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,152
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by djhn579
Hmmm....

If a team tries to be financially responsible and fit a player into their budget, they are wrong and are insulting the arbitrator.
Are you being stupid? Do you really think I made this argument?

I think it is financially responsible to try to win the arbitration case. I think the best way to win the arbitration case is different than the strategy adopted by the Sabres. Before the case started I would have guessed an award between $2.6 million and $2.9 million. It could hardly be less. I figure I win this case with an award of $2.5 or $2.6 and I'm going to try to convince an arbitrator to make that ruling. I think it is counter productive to lowball.

How do you think an arbitration hearing should go? What is your strategy? What do you think Biron is worth? What offer would you advance? Why? If you don't have opinions in this matter, why did you make a post?

Tom

Tom_Benjamin is offline  
Old
12-10-2004, 11:40 PM
  #58
Buffaloed
Administrator
Webmaster
 
Buffaloed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Buffalo, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 24,944
vCash: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by jj@jj.com
here's a txt copy for those who want to cut and paste
Good job, makes things a lot easier.

Quote:
3. Article 3 . Duration of Agreement. We propose a duration of six years from the date of
expiration of the prior CBA.
Make it 5 years , which is essentially 4 considering this year is about shot, and it's a deal. I don't think this proposal can be called unworkable until it's tried. The NHL thought it's last CBA was workable. It may even turn out that the NHLPA wants out of this one.

Buffaloed is offline  
Old
12-11-2004, 01:19 AM
  #59
PecaFan
Registered User
 
PecaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Ottawa (Go 'Nucks)
Posts: 8,912
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_Benjamin
I think it is financially responsible to try to win the arbitration case. I think the best way to win the arbitration case is different than the strategy adopted by the Sabres. Before the case started I would have guessed an award between $2.6 million and $2.9 million. It could hardly be less. I figure I win this case with an award of $2.5 or $2.6 and I'm going to try to convince an arbitrator to make that ruling. I think it is counter productive to lowball.
Since the arbitrator is completely free to award whatever he wants, it's basically irrelevant whether you say 2.2 or 2.6. He's basing his decision on the comparables, not the offers. Basically, looking at those decisions, he picks a number in the centre of the high and low of the compables (after tossing out the highest it appears).

Your point applies if this was a choose one of the offers arbitration. But it's not.

PecaFan is offline  
Old
12-11-2004, 02:30 AM
  #60
Tom_Benjamin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,152
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buffaloed
Good job, makes things a lot easier.

Make it 5 years , which is essentially 4 considering this year is about shot, and it's a deal. I don't think this proposal can be called unworkable until it's tried. The NHL thought it's last CBA was workable. It may even turn out that the NHLPA wants out of this one.
I think it is impossible to turn down. The owners won't let him turn it down in my opinion. You could take the agreement shorter, but if I'm Bettman, I'm inclined the other way. It sounds counter intuitive, but it works better on the cycle.

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that we are going to see salaries start to jump almost immediately. The Canucks were just handed $12 million in payroll room. They don't have to spend it, but they sure can. The giveback is too much. One of the downsides is that the best players may be able to win holdouts again. We may see more of them.

I think the owners could make a case that the pendulum had swung too far the other way, but there is no way the average salary should be at $1.3 million. The market wasn't that far off. Salaries will come back and revenues will climb. That said, I don't think salaries will be high enough in four years. Bettman wants them to climb beyond today's wage before the CBA expires. If revenues stay flat they won't go back up to $1.83 million.

Give it decent revenue increases and in seven or eight years and salaries could be back to $2 million. We will also have dominating higher payroll teams. By then they can try again using a whole new old set of arguments.

The idea of tying salaries to artificially defined revenues is too seductive to forget about, but this deal is very sweet for the owners in the here and now and they have always been here and now kind of guys. McCaw probably gets to jack up the price for half his team. Disney just ratcheted up their price expectations for selling the Ducks. If there is anybody losing money after this deal, it is deliberate.

I figure th league will be great for four years and then doomed again. We do it all over again in 2012.

Tom

Tom_Benjamin is offline  
Old
12-11-2004, 02:42 AM
  #61
Tom_Benjamin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,152
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PecaFan
Since the arbitrator is completely free to award whatever he wants, it's basically irrelevant whether you say 2.2 or 2.6. He's basing his decision on the comparables, not the offers. Basically, looking at those decisions, he picks a number in the centre of the high and low of the compables (after tossing out the highest it appears).
That is a really stupid way for a $1,000 dollar a day arbitrator to behave. It is stupid to think $1,000 dollar a day lawyers work like chimps on arbitration cases.

It is definitely not irrelevant whether you say $2.2 million or $2.6 million. if you say $2.6 million you can't get $2.4 million. I'm going to treat the arbitrator like he is an experienced professional who will intelligently assess my case. I'm not going to ask for more (or less) than I would award myself.

If the owners approached arbitration the way you suggest they do, they deserve to get pasted in the process.

Tom

Tom_Benjamin is offline  
Old
12-11-2004, 03:13 AM
  #62
coyotechrisz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Klagenfurt, Austria
Country: Austria
Posts: 137
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to coyotechrisz
I think.. when Bettman want's also a Salary Cap on Tuesday, and the NHLPA reject's the offer.. and we have no season until autumn 05/06 .. it would be a huge damage for the NHL and the Hockey in North America. Baseball had also a very hard time to recover from the lockout.. but the NHL is also damaged now.. and in 05/06 the will be much more damaged if there is no season, and maybe the won't recover from that anytime..

And who says us if the Salary Cap will be accepted in 05/06 ????????????

coyotechrisz is offline  
Old
12-11-2004, 04:35 AM
  #63
PecaFan
Registered User
 
PecaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Ottawa (Go 'Nucks)
Posts: 8,912
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_Benjamin
That is a really stupid way for a $1,000 dollar a day arbitrator to behave. It is stupid to think $1,000 dollar a day lawyers work like chimps on arbitration cases.

It is definitely not irrelevant whether you say $2.2 million or $2.6 million. if you say $2.6 million you can't get $2.4 million. I'm going to treat the arbitrator like he is an experienced professional who will intelligently assess my case. I'm not going to ask for more (or less) than I would award myself.
Right. You can't get $2.4 if you say $2.6. Buy you can if you say $2.2. And yet you say they should say $2.6. It doesn't mean squat anyway, the comparables are clearly where the decisions are made.

As for your "chimps", they may get paid a bundle, but that's exactly how they behave:

Biron
High $3,050,000
Low $2,500,000
Avg $2,775,000
Award $2,800,000
Difference $25,000

Salei
High $2,700,000
Low $2,100,000
Avg $2,400,000
Award $2,400,000
Difference $0

Fedotenko
High $1,622,500
Low $1,300,000
Avg $1,461,250
Award $1,500,000
Difference $38,750

Three cases, each one practically dead on the high/low average comparable. And I have no doubt that if you examined all the other awards, the same pattern would follow.

And why shouldn't they? This isn't rocket science. The two sides agree on the comparables. So by definition, the player falls somewhere between the two salary extremes.

PecaFan is offline  
Old
12-11-2004, 05:44 PM
  #64
Buffaloed
Administrator
Webmaster
 
Buffaloed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Buffalo, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 24,944
vCash: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by jj@jj.com
here's a txt copy for those who want to cut and paste
I stole your attachment and put it on my account so it won't count against your limit.

Buffaloed is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:20 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.