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.

NHL Proposal was very generous and fair

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-07-2005, 09:48 PM
  #76
OlliMackBjugStud
Registered User
 
OlliMackBjugStud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,673
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester
they've also been unable to be competitive for top-flight UFA's
since when is signing top flight UFA's a recipe for success ? its a big who cares.

dr

OlliMackBjugStud is online now  
Old
02-07-2005, 09:49 PM
  #77
OlliMackBjugStud
Registered User
 
OlliMackBjugStud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,673
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Iconoclast
That's right. Calgary would have been able to keep those players and remained competitive, instead of missing the playoffs for the better part of a decade. If they would have been forced to deal those players away it would have been for NHL ready talent in the same ball park. Either way the Flames would have been able to remain competitive, something they were not because of the CBA.
so let me get this straight .. u would prefer to have Nieuwendyk and Fleury instead of Iginla and Regehr?

dr

OlliMackBjugStud is online now  
Old
02-07-2005, 09:51 PM
  #78
Gary
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Behind enemy lines
Posts: 5,307
vCash: 500
I'm sure that the NHLPA could also negotiate something along the lines of: "The salary cap can't decrease more that 10% a year..." Both sides know that revenues will decrease next season if they don't play this season. But with a clause like this the players can limit the loses until things turn back around.

I've considered a simular avenue myself. Forget about what could be or how things are. Hockey is the FASTEST game on earth. Hockey requires alot of skills that few sports can equal. You need to skate fast, and well. You need to make plays under pressure, You CANNOT just 'go out of bounds' and get rid of pressure or stop a play. If you got a guy bearing down on you that's 6'4", 230 pounds and you got the puck-Sucks to be you. If you want to stay in the NHL you need to be able to make a play under that situation and worry about the consequences later. You can't jump into a 'Safety zone'.

The point I'm trying to make here is the NHL is IMO-BY FAR the most exciting game bar none. BUT IT'S NEVER BEEN PROPERLY MARKETED. If I personally was Bob Goodenow, I would'nt be *****ing about a salary cap or tax system, I'd be putting out ideas to GET THE EXPOSURE/FANBASE THE GAME DESERVES. Whether it be a shootout for younger crowds, taking out the redline, widening the nets, whatever. SOMETHING has to be done to get YOUNGER guys to watch the game and STILL keep the diehard contingency afloat.

I would come up with as many as possible ideas for improving the game, and financial numbers of what it all would cost, THEN tell the NHL...Look, If you want cost certainty then fine, we want a 'Exposure inflation' clause. If you don't generate a specific amount of exposure during the course of a year then our % of the revenue sharing will increase.

Gary is offline  
Old
02-07-2005, 09:52 PM
  #79
Icey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 591
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarlRacki
The current cap proposal is $42 million, not $35 million, so your question is a little misleading.
Regardless, given that the Flames' median salary last year was around $950,000, it shouldn't be difficult at all to sign the other 20 players for $29 million. Heck, they could do it for under $20 million without a single significant cut.
Not true at all. I just pulled the $35M because that is the figure the NHL keeps going back to, but even if you use $42M that includes other player costs. Once you subtract $2-3M your down to $39M, but the last figure I keep hearing is closer to $36M. Also remember this is all based on revenues of $2.1B, which is not going to happen.

So let's see, contracts committed to:

Gelinas $1.9M
Langkow $3M
Nielson $1.25M
Regehr $1.7M
Reinprechit $1.9
Simon $1.9M
Turek $1M
Warrener $2.2M
Wiemer $1.25
Yelle $1.8

That's $18M on ten more players.

Your now up to $31M and have 13 signed, so you have, if your lucky $7M to sign 10 players.

My point is that Calagry has contributed just as much to the escalating salaries as anyone else.

Does Iginla really deserve $7M at this point in his career, he's all of 27 years old. Does Kipursoff really deserve $3M after ONE good season (he could be another Jiggy for all we know, doubt it but he could be). How about he prove himself for another few seasons. These were contract the Flames agreed to and offered. Nobody had a gun to their heads. You complain about Mike Modano and Joe Sakic to make the money they make, but its okay for Iginla to make the same?

Like it or not, they contribute.

Icey is offline  
Old
02-07-2005, 10:01 PM
  #80
CarlRacki
Registered User
 
CarlRacki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,423
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icey
Not true at all. I just pulled the $35M because that is the figure the NHL keeps going back to, but even if you use $42M that includes other player costs. Once you subtract $2-3M your down to $39M, but the last figure I keep hearing is closer to $36M. Also remember this is all based on revenues of $2.1B, which is not going to happen.

So let's see, contracts committed to:

Gelinas $1.9M
Langkow $3M
Nielson $1.25M
Regehr $1.7M
Reinprechit $1.9
Simon $1.9M
Turek $1M
Warrener $2.2M
Wiemer $1.25
Yelle $1.8

That's $18M on ten more players.

Your now up to $31M and have 13 signed, so you have, if your lucky $7M to sign 10 players.

My point is that Calagry has contributed just as much to the escalating salaries as anyone else.

Does Iginla really deserve $7M at this point in his career, he's all of 27 years old. Does Kipursoff really deserve $3M after ONE good season (he could be another Jiggy for all we know, doubt it but he could be). How about he prove himself for another few seasons. These were contract the Flames agreed to and offered. Nobody had a gun to their heads. You complain about Mike Modano and Joe Sakic to make the money they make, but its okay for Iginla to make the same?

Like it or not, they contribute.
I'm not sure where you're hearing these cap numbers, but the NHL proposal says $42 million cap with up to $40 million in payroll (leaving $2 million for other compensation). So now we're looking at $9 million for 10 players. Again, with median salaries for the enitre team (including the big bucks for Iginla and Kiprusoff) under $1 million, this is not a significant problem.

Plus, you aren't factoring the fact that a cap will deflate salaries across the board, nor are you contemplating a possible rollback (whether it be 24 percent or some lesser figure).

CarlRacki is offline  
Old
02-07-2005, 11:22 PM
  #81
nyr7andcounting
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,919
vCash: 500
This is exactly the problem with a hard cap in a sport like hockey. It's workable, but the only way to do it right is to have a couple rookies/minimum salaries players on your roster. This is fine in football, in any given year a team can pick several players in the draft and sign a bunch of guys either as undrafted rookies or free agents to the veteran minimum. It's a lot easier to construct the bottom part of your roster in the NFL in this way, saving as much money as possible. In hockey it wouldn't work as well.

nyr7andcounting is offline  
Old
02-07-2005, 11:41 PM
  #82
Icey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 591
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarlRacki
I'm not sure where you're hearing these cap numbers, but the NHL proposal says $42 million cap with up to $40 million in payroll (leaving $2 million for other compensation). So now we're looking at $9 million for 10 players. Again, with median salaries for the enitre team (including the big bucks for Iginla and Kiprusoff) under $1 million, this is not a significant problem.

Plus, you aren't factoring the fact that a cap will deflate salaries across the board, nor are you contemplating a possible rollback (whether it be 24 percent or some lesser figure).
Those number are based on revenue of $2.1B. That isn't going to happen, not even close. But you just don't get it do you? I don't care what the cap is or what the median salary for the Flames is, the point is CALGARY AND OTHER SMALL MARKET TEAMS HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE NHL SALARY INFLATION JUST LIKE DETROIT, COLORADO, NY RANGERS, TORONTO, PHILADLEPHIA AND DALLAS HAS. And your counting on salary rollbacks and deflators and that is no different than teams counting on the playoffs to make money. Its a recipe for disaster and I think even you know that.

You can't hang this situation totally on the big market teams and that is what you and others are doing. Yes they may contribute a bit more, but everyone has thrown themselves into the pot. The difference is that the big market teams are paying Free Agents and the small markets are paying restricted agents.

That is the point. Calgary paid Iginla the big bucks. Calgary paid Kipursoff the big bucks. Phoenix pays Brian Savage $3.75M, Atlanta pays Kozolv $3M, Buffalo pays Drury $3.6M, Tampa Bay pays Sydor $3.2M, Nashville pays Steve Sullivan $3.8M. You see the pattern. Nobody is an exception, so stop hanging all the blame on the top market teams.

Icey is offline  
Old
02-07-2005, 11:47 PM
  #83
OilerFan4Life
Registered User
 
OilerFan4Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Heartland of Hockey
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icey
Those number are based on revenue of $2.1B. That isn't going to happen, not even close. But you just don't get it do you? I don't care what the cap is or what the median salary for the Flames is, the point is CALGARY AND OTHER SMALL MARKET TEAMS HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE NHL SALARY INFLATION JUST LIKE DETROIT, COLORADO, NY RANGERS, TORONTO, PHILADLEPHIA AND DALLAS HAS. And your counting on salary rollbacks and deflators and that is no different than teams counting on the playoffs to make money. Its a recipe for disaster and I think even you know that.

You can't hang this situation totally on the big market teams and that is what you and others are doing. Yes they may contribute a bit more, but everyone has thrown themselves into the pot. The difference is that the big market teams are paying Free Agents and the small markets are paying restricted agents.

That is the point. Calgary paid Iginla the big bucks. Calgary paid Kipursoff the big bucks. Phoenix pays Brian Savage $3.75M, Atlanta pays Kozolv $3M, Buffalo pays Drury $3.6M, Tampa Bay pays Sydor $3.2M, Nashville pays Steve Sullivan $3.8M. You see the pattern. Nobody is an exception, so stop hanging all the blame on the top market teams.
Brian Savage =
what a disgrace of a hockey player. He belongs in some beer hockey league. Actually those guys actually show up after October, unlike this mofo.

OilerFan4Life is offline  
Old
02-07-2005, 11:47 PM
  #84
Icey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 591
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyr7andcounting
This is exactly the problem with a hard cap in a sport like hockey. It's workable, but the only way to do it right is to have a couple rookies/minimum salaries players on your roster. This is fine in football, in any given year a team can pick several players in the draft and sign a bunch of guys either as undrafted rookies or free agents to the veteran minimum. It's a lot easier to construct the bottom part of your roster in the NFL in this way, saving as much money as possible. In hockey it wouldn't work as well.
And remember when we "even the playing field" the small market teams won't be getting the top drafts anymore. Small market teams won't be getting draft picks for losing FA because now they can sign them. So they won't have the abundance of RFA they have now. They won't have 10-15 young kids to sign for $500,000. they will now be forced to pick between Iginla and Kipursoff.

What happens when Colorado picks Crosby and Edmonton's first pick is in the third round. They can't have it both ways and they don't think about that.

Icey is offline  
Old
02-07-2005, 11:48 PM
  #85
Icey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 591
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OilerFan4Life
Brian Savage =
what a disgrace of a hockey player. He belongs in some beer hockey league. Actually those guys actually show up after October, unlike this mofo.
I actually threw him in the mix to see if anyone would say anything. That was probably the stupidest signing of all time. Just goes to prove that not all small market teams problems are money related, many are just poor management.

Icey is offline  
Old
02-07-2005, 11:50 PM
  #86
OilerFan4Life
Registered User
 
OilerFan4Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Heartland of Hockey
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icey
And remember when we "even the playing field" the small market teams won't be getting the top drafts anymore. Small market teams won't be getting draft picks for losing FA because now they can sign them. So they won't have the abundance of RFA they have now. They won't have 10-15 young kids to sign for $500,000. they will now be forced to pick between Iginla and Kipursoff.

What happens when Colorado picks Crosby and Edmonton's first pick is in the third round. They can't have it both ways and they don't think about that.
WTF? What does Colorado and Crosby have to do with Edmonton picking in the 3rd round. Me confuse

OilerFan4Life is offline  
Old
02-07-2005, 11:52 PM
  #87
NewBreed19
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by OilerFan4Life
Brian Savage =
what a disgrace of a hockey player. He belongs in some beer hockey league. Actually those guys actually show up after October, unlike this mofo.
As a phoenix fan, I would have to agree. I would rather watch any player play than see his sorry ass on the ice for phoenix! Barnett must of been drunk when he made that deal. :lol

 
Old
02-07-2005, 11:52 PM
  #88
OilerFan4Life
Registered User
 
OilerFan4Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Heartland of Hockey
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icey
I actually threw him in the mix to see if anyone would say anything. That was probably the stupidest signing of all time. Just goes to prove that not all small market teams problems are money related, many are just poor management.
cough*cough* Martin Lapoint *cough *cough

lol and its guys like Jermey Jacobs who whine about the current system. What the hell were u thinking signing Lapointe Jeremy>?

OilerFan4Life is offline  
Old
02-07-2005, 11:56 PM
  #89
NewBreed19
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by OilerFan4Life
cough*cough* Martin Lapoint *cough *cough

lol and its guys like Jermey Jacobs who whine about the current system. What the hell were u thinking signing Lapointe Jeremy>?
The signing of Savage for the yotes takes the cake! Barnett was out to lunch that day.

 
Old
02-08-2005, 06:42 AM
  #90
Seachd
Registered User
 
Seachd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Fail
Posts: 13,391
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icey
Does Kipursoff really deserve $3M after ONE good season (he could be another Jiggy for all we know, doubt it but he could be). How about he prove himself for another few seasons. These were contract the Flames agreed to and offered. Nobody had a gun to their heads.
Huh? You don't think the Flames had a gun to their heads when they had to either pay him or let him walk?

Seachd is offline  
Old
02-08-2005, 06:47 AM
  #91
transplant99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Does Kipursoff really deserve $3M after ONE good season (he could be another Jiggy for all we know, doubt it but he could be). How about he prove himself for another few seasons. These were contract the Flames agreed to and offered. Nobody had a gun to their heads

Uhhhh...it was an arbitration decision. No offer...no agreement. It was forced on them.

Or, they could of let a Vezina finalist/SC finalist/GAA leader walk away for nothing.

Uh huh.

transplant99 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 11:35 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.