HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Lockout discussion thread

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-21-2012, 12:22 PM
  #301
Mike8
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,110
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by waffledave View Post
I do, and I left it out to simplify things. I also left it out because realistically any safe investment will not produce enough money to support their lifestyle without starting to dig into capital. And if they have to start digging into capital, the return on something open and low risk is too low at the moment to even make a difference.

It's also besides the point. My entire argument is that there is nothing wrong with an NHL player wanting to maximize the few income earning years that they will have in their careers. Anyone would do that same, including every single person on this forum.
Agreed with your premise. Don't agree on the other stuff, though, but as you mentioned, that's not relevant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jigger77 View Post
How is that not true?
Average person will make more than 10% of $13m over the course of their careers.

Mike8 is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 12:33 PM
  #302
waffledave
waffledave, from hf
 
waffledave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,407
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike8 View Post
Agreed with your premise. Don't agree on the other stuff, though, but as you mentioned, that's not relevant.
With inflation there is barely anything left, even at a modest 4.5%.

__________________
Yours in Christ,

waffledave
waffledave is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 12:57 PM
  #303
Jigger77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,952
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike8 View Post



Average person will make more than 10% of $13m over the course of their careers.
I guess it's not totally true but pretty darn close. Depends how long they work. Average salary in Canada is 46,000$ right now. To earn 1.3mil it would take 28 years at that wage.

Jigger77 is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 12:59 PM
  #304
Mike8
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,110
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by waffledave View Post
With inflation there is barely anything left, even at a modest 4.5%.
How is there barely anything left with a conservative yield of 4.5% after factoring inflation?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jigger77 View Post
I guess it's not totally true but pretty darn close. Depends how long they work. Average salary in Canada is 46,000$ right now. To earn 1.3mil it would take 28 years at that wage.
Right, and 28 years is not long to work. Additionally, that average wage will increase significantly. So most Canadians will earn more than that amount over the course of their careers. Anyway, as mentioned, this is semantics.

Mike8 is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 02:33 PM
  #305
domdo345
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,105
vCash: 500
Isn't the inflation in Canada aimed to stay between 1%-3%? And I think I saw it at 1.3% this summer.

Anyway, I kinda laugh at those who have a perpetual hate towards rich owners (of any kind of market) and yet, they are the ones willing to invest their money at a high risk of loosing money to create the jobs.

domdo345 is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 03:10 PM
  #306
Theran189
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 232
vCash: 500
Happened to see the most recent numbers this morning on Tv.
inflation was 1.2 in Canada and mostly because of gas and food prices that were rising at a rate of between 2 and 3%. Otherwise, clothing and furnitures prices are actually minus a percent.

Theran189 is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 03:50 PM
  #307
waffledave
waffledave, from hf
 
waffledave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,407
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike8 View Post
How is there barely anything left with a conservative yield of 4.5% after factoring inflation?
We are talking about a period of 30-40 years. Inflation is low at the moment but over the long term we are looking at 2-3%...So your 4.5% growth is not quite as much as it seems. Factor in taxes, and even 4.5% growth on $3 mil isn't really enough to support a higher end lifestyle.

These guys live in multi million dollar homes. Not $250,000 condos in Montreal. I don't fault them for trying to make as much cash as possible, life is expensive when you have money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by domdo345 View Post
Isn't the inflation in Canada aimed to stay between 1%-3%? And I think I saw it at 1.3% this summer.

Anyway, I kinda laugh at those who have a perpetual hate towards rich owners (of any kind of market) and yet, they are the ones willing to invest their money at a high risk of loosing money to create the jobs.
Long term it will increase.

waffledave is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 04:04 PM
  #308
domdo345
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,105
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by waffledave View Post
We are talking about a period of 30-40 years. Inflation is low at the moment but over the long term we are looking at 2-3%...So your 4.5% growth is not quite as much as it seems. Factor in taxes, and even 4.5% growth on $3 mil isn't really enough to support a higher end lifestyle.

These guys live in multi million dollar homes. Not $250,000 condos in Montreal. I don't fault them for trying to make as much cash as possible, life is expensive when you have money.



Long term it will increase.
If they were that worried of keeping ''the lifestyle'' of millionaires, then they should not bite on the hands that feed them. Hands who had balls to invest/create jobs in a league that was going nowhere few years ago. Players should be tankful that owners in cities like Columbus, Nashville, Florida, Tampa, Anaheim, Phoenix, NYI, NJ, etc do not close business after a few years of loosing money. A good share of the players jobs are held in teams that probably lose money more often than not. Hell, they should be thankful to live ''the lifestyle'' because of hockey.

Edit: loosing a year of salary in not a wise choice when you have a short career. In the end, a 50/50 should be a fair deal for both sides IMO

domdo345 is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 04:19 PM
  #309
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,463
vCash: 500
It's interesting that some could be so ignorant of economics as to argue that professional athletes are overpaid.

Part of the reason hockey players are well-paid is because it takes a tremendous sacrifice to become a hockey player. You need to sacrifice a huge part of your life in the ages 4-18 including high school, college, and other life experiences to become a professional hockey player. In order to succeed, it's likely a 100-hour/week job when including exercise, practices, travelling, etc. Some players do go to college while preparing for hockey, but they are typically majoring in "communication studies", and thus not getting a real education -- they don't have time to do so if they are serious about becoming hockey players.

For each person who succeeds, there are dozens or hundreds that fail, and thus it is a higher risk job. Any job that comes with a very high risk of failure will necessarily also come with a high salary to compensate. Conversely, jobs where everybody succeeds don't merit higher salaries. In this sense the salaries of professional athletes are logically comparable to those of Hollywood stars.

Finally, the average career is five years, and comes with high risk of concussions and other debilitating injuries.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 04:24 PM
  #310
Mike8
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,110
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by waffledave View Post
We are talking about a period of 30-40 years. Inflation is low at the moment but over the long term we are looking at 2-3%...So your 4.5% growth is not quite as much as it seems. Factor in taxes, and even 4.5% growth on $3 mil isn't really enough to support a higher end lifestyle.

These guys live in multi million dollar homes. Not $250,000 condos in Montreal. I don't fault them for trying to make as much cash as possible, life is expensive when you have money.



Long term it will increase.
That 4.5% will incorporate inflation anyway, so it's not too relevant to this discussion.

$135,000 as a base salary, after having already bought a nice property(s), is healthy living for an average to below average NHLer in his retirement. With an average to above average job on top of that base salary, you're looking at $200,000 a year. If the wife works at all, that becomes $250,000. That's without touching the savings.

That actually is enough cash to support a good life. Remember -- we're not talking about higher end players here who are accustomed to spending a ton. Nor are we talking about someone who wants to 'live it up' because, if we were, then they'd be looking to get more than an average paying bluecollar job. This is the average NHLer who only put away $3m by the end of their career. To be honest, most NHLers should wind up with more than that in their bank account, but we're being conservative in all of our estimates here. Even if we're looking at $4m here, then that base salary per annum becomes $180,000.

Nevertheless, I agree with your premise: that an NHLer, like any rational individual, will want to maximise their salary.

Mike8 is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 06:01 PM
  #311
impudent_lowlife
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Country: Japan
Posts: 785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
It's interesting that some could be so ignorant of economics as to argue that professional athletes are overpaid.

Part of the reason hockey players are well-paid is because it takes a tremendous sacrifice to become a hockey player. You need to sacrifice a huge part of your life in the ages 4-18 including high school, college, and other life experiences to become a professional hockey player. In order to succeed, it's likely a 100-hour/week job when including exercise, practices, travelling, etc. Some players do go to college while preparing for hockey, but they are typically majoring in "communication studies", and thus not getting a real education -- they don't have time to do so if they are serious about becoming hockey players.

For each person who succeeds, there are dozens or hundreds that fail, and thus it is a higher risk job. Any job that comes with a very high risk of failure will necessarily also come with a high salary to compensate. Conversely, jobs where everybody succeeds don't merit higher salaries. In this sense the salaries of professional athletes are logically comparable to those of Hollywood stars.

Finally, the average career is five years, and comes with high risk of concussions and other debilitating injuries.
This. Add to this the fact that approximately 60% of NHL players will play only 5 seasons or less in in the NHL in their careers. I have 40 years to make my millions in my chosen field - the average NHLer has 5.

impudent_lowlife is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 06:08 PM
  #312
BLONG7
Registered User
 
BLONG7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 12,324
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by impudent_lowlife View Post
This. Add to this the fact that approximately 60% of NHL players will play only 5 seasons or less in in the NHL in their careers. I have 40 years to make my millions in my chosen field - the average NHLer has 5.
But, it's their choice...still alot better choice than the avg joe...

Nothing says they can't work at something after their 5 yrs of fame are up either...again, that's their choice...

BLONG7 is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 06:13 PM
  #313
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,463
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLONG7 View Post
avg joe
Average Joe doesn't matter. Professional athletes are a skilled elite with talent and dedication at the extreme end of the bell curve, they are not average. The proper comparison are elite musicians, movie stars, etc.

ETA: A max pacioretty story. When he was ~6 years old, his mother would wake up and wake him up at 5am on weekends to take him to hockey practice, because he loved the game that much. Most of you live your lives without ever having that kind of dedication, hence, you are average.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 06:20 PM
  #314
Kingbobert
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Kingbobert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Greece
Posts: 4,660
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by impudent_lowlife View Post
This. Add to this the fact that approximately 60% of NHL players will play only 5 seasons or less in in the NHL in their careers. I have 40 years to make my millions in my chosen field - the average NHLer has 5.
this argument is abit flawed though.
The players that are making the big bucks, the ones that are causing all these issues (the salaries not the players) dont play 5 years only.
So it's not like Malkin, Stamkos, Sid etc etc will get 8mil plus for 5 years only.

The ones that have the shorter careers are the ones that are making league minimum which i'm sure the owners dont have issues with.

Kingbobert is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 06:48 PM
  #315
Bubbles
Tank for Tyler2016
 
Bubbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: BC Teams:Nucks,Juve
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,368
vCash: 200
Tomas Kaberle signs with HC Kladno. Link

Bubbles is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 07:57 PM
  #316
SouthernHab
Registered User
 
SouthernHab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,888
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubbles View Post
Tomas Kaberle signs with HC Kladno. Link
Damn. I hope its permanent and not just a temporary signing.

SouthernHab is online now  
Old
09-21-2012, 10:01 PM
  #317
impudent_lowlife
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Country: Japan
Posts: 785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingbobert View Post
this argument is abit flawed though.
The players that are making the big bucks, the ones that are causing all these issues (the salaries not the players) dont play 5 years only.
So it's not like Malkin, Stamkos, Sid etc etc will get 8mil plus for 5 years only.

The ones that have the shorter careers are the ones that are making league minimum which i'm sure the owners dont have issues with.
The Minnesota Wild sign Parise and Suter to identical 13-year, $98 million US deals and then have the audacity to compalin about player salaries? Hypocrites. It is blatantly obvious that there is a rift in the NHL governors between the rich and poor NHL teams. The rich don't want to share revenue and the poor don't want contraction. The answer? Get the money the poor teams need from the players.

impudent_lowlife is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 10:39 PM
  #318
sammy d
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 602
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prairie Habs View Post
Player salaries only go up when the owners agree to pay them more. The owners can''t turn around and lockout the players because of bloated contracts when they are the ones who signed the bloated contracts.

Also have you considered that some of the guys going to Europe just enjoy playing hockey and want to use this opportunity to see a little more of the world/play at home? Or are they purposefully doing this because they hate all fourth liners in the European leagues?

Also I don't see how your last statement makes any sense. The players are the employees, so what? Does being an employee mean you just bend over and take it whenever your employer wants to lower your salary or take away your rights (later UFA, no player-elected arbitration, stupid long ELCs)?
Players salaries went up because the league made more revenues from year to year.

They are going to Europe to make money and shaft some guy making 100k per year out of a job, they all make enough money that if they wanted to tour Europe in the offseason they could.

Yes, if your a employee anywhere.. bend over.. if you don't like it you have a choice to find employment somewhere else.

Also take into consideration that all players contracts are gauranteed, if they have a crappy year do they have to give money back..no.

If the team has a crappy year and attendance drops who loses, the owners because some players are having a crappy year.

sammy d is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 11:16 PM
  #319
sheed36
Registered User
 
sheed36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,954
vCash: 500
I was reading this article http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...rticle4558319/ earlier tonight and was a little surprised to see guys like Connor Carrick and Jason Zucker post that stuff publicly on twitter..

Eventually the lockout will end and the guys calling out the NHL need to remember the people they're calling out is the same people that will be paying them again eventually.. Airing you're not so nice comments for the people that will be paying you isn't such a smart move IMO. Calling out Bettman is the same as calling out the owners since he represents all of them in this mess.

sheed36 is online now  
Old
09-22-2012, 01:34 AM
  #320
LyricalLyricist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,140
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheed36 View Post
I was reading this article http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...rticle4558319/ earlier tonight and was a little surprised to see guys like Connor Carrick and Jason Zucker post that stuff publicly on twitter..

Eventually the lockout will end and the guys calling out the NHL need to remember the people they're calling out is the same people that will be paying them again eventually.. Airing you're not so nice comments for the people that will be paying you isn't such a smart move IMO. Calling out Bettman is the same as calling out the owners since he represents all of them in this mess.
Players are stupid. Bettman makes more than them for a reason. Some of these guys are smart, some have **** for brains. Hate to say it but not every hockey player is a genius here. Some probably struggled in high school and they talk financials.

I've actually around when a company was doing a new CBA for their employees. I didn't really care but everyone voted strike, or the majority anyway.

What did the workers want? Trust me, it wasn't for the 'greater good'. They got an extra 1$ an hour but in return all new employees would be shafted later on and would start off at a lower wage and would not be eligible for the 1$ boost. Essentially, people only care about themselves. Ovechkin cares about himself, so does crosby and everyone else. They throw out ******** but it's just the truth. Some of these probably bought a multi million dollar beach house and don't feel like sacrificing their expensive gourmet deals to not go in debt. It's like that, it's life.

Obviously, rollbacks suck, it always does, but they were too high to begin with. I think they should go by % based system honestly. Basically, if a player gets 5 mil of 70 mil, that is about 7.14% of the total cap right? Now, if there's a rollback and cap is say 50 million he'll get about 3.5 mil. Sucks right? This is the part that fixes it. If the cap goes back up to say 70 million then the player will regain 5 million because he gets a % of the cap. Also, if cap becomes 100 mil, he now gets 7%. Essentially, it's in everyone's interest to grow the game and you won't be tied down if you get a rollback. If league makes money you'll increase your paycheck.

LyricalLyricist is offline  
Old
09-22-2012, 08:38 AM
  #321
BLONG7
Registered User
 
BLONG7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 12,324
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Average Joe doesn't matter. Professional athletes are a skilled elite with talent and dedication at the extreme end of the bell curve, they are not average. The proper comparison are elite musicians, movie stars, etc.

ETA: A max pacioretty story. When he was ~6 years old, his mother would wake up and wake him up at 5am on weekends to take him to hockey practice, because he loved the game that much. Most of you live your lives without ever having that kind of dedication, hence, you are average.
Again, everything you said, is a result of their choices...so an avg career of 5 yrs is their doing, unlike everyone else...

I have dedication to my job and my family, and you would have no idea to the degree of that dedication...all I am saying is they make their choices...hence they live with the shorter careers...no big deal...

BLONG7 is offline  
Old
09-22-2012, 10:20 AM
  #322
loudi94
Master of my Domain
 
loudi94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lethbridge, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,368
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheed36 View Post
I was reading this article http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...rticle4558319/ earlier tonight and was a little surprised to see guys like Connor Carrick and Jason Zucker post that stuff publicly on twitter..

Eventually the lockout will end and the guys calling out the NHL need to remember the people they're calling out is the same people that will be paying them again eventually.. Airing you're not so nice comments for the people that will be paying you isn't such a smart move IMO. Calling out Bettman is the same as calling out the owners since he represents all of them in this mess.
There should be people assigned to speak on the situation. Everyone else should zip their lips. You have representation for a reason. A simple "no comment" or "you'll have to talk to ________" would be appropriate. Anything else and you could end up messing around with bargaining.

My association is currently in bargaining. I'd get in deep poo poo if I made a comment about it right now. Not sure why they haven't been directed to shut up.

loudi94 is offline  
Old
09-22-2012, 11:12 AM
  #323
LyricalLyricist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,140
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by loudi94 View Post
There should be people assigned to speak on the situation. Everyone else should zip their lips. You have representation for a reason. A simple "no comment" or "you'll have to talk to ________" would be appropriate. Anything else and you could end up messing around with bargaining.

My association is currently in bargaining. I'd get in deep poo poo if I made a comment about it right now. Not sure why they haven't been directed to shut up.
Not sure either.

All the owners either don't talk about it or are pretty neutral on it.

When it comes to the players we hear plenty of shots on Bettman and the owners.

NHL players proving to be the less educated and professional of the two sides.

They blame bettman constantly and some even mentioned his salary like it makes a difference. If the owners asked for 45% it's his job to get it basically. He's just a representative. Granted, the owners won't ask for that, but Bettman actually has no ownership of a franchise and is merely doing his job. If it's 40% or 60% he still gets paid. The only thing that might change his salary is him representing the owners, getting the job done and improving the game. If he fails to do that, he wouldn't get raises.

LyricalLyricist is offline  
Old
09-22-2012, 11:23 AM
  #324
Mike8
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,110
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist View Post
Not sure either.

All the owners either don't talk about it or are pretty neutral on it.

When it comes to the players we hear plenty of shots on Bettman and the owners.

NHL players proving to be the less educated and professional of the two sides.

They blame bettman constantly and some even mentioned his salary like it makes a difference. If the owners asked for 45% it's his job to get it basically. He's just a representative. Granted, the owners won't ask for that, but Bettman actually has no ownership of a franchise and is merely doing his job. If it's 40% or 60% he still gets paid. The only thing that might change his salary is him representing the owners, getting the job done and improving the game. If he fails to do that, he wouldn't get raises.
Logically, a lockout is against Bettman's personal interests, as it makes his job of growing/marketing the game more difficult.

Mike8 is offline  
Old
09-22-2012, 11:49 AM
  #325
Roulin
Registered User
 
Roulin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,235
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist View Post
Not sure either.

All the owners either don't talk about it or are pretty neutral on it.

When it comes to the players we hear plenty of shots on Bettman and the owners.

NHL players proving to be the less educated and professional of the two sides.

They blame bettman constantly and some even mentioned his salary like it makes a difference. If the owners asked for 45% it's his job to get it basically. He's just a representative. Granted, the owners won't ask for that, but Bettman actually has no ownership of a franchise and is merely doing his job. If it's 40% or 60% he still gets paid. The only thing that might change his salary is him representing the owners, getting the job done and improving the game. If he fails to do that, he wouldn't get raises.
http://islandsportsnews.net/componen...ings-senior-vp

Roulin 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 06:29 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.