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 2.0

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-06-2012, 04:54 PM
  #251
habakkuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 50
vCash: 500
Lost my respect for the players.

In recent days a couple of things have taken away what sympathy I might have had for the players.
I listened to an discussion with Pierre Dagenais, who discussed the last players strike. Being a marginal NHL player who could see his dream of playing in the NHL fading during the work stoppage he voiced his concerns during a players meeting. During this meeting he said he was told to shut up by Brian Rafalski because players of his stature didn't matter.
During the current work stoppage it seems the priority for the big guns is to see that they get their money according to their existing contracts. What's troubling is this is their main concern, and they have no concern for retired players or the players who will enter the league in the future. In order to maximize the salary of the current "stars" they will agree to 5 year entry contracts for new players and to a 50/50split for future players to take effect after existing contracts have been completed.
Most unions are in place to protect all the membership and not an elite few, but its the opposite for the NHLPA.

habakkuk is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 05:53 PM
  #252
BLONG7
Registered User
 
BLONG7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 12,325
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habakkuk View Post
In recent days a couple of things have taken away what sympathy I might have had for the players.
I listened to an discussion with Pierre Dagenais, who discussed the last players strike. Being a marginal NHL player who could see his dream of playing in the NHL fading during the work stoppage he voiced his concerns during a players meeting. During this meeting he said he was told to shut up by Brian Rafalski because players of his stature didn't matter.
During the current work stoppage it seems the priority for the big guns is to see that they get their money according to their existing contracts. What's troubling is this is their main concern, and they have no concern for retired players or the players who will enter the league in the future. In order to maximize the salary of the current "stars" they will agree to 5 year entry contracts for new players and to a 50/50split for future players to take effect after existing contracts have been completed.
Most unions are in place to protect all the membership and not an elite few, but its the opposite for the NHLPA.
The PA is pretty disfunctional, but if this really happened, someone should have put Rafalski in his place, but in this type of situation, this kind of stuff probably happens all the time, not just in the NHL but in the other pro sports also...

Today's guys are out for today's guys...no matter what they say...they talk about doing what they can for the future guys, but balk at every deal that wont protect their salaries from last year? Talking out of both sides of their mouth's...

BLONG7 is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 07:35 PM
  #253
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habakkuk View Post
In recent days a couple of things have taken away what sympathy I might have had for the players.
I listened to an discussion with Pierre Dagenais, who discussed the last players strike. Being a marginal NHL player who could see his dream of playing in the NHL fading during the work stoppage he voiced his concerns during a players meeting. During this meeting he said he was told to shut up by Brian Rafalski because players of his stature didn't matter.
During the current work stoppage it seems the priority for the big guns is to see that they get their money according to their existing contracts. What's troubling is this is their main concern, and they have no concern for retired players or the players who will enter the league in the future. In order to maximize the salary of the current "stars" they will agree to 5 year entry contracts for new players and to a 50/50split for future players to take effect after existing contracts have been completed.
Most unions are in place to protect all the membership and not an elite few, but its the opposite for the NHLPA.
Conversely, should a player like Dagenais get what he wants, i.e. no work stoppage with the owners getting everything they ask for, player salaries would end up converging to extremely low levels, where they were in the 1970s, which would screw over future players.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 07:44 PM
  #254
katatoniak
Registered User
 
katatoniak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Jonquiere, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,225
vCash: 500


That's me since this 3pm

Getting tired now ...

katatoniak is online now  
Old
11-06-2012, 10:36 PM
  #255
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
I'd say predictable over unacceptable. The players are complete morons for thinking they wouldn't have to deal with a salary rollback. I mean come on, everybody knew that was coming. Now they're saying it's unbelievable and unacceptable that the crazy deals they were signed to needs adjusting?
In negotiations, you tend to have give and take. The owners are demanding a 12.3% reduced player share of total income, from 57% to 50%. It makes sense that the players get to make their own demand: that the reduction be phased in so as to honour current contracts.

Note that this is still a net win for the owners. The bottom line is that they get a bigger slice of the pie, the only question is whether it's immediate or whether it's phase in over a few years.

I don't think it's foolish of the players to believe that they could extract minor concessions. If you were a player, you would not have entered this lockout expecting to lose on every single front with zero exceptions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Really think Kovalchuk can't live with making 7M over 11?
Really think Geoff Molson can't live with making 40M over 55?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
The reason why he doesn't want the rollback is because he's signed until 2025, which is completely ridiculous to begin with. 14 year contract that has him make as high as 11.8M and as low as 1M??
The roll backs will also negatively impact players like Pacioretty.

The Kovalchuk-type contracts have absolutely nothing to do with the lockout. The players are making 57% either way. There would still be a lockout even if every player in the league was getting paid his cap hit. The Kovalchuk contracts doesn't take money away from owners, it takes money away from other players, like all other contracts, because the total salary pool is fixed at 57%.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
But everybody knew the league was going to address that issue.
Evidence? I know this was in the first offer, but what about latter offers?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
As I said, at the end of the day, those players will still be millionaires living out their dreams. Doesn't mean they should abide to everything the owners/nhl say, but salary rollback was easily predictable, and having that hardheaded no answer is just not going to help anything.
At the end of the day, the owners will still be billionaires living out their dreams.

Salary rollbacks were not trivially predictable. Ask the players who gave the owners everything they wanted last lockout if they expected another lockout a meager 7 years later. Even Gary Bettman said that the lockout fixed everything, because the owners now had cost certainty.

That said, due to the lack of revenue sharing, and if you knew about the rise in Canadian dollar, salary rollbacks were predictable in my view, but you would have needed advanced economic analysis to realize that all of the owner's gains (~270% since last lockout compared to ~80% for the players) would evaporate; and certainly the rise of the Canadian dollar from US $0.85 to US$ 1.00 was not predicted.


Last edited by DAChampion: 11-06-2012 at 10:56 PM.
DAChampion is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 10:58 PM
  #256
Clumsyhab
Registered User
 
Clumsyhab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Montreal
Posts: 6,747
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habakkuk View Post
In recent days a couple of things have taken away what sympathy I might have had for the players.
I listened to an discussion with Pierre Dagenais, who discussed the last players strike. Being a marginal NHL player who could see his dream of playing in the NHL fading during the work stoppage he voiced his concerns during a players meeting. During this meeting he said he was told to shut up by Brian Rafalski because players of his stature didn't matter.
During the current work stoppage it seems the priority for the big guns is to see that they get their money according to their existing contracts. What's troubling is this is their main concern, and they have no concern for retired players or the players who will enter the league in the future. In order to maximize the salary of the current "stars" they will agree to 5 year entry contracts for new players and to a 50/50split for future players to take effect after existing contracts have been completed.
Most unions are in place to protect all the membership and not an elite few, but its the opposite for the NHLPA.
Dagenais is a ******. I've only seen him whine in his interviews since he's left the NHL because he was not good enough. Don't believe everything he says.

Clumsyhab is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 10:59 PM
  #257
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 23,275
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
In negotiations, you tend to have give and take. The owners are demanding a 12.3% reduced player share of total income, from 57% to 50%. It makes sense that the players get to make their own demand: that the reduction be phased in so as to honour current contracts.

Note that this is still a net win for the owners. The bottom line is that they get a bigger slice of the pie, the only question is whether it's immediate or whether it's phase in over a few years.

I don't think it's foolish of the players to believe that they could extract minor concessions. If you were a player, you would not have entered this lockout expecting to lose on every single front with zero exceptions.
Right, and there's nothing unusual for the employer to get a bigger piece of the pie.
No problem for players to expect minor concessions, but it doesn't seem like that's what they're doing with their hard no stance on rollbacks. Unless I missed an offer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Really think Geoff Molson can't live with making 40M over 55?
No, I'm sure he'll be fine, even though he just got himself into a nice debt with a small purchase. That being said, I'm pretty sure Molson doesn't care about this lockout. However, it's not about the owners of the best franchises in the league.
Ask me this question for the more struggling teams, and yea, I'll tell you they do mind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
The roll backs will also negatively impact players like Pacioretty.

The Kovalchuk-type contracts have absolutely nothing to do with the lockout. The players are making 57% either way. There would still be a lockout even if every player in the league was getting paid his cap hit.
But MaxPac will still hit his jackpot down the road. Kovalchuk signed his last contract.
And yes, there's nothing absurd about the 50-50 split owners want. Kind of normal for the employer to make more than the total of his employees.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Evidence?
Considering the fact some teams got investigated on some long term contracts, like Jersey, and the numerous discussions in the media about them, you didn't have to be a genius to figure out this was coming.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
At the end of the day, the owners will still be billionaires living out their dreams.

Salary rollbacks were not trivially predictable. Ask the players who gave the owners everything they wanted last lockout if they expected another lockout a meager 7 years later. Even Gary Bettman said that the lockout fixed everything, because the owners now had cost certainty.

That said, due to the lack of revenue sharing, and the rise in Canadian dollar, salary rollbacks were predictable in my view, but you would have needed advanced economic analysis to realize that all of the owner's gains (~270% since last lockout compared to ~80% for the players) would evaporate.
I didn't expect a lockout to happen even when they were still discussing things in early September. I thought they would settle their differences in time. The demands from the league didn't seem unacceptable.
I think the rollback became an issue as the years progressed and the contracts offered became simply ridiculous.

Kriss E is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 11:14 PM
  #258
loudi94
Master of my Domain
 
loudi94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lethbridge, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,368
vCash: 50
This lockout isn't about teams like the Leafs and Habs that make money. It's teams that have trouble meeting the cap floor. There's probably 10 teams losing money. The PA wouldn't want to contract them as it would cost jobs. There has to be a solution and it will involve players giving some back. The league should probably move to team revenue sharing in order to bring stability.

loudi94 is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 11:16 PM
  #259
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Right, and there's nothing unusual for the employer to get a bigger piece of the pie.
No problem for players to expect minor concessions, but it doesn't seem like that's what they're doing with their hard no stance on rollbacks. Unless I missed an offer.
What does "minor" mean? even 1% of league revenue is worth 30 million dollars :-)

The players have accepted to take on a reduced share, but they're asking for it to be phased-in (mathematically equivalent to no rollbacks assuming moderate growth).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
No, I'm sure he'll be fine, even though he just got himself into a nice debt with a small purchase. That being said, I'm pretty sure Molson doesn't care about this lockout. However, it's not about the owners of the best franchises in the league.
Ask me this question for the more struggling teams, and yea, I'll tell you they do mind.
My point is that Kovalchuk is as un-representative as Molson.

For players like Colby Armstrong, Hal Gill, and Travis Moen; a 12.3% rollback is a significant deal. Considering the risks they take, their sacrifices, and their short careers, they don't make huge money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
But MaxPac will still hit his jackpot down the road.
If that was his attitude he would have taken a 3 or 4 year contract.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
And yes, there's nothing absurd about the 50-50 split owners want. Kind of normal for the employer to make more than the total of his employees.
That's actually not correct for industries where the talent difference between employees is huge. A lawyer previously posted in this thread that at his firm compensation runs at ~75% of firm revenue. On Wall Street, compensation is well documented to be above 50% of banking revenue. You can also look up various articles about the troubles companies like facebook and google have to attract "talent".

When employees are not just talented, but differentially talented, and measurably so, then employee compensation can shoot far north of 50%.

This is also the case with the NHL. Now that owners have limited freedom to spend on payroll, teams are spending more on scouting and drafting. I bet you that the salaries of people like Timmins and Dudley are going up, and up, and up.

I predict that the salary increases for scouts, coaches, sports psychologists, trainers, etc will eventually consume 100% of the gains owners make from lower player salaries. My prediction is a direct consequence of classical economic theory, see the tendency of the rate of economic profit to decline.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Considering the fact some teams got investigated on some long term contracts, like Jersey, and the numerous discussions in the media about them, you didn't have to be a genius to figure out this was coming.
If Jersey was spending less money on Kovalchuk they'd be spending the remainder on somebody else.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
I didn't expect a lockout to happen even when they were still discussing things in early September. I thought they would settle their differences in time. The demands from the league didn't seem unacceptable.
I think the rollback became an issue as the years progressed and the contracts offered became simply ridiculous.
Did you really expect the players to fold on every single issue, and to accept 12.3% rollbacks with zero concessions from the league?

Honestly I was shocked by the league's first offer. 43% for the players, WTF? And they didn't offer anything in return. I would have expected something like raising league minimum to $750,000, and raising AHL salaries.


Last edited by DAChampion: 11-06-2012 at 11:36 PM.
DAChampion is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 11:18 PM
  #260
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by loudi94 View Post
This lockout isn't about teams like the Leafs and Habs that make money. It's teams that have trouble meeting the cap floor. There's probably 10 teams losing money. The PA wouldn't want to contract them as it would cost jobs. There has to be a solution and it will involve players giving some back. The league should probably move to team revenue sharing in order to bring stability.
Contraction is a non-starter.

With a fixed cap, and in the absence of revenue sharing, you'll always have between one third and one half of the teams losing money, regardless of whether there are 10, 30, or 50 teams.

For example, if you go from 30 teams to 26 teams, the cap would rise because you got rid of the weakest markets, and then teams 23 though to 26 would be in trouble.


Last edited by DAChampion: 11-06-2012 at 11:35 PM.
DAChampion is offline  
Old
11-06-2012, 11:48 PM
  #261
Ozymandias
#firetherrien
 
Ozymandias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hockey Mecca
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,441
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
I don't see it. The team will be stronger and last year had a fluke element to it, teams with -14 are not usually 15th in the conference. heck Florida made the playoffs at -24. Columbus was last in the West at -60 and the Islanders 14th in the East at -52.

I don't think we are a lock to make the playoffs, but we have a better chance than Florida and Ottawa who both had fluke years the other way.
Dude, don't ever question crystal ball wisdom!



Ozymandias is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 01:37 AM
  #262
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
Dude, don't ever question crystal ball wisdom!


Some outcomes are more likely than others.

It's not crystal ball wisdom, it's analysis. This isn't people saying "I have a gut feeling Habs are winning tonight because Carbonneau is wearing his lucky tie", there's a lot of analysis to back up the claim the Habs are a lottery candidate this year, assuming there is a "this year".

DAChampion is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 02:55 AM
  #263
FlyingKostitsyn
Registered User
 
FlyingKostitsyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec
Country: Australia
Posts: 8,018
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Some outcomes are more likely than others.

It's not crystal ball wisdom, it's analysis. This isn't people saying "I have a gut feeling Habs are winning tonight because Carbonneau is wearing his lucky tie", there's a lot of analysis to back up the claim the Habs are a lottery candidate this year, assuming there is a "this year".
Its a possible outcome, and I'm sure most will agree its possible to Habs are again a lottery team. The problem is you seem to push it as if it were a near certainty, its not.

Habs being a lottery team imho isn't ''more likely''. ''Most likely'' in my opinion is Habs will be a middle of the pack team, which can mean anything from 10th place to 6th if there is the same kind of parity as previous years. A shorter season also makes it all more of an unpredictable crapshot, I'm sure you will agree.

FlyingKostitsyn is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 03:40 AM
  #264
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingKostitsyn View Post
Its a possible outcome, and I'm sure most will agree its possible to Habs are again a lottery team. The problem is you seem to push it as if it were a near certainty, its not.

Habs being a lottery team imho isn't ''more likely''. ''Most likely'' in my opinion is Habs will be a middle of the pack team, which can mean anything from 10th place to 6th if there is the same kind of parity as previous years. A shorter season also makes it all more of an unpredictable crapshot, I'm sure you will agree.
A shorter season increases fluctuations, definitely. There is also the fact the schedule might not be cut down fairly, we could end up with an easier or harder schedule. We shall see.

My prediction was 11th to 15th place at high confidence, so I did not and do not think the lottery is a certainty.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 08:38 AM
  #265
Drydenwasthebest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,503
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Some outcomes are more likely than others.

It's not crystal ball wisdom, it's analysis. This isn't people saying "I have a gut feeling Habs are winning tonight because Carbonneau is wearing his lucky tie", there's a lot of analysis to back up the claim the Habs are a lottery candidate this year, assuming there is a "this year".
Incorrect. There is not a "lot of analysis" there are gut feelings based on a single poor year. Last year was a complete cluster****, it was FUBAR in every sense of the term due to multiple injuries, coaching stupidity, management idiocy, etc...

To do a proper analysis, one should look beyond a single season. For example: Montreal made the playoffs in 4 of the last 5 seasons. We made the Conference quarterfinals twice, Conference semi-finals once, and the Conference finals once. That shows this is a competitive team that is capable of making, and even succeeding to some degree, in the playoffs. For a further analysis, we can look at one of our greatest areas of weakness last year: a lack of size and toughness. Prust and Armstrong are two players brought in to help address those weaknesses. Bouillon was alsoi brought in to strengthen the defensive strength and toughness. We also needed better support for Plekanec. Ideally Bourque and Gionta will help considerably in that regard. We are not even considering the rookies who could very well have an impact this season.

Other problems have also been addressed: we have a new GM who seems to have an eye for talent and is putting his stamp on this team. We have an entire new coaching staff and Head Coach who will, at the very least, bring a different atmosphere to a locker room that was lost by the coaching staff last season.

Now, there are no guarantees we will make the playoffs. However, if we do an actual analysis of our team that looks at a lot more than our record from last year, we can see the possibilities for success being higher than a small and simplified analysis of our one year record would indicate.

Drydenwasthebest is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 08:56 AM
  #266
FlyingKostitsyn
Registered User
 
FlyingKostitsyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec
Country: Australia
Posts: 8,018
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
Incorrect. There is not a "lot of analysis" there are gut feelings based on a single poor year. Last year was a complete cluster****, it was FUBAR in every sense of the term due to multiple injuries, coaching stupidity, management idiocy, etc...

To do a proper analysis, one should look beyond a single season. For example: Montreal made the playoffs in 4 of the last 5 seasons. We made the Conference quarterfinals twice, Conference semi-finals once, and the Conference finals once. That shows this is a competitive team that is capable of making, and even succeeding to some degree, in the playoffs. For a further analysis, we can look at one of our greatest areas of weakness last year: a lack of size and toughness. Prust and Armstrong are two players brought in to help address those weaknesses. Bouillon was alsoi brought in to strengthen the defensive strength and toughness. We also needed better support for Plekanec. Ideally Bourque and Gionta will help considerably in that regard. We are not even considering the rookies who could very well have an impact this season.

Other problems have also been addressed: we have a new GM who seems to have an eye for talent and is putting his stamp on this team. We have an entire new coaching staff and Head Coach who will, at the very least, bring a different atmosphere to a locker room that was lost by the coaching staff last season.

Now, there are no guarantees we will make the playoffs. However, if we do an actual analysis of our team that looks at a lot more than our record from last year, we can see the possibilities for success being higher than a small and simplified analysis of our one year record would indicate.
Couldn't have said it better.

Virtually nobody last year projected the Habs to have such a terrible season, it shows how much they underperformed in regards to expectations. A lot of unpredictable external factors contributed to their demise and not just injuries (which are expected on any teams). Since the team is, at least on paper, at least as good as last year's (and imho better, with the addition of solid bottom 6 players which we lacked, and more experience on defense) we should expect better results since hopefully we won't get a management and coaching gong show going on. In fact, we might even get a ''coaching honeymoon'' as players will try and follow the new system. This ''honeymoon'' did not appear with Cunneyworth, who didn't change much from Martin and was already out of the playoffs anyways.

I'd actually love a top pick again DAChampion, I just don't think we're very likely to have one. In fact the shorter the season&longer the lockout, the less I care about the playoffs or watching a team that can win games.


Last edited by FlyingKostitsyn: 11-07-2012 at 09:02 AM.
FlyingKostitsyn is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 08:59 AM
  #267
ECWHSWI
5M? insulting!!!
 
ECWHSWI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 15,213
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
Incorrect. There is not a "lot of analysis" there are gut feelings based on a single poor year. Last year was a complete cluster****, it was FUBAR in every sense of the term due to multiple injuries, coaching stupidity, management idiocy, etc...

To do a proper analysis, one should look beyond a single season. For example: Montreal made the playoffs in 4 of the last 5 seasons. We made the Conference quarterfinals twice, Conference semi-finals once, and the Conference finals once. That shows this is a competitive team that is capable of making, and even succeeding to some degree, in the playoffs. For a further analysis, we can look at one of our greatest areas of weakness last year: a lack of size and toughness. Prust and Armstrong are two players brought in to help address those weaknesses. Bouillon was alsoi brought in to strengthen the defensive strength and toughness. We also needed better support for Plekanec. Ideally Bourque and Gionta will help considerably in that regard. We are not even considering the rookies who could very well have an impact this season.

Other problems have also been addressed: we have a new GM who seems to have an eye for talent and is putting his stamp on this team. We have an entire new coaching staff and Head Coach who will, at the very least, bring a different atmosphere to a locker room that was lost by the coaching staff last season.

Now, there are no guarantees we will make the playoffs. However, if we do an actual analysis of our team that looks at a lot more than our record from last year, we can see the possibilities for success being higher than a small and simplified analysis of our one year record would indicate.
roster changed a lot over the last few years...

ECWHSWI is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 09:23 AM
  #268
bsl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,089
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post


That's actually not correct for industries where the talent difference between employees is huge. A lawyer previously posted in this thread that at his firm compensation runs at ~75% of firm revenue. On Wall Street, compensation is well documented to be above 50% of banking revenue. You can also look up various articles about the troubles companies like facebook and google have to attract "talent".

When employees are not just talented, but differentially talented, and measurably so, then employee compensation can shoot far north of 50%.

This is also the case with the NHL. Now that owners have limited freedom to spend on payroll, teams are spending more on scouting and drafting. I bet you that the salaries of people like Timmins and Dudley are going up, and up, and up.

I predict that the salary increases for scouts, coaches, sports psychologists, trainers, etc will eventually consume 100% of the gains owners make from lower player salaries. My prediction is a direct consequence of classical economic theory, see the tendency of the rate of economic profit to decline.
Correct on 50 50 not applicable to industries that employ talent not labour. I've wasted my breath here trying to explain that difference.

Correct on profits dropping because of additional non player spending required to remain competitive.

I'm not sure, but I would guess that there is a direct relation between profitability, and the level of competition within any given industry. Economics 101 probably, but I'm too lazy to look it up.

To counter this disadvantage of high competition, I think you might need to redefine what the industry standards are by providing products or services that are far superior to, or desirably different from, the standards in that industry.

Apple computers is a good example perhaps. Pretty obvious.

Which suggests that the IT and computer industry is still highly elastic in the level of service and product that can be provided.

I'd guess that the NHL is not elastic at all in the level of service/product provided by competing teams, in terms of team and player performance, and therefore competition cannot be overcome through elasticity of product quality or difference, and profits will therefore always be limited.

IE: Don't buy an NHL team and expect to profit. Could be good thesis in there. Too tired to bother.

bsl is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 09:52 AM
  #269
Drydenwasthebest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,503
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI View Post
roster changed a lot over the last few years...
100% true. However, the changes were not that significant from 2 seasons ago when we met the Bruins and fought them to a game 7 even with significant injuries that would have made the difference. Also, some of the changes from last season to this one are the necessary improvements in toughness and character that we desperately needed last year. As well, the entire change in coaching staff is significant, as is the managerial change.

The roster from the centennial year to now is about 85% different, but from last year and the season before, it is actually very similar. Now, we do need to stay healthy, which has been difficult, but that is true of any team.

Drydenwasthebest is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 06:25 PM
  #270
Marc the Habs Fan
Moderator
Ours!
 
Marc the Habs Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Longueuil
Country: Canada
Posts: 50,506
vCash: 597
Larry Brooks ‏@NYP_Brooksie
Also told that amnesty buyouts are on table.

Please please please please.

Marc the Habs Fan is online now  
Old
11-07-2012, 06:35 PM
  #271
HankyZetts
Twi2ted
 
HankyZetts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,711
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc the Habs Fan View Post
Larry Brooks ‏@NYP_Brooksie
Also told that amnesty buyouts are on table.

Please please please please.
Imagine!! Throw the moon at perry!

HankyZetts is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 07:21 PM
  #272
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc the Habs Fan View Post
Larry Brooks ‏@NYP_Brooksie
Also told that amnesty buyouts are on table.

Please please please please.
The habs will benefit from an amnesty buyout, but so will other teams, so it might be a wash for us.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 07:27 PM
  #273
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
Incorrect. There is not a "lot of analysis" there are gut feelings based on a single poor year. Last year was a complete cluster****, it was FUBAR in every sense of the term due to multiple injuries, coaching stupidity, management idiocy, etc...
You say that you want to debate more respectfully, and I consider giving you the benefit of the doubt, and then you write myopic posts like this one.

You, clearly, have not read any detailed analysis as to why the team would finish poorly this year if there was a this year, OK, fine, none of us have read all of the millions of posts on HFboards --- However --- don't you think it might make more sense to ask for a link to this analysis, given that another poster told you it is out there, then to simply assume that poster is a liar and say that no such analysis has been written?

DAChampion is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 07:38 PM
  #274
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsl View Post
Correct on 50 50 not applicable to industries that employ talent not labour. I've wasted my breath here trying to explain that difference.
You are a world traveler on business for fifteen years in Hong Kong. A lot of what you know would not be explainable to the rest of us :-)

Quote:
Originally Posted by bsl View Post
Correct on profits dropping because of additional non player spending required to remain competitive.
A lot of people on this board know that player payroll is up ~70% since the last lockout, but few people realize that the pot for the owners, what is left after player payroll, is up ~170%. They had 28% before, now they have 43%, and total revenue is up 80%, so (1.8*0.43/0.28 = 2.76, hence 176% growth).

However, the owners openly admit that profits have not grown that much because they now spend more on scouting, drafting, etc. It's kind of cool to see a classical economic law in action. And it's kind of uncool that many don't realize that it is happening to a T.

I would not be surprised if Trevor Timmins is making 30 or 40 million a year by 2020. That's the kind of value he brings to the team. Further, the stronger and more stringent a CBA, the more valuable a man like Trevor Timmins becomes.

Once that happens the owners will demand that the player share drop from 50/50 to 60/40, and we'll have another lockout.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bsl View Post
To counter this disadvantage of high competition, I think you might need to redefine what the industry standards are by providing products or services that are far superior to, or desirably different from, the standards in that industry.
Or you could just remove competition. Bain capital apparently offered to buy the NHL in 2005, part of their business plan was to have a single ownership group (Bain) replace 30 ownership groups, i.e. less competition.

You don't need to pay a man like Trevor Timmins a lot of money if you agree that there is to be a single scouting service for the entire NHL, as Bain Capital might have implemented.

That said, competition among owners is partial. They compete in costs: only one team can have Sidney Crosby as a player, which drives up players. They partially complete in revenue: only some teams get playoff revenue, apparently worth 2 million a game to Molson. However, they don't totally compete in revenue: the natural profit margin in Toronto is simply higher. They make 90 million a year of profit with no playoff revenue and a huge management staff. This allows some teams to be profitable.

In the case of Apple they were able to make huge profits last year due to inferior competition. They made a lot of new products, and it took some time for the rest of the market to match their innovations. Now, they're not as hot anymore.


Last edited by DAChampion: 11-07-2012 at 07:45 PM.
DAChampion is offline  
Old
11-07-2012, 07:48 PM
  #275
overlords
Hfboards
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Trolling Brian Wilde
Posts: 26,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
The habs will benefit from an amnesty buyout, but so will other teams, so it might be a wash for us.
Don't think there's any other team that can benefit from an amnesty buyout as much as the habs.

overlords 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 10:14 AM.

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.