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
11-13-2012, 09:35 PM
  #526
ECWHSWI
5M? insulting!!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 15,523
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Well, that's the thing. You only look at math. Sadly math is not the determining of whether or not a player gets overpaid on a given year or not.
Performance is what will determine if a player is overpaid or not, and the cap. So, you can have Kovalchuk taking in 20% of the cap alone, not providing 20% of the production, with the rest of the team playing like crap and finishing dead last. But that won't prevent Jeff Finger from getting 4M or Prust getting 2.5M, or whoever else. It's to the point where third and fourth liners also get overpaid. The only thing you have to balance it out are the youngsters.
And again, this is based on your opinion that a guy like MaxPac was underpaid last year. An idea I strongly disagree with.


Have you ever negotiated anything in life? Or sold something to someone else?
You put your price real high, the other party will come in with something real low, and you settle somewhere in the middle. That's what is happening. Nothing new or crazy.
As for the future, again, nothing GUARANTEES a lockout.
when you determine wether a player is over/under paid by looking at his production (points wise), you're also looking at this from a mathematical standpoint.


while there's no guarantee, last 20 years showed everyone the possibility is STRONG.

ECWHSWI is online now  
Old
11-13-2012, 09:52 PM
  #527
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 24,022
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Let's try again:

If the New Jersey Devils overpay for Kovalchuk, they have less cap space to spend on other players.

League-wise, player salaries are exactly 57% of revenue. If some players are overpaid, other players have to be underpaid.
Yes, others are underpaid, but not the exact same number, but I don't consider youngsters on first or second contracts to fall in the underpaid category, you do.
It's a recurring theme during open market that players getting overpaid have become the norm of the NHL, that you get a lot less players that are a bargain.
The only good deals you get are from youngsters, and as I said, you and I disagree on whether or not they fall in the underpaid column.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
The NHL has a total payroll of ~2 billion dollars split over 700 players. I expect that there are hundreds of players who are overpaid and hundreds who are underpaid.

You don't even know that Prust will be overpaid by the way, he could exceed your expectations. He is not currently overpaid as he has not yet done anything, and he has not yet been paid anything :-)
Well, if we follow that train of thought, let's pay him 5M and say we don't know if it'll be an overpayment.
Don't play dumb just to play dumb. Prust is not worth 2.5M at the moment of his signing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Yes, I don't try and screw people over. I value good working relationships. I try to be always upfront and direct about my expectations. Sometimes I don't succeed, and I consider that a personal failing.

Anyway, you are basically admitting that the NHLPA gets a better deal if they hold out longer. You're saying the first offer is always bad; so yeah, the NHLPA should hold out for the 20th offer. Even if you weren't around to teach this to the world, we would know, because we've just seen this happen :-)
Sure, that's if you think there will be offers being proposed non-stop. Not the case. People go away once they're fed up. Some try to get more than they should, play hard ball, only to come back and accept a previous offer.
NHLPA can hold out all they want, doesn't mean it's advantageous to them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Some outcomes are more likely than others. The Bettman plan is very likely to lead to another lockout as it doesn't solve any of the problems that contributed to this lockout.
Sure, but still doesn't guarantee it, and there seems to be a focus on revenue sharing/rollbacks. Once they get those two things sorted out, it's still unsure what they'll settle on for the rest after going back and forth, and still not decided how long the new CBA will last.
Bottom line is, nothing is guaranteed.

Kriss E is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 09:57 PM
  #528
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 24,022
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI View Post
when you determine wether a player is over/under paid by looking at his production (points wise), you're also looking at this from a mathematical standpoint.


while there's no guarantee, last 20 years showed everyone the possibility is STRONG.
Sure, it's both. Math falls in place because salary will be considered, but that will be relative to performance. As I said, it's both.

Strong, again, is relative to how the league will operate until the next CBA and where the owners/players will be. Strong possibility, perhaps, but fact remains we don't know.

Kriss E is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 10:09 PM
  #529
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Yes, others are underpaid, but not the exact same number, but I don't consider youngsters on first or second contracts to fall in the underpaid category, you do.
It's the exact same number. Total player compensation is fixed at 57%. If any player is overpaid, somebody else has to be underpaid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
The only good deals you get are from youngsters, and as I said, you and I disagree on whether or not they fall in the underpaid column.
This is a simple math problem.

You are saying that you think it's fair that young players are paid less than veterans for comparable production. OK -- then that means you're saying it's fair that veterans are paid more than young players for comparable production.

ETA: If you want to evaluate veterans and rookies as separate pools, then do that. But that then means that if a veteran is overpaid, some other veteran is underpaid.

There are a lot of players who come through here in recent history and exceeded all expectations. Alex Kovalev, for example, gave us four 260 points over 4 years for the tidy sum of 4.75 million per year. Roman Hamrlik was healthy for a full four years during which he was our no. 2 dman for two years and our no. 1 dman for two years, and we saw the catastrophic collapse of our defense when he left... he was clearly worth many millions of dollars to Molson. Glen Metropolit, Dominic Moore, and Jeff Halpern all outplayed their ~1 million dollar salaries. Travis Moen fought frequently fought for us and provided good secondary scoring for 1.5 million. Tomas Plekanec gave us a 70 point season in 2009-2010 for 2.7 million. This past year, Erik Cole was signed to be a 20-25 goal player, and played as a 35 goal player.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Well, if we follow that train of thought, let's pay him 5M and say we don't know if it'll be an overpayment.
Don't play dumb just to play dumb. Prust is not worth 2.5M at the moment of his signing.
I'm not playing dumb, there are decent odds that Prust will yield good value.

One of your pet peeves, which I share, is that Plekanec has been used in a very defensive role, reducing his offensive potential. Part of the reason this has been so is because our bottom-6 has been mediocre. With the addition of a player like Prust, who is effective in shutdown duties, who is effective on the penalty kill, any future coach will have a bit more flexibility, and Plekanec might be liberated into a more offensive role.

I think that if Prust, and Moen for that matter, lose negligible time to injury, perform well on the PK and shutdown thus liberating players like Plekanec to focus more on offense, and stand up for our players with good fights on a semi-regular basis, then we will get good value on their contracts.

If this succeeds, then Prust is being underpaid. If it fails, then Prust is being overpaid, and then we will spend less money on other players.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
can hold out all they want, doesn't mean it's advantageous to them.
Have the NHL's offers not been getting continuously better?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Bottom line is, nothing is guaranteed.
I live my life paying attention to the likelihood of outcomes.

I'm not guaranteed to end up with a lottery ticket that doesn't win me 20 million dollars, but I don't buy them, because I probably won't win, even though it's not guaranteed that I won't win.

The point here, is that the Bettman plan doesn't solve any of the problems that led to the current lockout.


Last edited by DAChampion: 11-13-2012 at 10:49 PM.
DAChampion is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 04:43 AM
  #530
ECWHSWI
5M? insulting!!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 15,523
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Sure, it's both. Math falls in place because salary will be considered, but that will be relative to performance. As I said, it's both.

Strong, again, is relative to how the league will operate until the next CBA and where the owners/players will be. Strong possibility, perhaps, but fact remains we don't know.

performance is "numbered", wether it's +/- for defensive players or points for off. players for example...

back to maths I guess.

ECWHSWI is online now  
Old
11-14-2012, 07:01 AM
  #531
Protest the Hero
Registered User
 
Protest the Hero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post


Have the NHL's offers not been getting continuously better?
The offers are only getting better because the majority of the season could still be saved. What happens after that point, you think the owners proposals will still be getting better in 2013?

Protest the Hero is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 07:11 AM
  #532
Craig71
Registered User
 
Craig71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,930
vCash: 500
Bring on the replacement players, lets drop the puck.

Craig71 is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 08:38 AM
  #533
FlyingKostitsyn
Registered User
 
FlyingKostitsyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec
Country: Australia
Posts: 8,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig71 View Post
Bring on the replacement players, lets drop the puck.
The replacement players? You realize caliber would be worse than AHL right? Why would we watch instead of, well, watching AHL or junior?

FlyingKostitsyn is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 08:44 AM
  #534
niftymove
Registered User
 
niftymove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 350
vCash: 500
Quote:
Bring on the replacement players, lets drop the puck
Just imagine the assistance in Phoenix and other money losing teams!

That would cost more to NHL owners than a pure lockout!

niftymove is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 09:40 AM
  #535
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 24,022
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
This is a simple math problem.

You are saying that you think it's fair that young players are paid less than veterans for comparable production. OK -- then that means you're saying it's fair that veterans are paid more than young players for comparable production.

ETA: If you want to evaluate veterans and rookies as separate pools, then do that. But that then means that if a veteran is overpaid, some other veteran is underpaid.

There are a lot of players who come through here in recent history and exceeded all expectations. Alex Kovalev, for example, gave us four 260 points over 4 years for the tidy sum of 4.75 million per year. Roman Hamrlik was healthy for a full four years during which he was our no. 2 dman for two years and our no. 1 dman for two years, and we saw the catastrophic collapse of our defense when he left... he was clearly worth many millions of dollars to Molson. Glen Metropolit, Dominic Moore, and Jeff Halpern all outplayed their ~1 million dollar salaries. Travis Moen fought frequently fought for us and provided good secondary scoring for 1.5 million. Tomas Plekanec gave us a 70 point season in 2009-2010 for 2.7 million. This past year, Erik Cole was signed to be a 20-25 goal player, and played as a 35 goal player.
Yes, it's okay for youngsters to get paid less, because in most cases, they deserve less. They aren't signed to longterm deals, and need time to progress. It's rare to see a youngsters come in and dominate since his rookie days. That's Crosbyesque, and Crosby got his pay day early, only 3years into his career.

As for Kovalev, he wasn't overpaid. He signed his deal with a total cap at 39M.
At the best, he was worth his deal. I've been one of the biggest Hamrlik defenders on these boards, but he also didn't come cheap. 5M for a guy that barely produced offensively is a bit much. He was a very key player for us, and held the defensive fort together, but when you're paid that much as a Dman, you're expected to produce. He didn't.

Erik Cole gets paid enough. A 20 goal season from him would have been a disappointment, so would have a 25-25. Plekanec got his pay day and still hasn't broken that career high, last year he barely cracked the 50pts mark.

Metro-Halpern-Moen have perhaps given more than expected, but not by a whole lot. 500K more maybe, that's it.

It's becoming clearer that your standards are simply lower. Thinking Kovalev and Hamrlik were underpaid, and that Cole was signed to 4.5M for 4years at 33 was an underpayment, proves it to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
I'm not playing dumb, there are decent odds that Prust will yield good value.

One of your pet peeves, which I share, is that Plekanec has been used in a very defensive role, reducing his offensive potential. Part of the reason this has been so is because our bottom-6 has been mediocre. With the addition of a player like Prust, who is effective in shutdown duties, who is effective on the penalty kill, any future coach will have a bit more flexibility, and Plekanec might be liberated into a more offensive role.

I think that if Prust, and Moen for that matter, lose negligible time to injury, perform well on the PK and shutdown thus liberating players like Plekanec to focus more on offense, and stand up for our players with good fights on a semi-regular basis, then we will get good value on their contracts.

If this succeeds, then Prust is being underpaid. If it fails, then Prust is being overpaid, and then we will spend less money on other players.
That's his damn role. Are players underpaid now when they actually play for what they were paid to do? Is that the standard now? That's ridiculous.

These guys are paid to play a shutdown role, stick up for their teammates and bring some energy/character, so that the more skilled players can focus on what they're best at and produce. Now you want to argue that if that shutdown player does it well, he'll be overpaid?? No man, that's not being overpaid. That's living up to your contract.

As I said, it appears you have very low standards.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Have the NHL's offers not been getting continuously better?
Ah, well, with that logic, maybe wait untill 2018. Perhaps the players will have a super duper deal by then..

Doesn't work that way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
I live my life paying attention to the likelihood of outcomes.

I'm not guaranteed to end up with a lottery ticket that doesn't win me 20 million dollars, but I don't buy them, because I probably won't win, even though it's not guaranteed that I won't win.

The point here, is that the Bettman plan doesn't solve any of the problems that led to the current lockout.
Again, this doesn't matter. Renegotiating a CBA does not guarantee a lockout.
Could be very likely, but doesn't guarantee it. It will also depend on the final look of this current CBA, and how the league progresses over the years until the next CBA.

So stop assuming that whatever happens, if this goes in favor of the NHL, then there's automatically a lockout.

Kriss E is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 11:31 AM
  #536
Blind Gardien
Global Moderator
nexus of the crisis
 
Blind Gardien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Four Winds Bar
Country: France
Posts: 19,685
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingKostitsyn View Post
The replacement players? You realize caliber would be worse than AHL right?
Considering the number of things that would have to happen and the timescales involved, I don't think there is any chance a replacement player scenario could materialize before next season. Some will say it may not be possible at all. But if it did occur in the summer with full camps and everything opening up, I could see it being better than the AHL. Depending on how many international players in general were willing to sign on. It would definitely be better than the AHL in Year 2, at least.
Quote:
Why would we watch instead of, well, watching AHL or junior?
Two letters: C H

Blind Gardien is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 01:47 PM
  #537
Frozenice
the random dude
 
Frozenice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blind Gardien View Post
Considering the number of things that would have to happen and the timescales involved, I don't think there is any chance a replacement player scenario could materialize before next season. Some will say it may not be possible at all. But if it did occur in the summer with full camps and everything opening up, I could see it being better than the AHL. Depending on how many international players in general were willing to sign on. It would definitely be better than the AHL in Year 2, at least.

Two letters: C H
Three words: Burn baby burn.

Not only do I think it would be illegal to hire scabs to replace the hockey players, but you are going to ask your fans to pay decent coin to physically cross picket lines to watch a bunch of never will be's to play beer league hockey.

Plus, you're going to encourage the protest crowd to come downtown in full force to create major havoc and destruction.

I don't see this ever seeing the light of day in Canada under any conditions. Might be different in the States but not here.

Frozenice is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 03:08 PM
  #538
FlyingKostitsyn
Registered User
 
FlyingKostitsyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec
Country: Australia
Posts: 8,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blind Gardien View Post
Two letters: C H
Yeah right. Any scab team would be a disgrace to the sport. It would pollute the legacy of the Habs and I wouldn't want to watch a single second of this farce. Its not just about the logo, its about whats behind.

The whole idea of replacement players is impossible, because its illegal and illogical as well since its a lockout, not a strike.

And yes the level of play would be lower than AHL. Players would not leave Europe en-masse to play filler in makeshift one year teams while completely throwing away an NHL future (because obviously any of the scabs that would keep an NHL job would get targeted by everyone once the season starts, and would even be hated by their own teammates). For that same reason AHLers wouldn't want to join the league as well, as it would tarnish their reputations forever. The level of play might be similar to the ECHL perhaps and very clumsy since these teams would be made up of random people with little to no experience of playing with each other or at a pro level.

Its likely a new, superior hockey league would soon appear (NHL player initiative joined by some of the owners or other would be owners?) and I don't think players would have any moral or legal obligations not to permanently defect from the NHL (who wouldn't be respecting their contracts) to join it.

FlyingKostitsyn is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 03:51 PM
  #539
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
As I said, it appears you have very low standards.
I do not have low standards. I believe that the players were guaranteed 57% of hockey-related-revenue, that is all. That means that when one player is underpaid, another is overpaid, and vice versa.

The "standards" for how much hockey players should be paid are determined by fans like you and I, when we pay a lot of money for tickets, and when we watch the cable shows, and when we increase beer spending at bars showing the games. If you think hockey players are overpaid, then you have the power to spend less on hockey.

It's the fans that determine how much players should be paid. Why do you think dominant MLB players get paid more than dominant NHL players? Because the former brings in more money from fans. It has nothing to do with the former being superior athletes, they might even be inferior athletes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Again, this doesn't matter. Renegotiating a CBA does not guarantee a lockout.
Could be very likely, but doesn't guarantee it. It will also depend on the final look of this current CBA, and how the league progresses over the years until the next CBA.
Not getting treatment when you have metastatic cancer doesn't guarantee you're going to die, it merely makes it more likely.

Jumping out the window from a 2-story building doesn't guarantee you're ending up a cripple, some people somehow end up ok, but it does make it a lot more likely.

Driving drunk on a regular basis doesn't guarantee you're going to hurt someone, but it does make it a lot more likely.

And so on. You can engage in all the sophistry you want about "guarantees", but the real world is run on probabilities, all of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
So stop assuming that whatever happens, if this goes in favor of the NHL, then there's automatically a lockout.
I have never assumed this. What I'm assuming is that a CBA which solves none of the league's problems, such as the Bettman-Jacobs plan, is more likely to lead to renewed labour strife.


Last edited by DAChampion: 11-14-2012 at 03:59 PM.
DAChampion is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 03:53 PM
  #540
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest the Hero View Post
The offers are only getting better because the majority of the season could still be saved. What happens after that point, you think the owners proposals will still be getting better in 2013?
I agree.

Donald Fehr is playing a difficult poker game. We'll find out if he sells at the right time.

I hope we get the same labour peace he brought to the MLB -- 18 years with no lockout. I'm tired of the Bettman lockout cycle.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 04:04 PM
  #541
Blind Gardien
Global Moderator
nexus of the crisis
 
Blind Gardien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Four Winds Bar
Country: France
Posts: 19,685
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingKostitsyn View Post
Yeah right. Any scab team would be a disgrace to the sport. It would pollute the legacy of the Habs and I wouldn't want to watch a single second of this farce. Its not just about the logo, its about whats behind.
Well, various versions of this argument have gone on in other threads. To me, it's really the CH that matters. I'd watch and cheer for the Habs, no matter who wears the sweater, just because they're the Habs. Sort of like cheering for Lind and Whitehall and Ronan and whoever. They don't have to be the world's best, I'll cheer for them. A chacun son gout.
Quote:
The whole idea of replacement players is impossible, because its illegal and illogical as well since its a lockout, not a strike.
As I said, the number of things that would have to happen... including a strike... are on timescales that at the very least would push things out to next season. Many people who know the labour laws say it is not at all likely that an impasse and imposed CBA would arise, and thus the whole scenario is not at all likely... but certainly a popular hot button one and interesting one to speculate about all the same, not comensurate with its actual likelihood.
Quote:
And yes the level of play would be lower than AHL. Players would not leave Europe en-masse to play filler in makeshift one year teams while completely throwing away an NHL future (because obviously any of the scabs that would keep an NHL job would get targeted by everyone once the season starts, and would even be hated by their own teammates). For that same reason AHLers wouldn't want to join the league as well, as it would tarnish their reputations forever. The level of play might be similar to the ECHL perhaps and very clumsy since these teams would be made up of random people with little to no experience of playing with each other or at a pro level.
Impossible to know. The timing would be all-important. If it was too late and all the good international players and fringe NHLers had already signed elsewhere, it wouldn't be better. But the NHL, even whilst saving money on replacement players, would still have resources and venues that would otherwise attract a lot of the top non-NHLPA players, and if the timing was right I expect they would easily become the best league in the world again, with replacement players who don't care a whit about any PA backlash and had no remaining NHL dreams of their own.
Quote:
Its likely a new, superior hockey league would soon appear (NHL player initiative joined by some of the owners or other would be owners?) and I don't think players would have any moral or legal obligations not to permanently defect from the NHL (who wouldn't be respecting their contracts) to join it.
I can't see any player initiative working, nor owners breaking ranks. More likely players eventually crossing the line. But it's all so hypothetical, speculative, and unlikely that it's hardly worth talking about. Well, except these kinds of apocalyptic scenarios are actually kind of more "fun" in some ways than the more mundane issues at hand with the current negotiations. If one can suspend disbelief long enough to go along with them.

Blind Gardien is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 04:25 PM
  #542
MtlPenFan
Registered User
 
MtlPenFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 11,014
vCash: 500
Melnyk on team690 is becoming insufferable on this issue.

He tries to pull McGuire one way, and McGuire's got to bring him back towards the middle.

MtlPenFan is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 04:34 PM
  #543
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,730
vCash: 500
As an aside,

We have all discussed the cons of various proposals and behaviors in these negotiations, and I think it's important to state what a good agreement would look like, at least approximately. For me, as a fan, a good agreement needs to have the following attributes: long-term labour peace, parity, and high-player salaries to keep the sport attractive to talented teenage athletes. These are not mutually exclusive points.

According to Forbes magazine, the NHL has the most disparity of any of the major North American sports. Forbes estimated that 18 of 30 NHL teams lost money in 2010-2011.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbade...snt-have-them/
The article points out that the five most profitable teams (Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver, Edmonton, New York) earned 212 million, and the remaining 25 teams lost 86 million (total league profit is 126 million). It says that the NBA had a problem nearly as bad, but that it tripled revenue sharing in its new CBA. The article then says Baseball (in the post-Fehr era) is the most equitable of major North American sports, with the 3 most profitable teams only making a mere 20% of total league operating income (!!!).

The full ranking of NHL teams by operating income is available here:
http://www.forbes.com/nhl-valuations/list/
It says that 12 of the 30 teams are profitable. For hockey to be viable and to have labour peace, I'd estimate that you'd need ~22 teams to be profitable.

In order to have 22 profitable teams, you'd have to add 7.5 million to the total pool per team to make it down to the Nashville Predators (in 22nd place). That is 165 million, equivalent to 5% of HRR. Lowering the cap to 52% of HRR from 57% of HRR would immediately achieve this. However, the players have accepted a reduction to 50%, which would make 27 of 30 teams profitable -- but only in the short-term. In the long-term, this won't help, as growth is faster in the richest markets (which increases disparity), and owners shift more money into scouting, drafting, etc which raises the average expense to be competitive.

Thus, aside from the short-term solution of lower player salaries, the NHL will also need more revenue sharing, to be more in line with the successful North American sports. A fair agreement would be for the five most successful teams to have a 12.3% reduction in operating income (as with the players), and thus have their profits decrease from 212 million to 186 million. As their payrolls are dropping as well due to the new CBA by a total of 43 million, that means an addition of 69 million dollars to the revenue sharing pool, or an average of 2.76 million for the 25 other teams. At this point, all teams would be profitable except for the Columbus Blue Jackets and Phoenix Coyotes.

You would seemingly have an incentive for the owners not to push another lockout if 28 teams are profitable. However, that wouldn't last on its own. For 28 teams to remain profitable, you would need a salary cap on non-player expenses (scouting, drafting, etc). As the owners have admitted, even though they have 176% growth hockey-related revenue since the last lockout after subtracting player salaries, they are worse off, because scouting, drafting, etc have become expenses. If player salaries are fixed, teams will try and compete by hiring better scouts, and we will eventually see a situation where people like Trevor Timmins are paid 30 or 40 million a year, because that's how much they're worth if player salaries are fixed and rookie salaries are kept artificially low, or a situation where every team has six or seven general manager equivalents pondering every move like with the Toronto Maple Leafs. This will lead to new disparity and a new lockout. This would wipe out any gains from the new CBA as it did with the old CBA. The solution is a cap (or a luxury tax) on non-player expenses. What that cap would be would depend on the internal details, which are not available to us. A good idea, I think, would be to put the cap at a few million dollars above whatever the current average is, and a 50% luxury tax for spending above that amount. That might be the mechanism to finance the revenue sharing mentioned above.

Thus, in summary:
- Lower player cap to 50% of HRR.
- Increase revenue sharing by ~70 million dollars.
- Have a soft cap on non-player hockey-related expenses (scouting, drafting, management, etc) with a luxury tax, that could finance the revenue sharing mentioned above. This should give total cost parity and certainty to the NHL.

Suggested concessions to the players:
- Get rid of the idiotic retirement rule that penalizes players older than 35, you could probably pull this off by having salary be more equal to average salary in each year of a contract.
- Raise the minimum salary to $750,000 or $1,000,000; increase pensions and health benefits.
- Reduce offer sheet compensations so that second contract players are paid comparable salaries for comparable production.
- Increase draft bonuses to attract more talent into the sport. Have the bonus be paid out at the draft.
- Have the CBA be long, so that players don't lose more money to yet another lockout in five years.
- Honour current contracts by having the convergence to 50/50 be gradual.


Last edited by DAChampion: 11-14-2012 at 08:32 PM.
DAChampion is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 04:58 PM
  #544
Protest the Hero
Registered User
 
Protest the Hero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,383
vCash: 500
The over 35 rule is there so you don't get to sign stupid contracts like Prongers, and have him retire with 3 years left on it.

You don't have to worry about teenagers choosing another league. How likely are US and Canadian born kids are going to move to Russia to play? I don't know why you're so worried about the draft either, the best players in the world already come over for the draft.

I think cap hits should be the actual pay. No more ridiculous front loaded contracts, but I'm sure the players love this. It would make handling cap space more creative.

Protest the Hero is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 05:04 PM
  #545
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest the Hero View Post
The over 35 rule is there so you don't get to sign stupid contracts like Prongers, and have him retire with 3 years left on it.

You don't have to worry about teenagers choosing another league. How likely are US and Canadian born kids are going to move to Russia to play? I don't know why you're so worried about the draft either, the best players in the world already come over for the draft.

I think cap hits should be the actual pay. No more ridiculous front loaded contracts, but I'm sure the players love this. It would make handling cap space more creative.
If you make cap hit = annual salary then you don't need the age 35 retirement rule. Think about it.

*****

A lot of teenagers are talented at multiple sports and end up making a choice. I think it's more of an issue in the US.

Not sure why you focused on what were two secondary points. Maybe I just shouldn't make secondary points. It confuses people.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 05:23 PM
  #546
Protest the Hero
Registered User
 
Protest the Hero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
If you make cap hit = annual salary then you don't need the age 35 retirement rule. Think about it.

*****

A lot of teenagers are talented at multiple sports and end up making a choice. I think it's more of an issue in the US.

Not sure why you focused on what were two secondary points. Maybe I just shouldn't make secondary points. It confuses people.
I just picked the points I had opinions about.

Protest the Hero is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 09:04 PM
  #547
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 24,022
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
I do not have low standards. I believe that the players were guaranteed 57% of hockey-related-revenue, that is all. That means that when one player is underpaid, another is overpaid, and vice versa.

The "standards" for how much hockey players should be paid are determined by fans like you and I, when we pay a lot of money for tickets, and when we watch the cable shows, and when we increase beer spending at bars showing the games. If you think hockey players are overpaid, then you have the power to spend less on hockey.

It's the fans that determine how much players should be paid. Why do you think dominant MLB players get paid more than dominant NHL players? Because the former brings in more money from fans. It has nothing to do with the former being superior athletes, they might even be inferior athletes.
I really don't get what you're trying to say here..
How much money these industries make is based on how many fans they have and how those spend? No kidding.

Not at all what we were discussing. You said Kovalev, Hammer, Cole are guys that are/were underpaid because they gave a lot more to the team than the cash they ended up making. I disagree. I think those guys either more money than what they gave, or at the very peak, earned their contract.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Not getting treatment when you have metastatic cancer doesn't guarantee you're going to die, it merely makes it more likely.

Jumping out the window from a 2-story building doesn't guarantee you're ending up a cripple, some people somehow end up ok, but it does make it a lot more likely.

Driving drunk on a regular basis doesn't guarantee you're going to hurt someone, but it does make it a lot more likely.

And so on. You can engage in all the sophistry you want about "guarantees", but the real world is run on probabilities, all of it.
So? NO GUARANTEE still stands.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
I have never assumed this. What I'm assuming is that a CBA which solves none of the league's problems, such as the Bettman-Jacobs plan, is more likely to lead to renewed labour strife.
Yes you have, which is what sparked it all to begin with. Here's the quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
3) What the NHL asked on day 1 was a 25% roll back, so Kovalchuk would lose 25 million. He would then lose even more in five or six years when the next lockout happens, losing more money due to lost playing time, and whatever the next rollback is that Bettman has in mind. The players should not set a precedent of losing 25% every five or six years.
So you see, you were speaking as if it was a certainty. After that you switched over to near-certainty or probability.

All I said was no lockout is guaranteed. I don't care if you think it's 99% sure there will be one, fact remains there's no guarantee.
A lot can happen over 5-6 years (if that's even the length of the next CBA), and if the supposed ruthless Fehr accepts a deal, then it'll be because he is satisfied. If he's forced into it and settles for less, I'm not sure he'll be rehired for the next convention and so, who knows. Really, there's really no way to know what's going to happen until then.

Kriss E is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 09:37 PM
  #548
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
So? NO GUARANTEE still stands.

Yes you have, which is what sparked it all to begin with. Here's the quote:

So you see, you were speaking as if it was a certainty. After that you switched over to near-certainty or probability.

All I said was no lockout is guaranteed. I don't care if you think it's 99% sure there will be one, fact remains there's no guarantee.
A lot can happen over 5-6 years (if that's even the length of the next CBA), and if the supposed ruthless Fehr accepts a deal, then it'll be because he is satisfied. If he's forced into it and settles for less, I'm not sure he'll be rehired for the next convention and so, who knows. Really, there's really no way to know what's going to happen until then.
There are no guarantees in life Kriss. However, reasonable people make projections and live their lives where in a manner where they treat near-certainties as certainties and pay attention to odds.

The name of this board is hockeys future. The entire purpose is to estimate the future.

Did you have a preference between Obama and Romney? If so, why? There are "NO GUARANTEES".

The point here, is that a plan that solves none of the league's problems is more likely to lead to more lockouts than a plan that does solve many or all of the league's problems. I am not sure why you're disagreeing with this.

Definitely, I don't know if the odds of another lockout in the Bettman are 90% or 95%; I just know that it's very high, so I won't belabour the point by picking an artificial number.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
You said Kovalev, Hammer, Cole are guys that are/were underpaid because they gave a lot more to the team than the cash they ended up making. I disagree. I think those guys either more money than what they gave, or at the very peak, earned their contract.
Kovalev and Hammer took us deeper into the playoffs then we had any right to go, and they no doubt increased regular season TV ratings. Don't worry about George Gillette. He's fortunate to have spent money on those contracts. He's a much richer man for it, probably by a few tens of millions.

Look at Kovalev specifically. 19 million over 4 years for 260 points, between 2005-06 and 2008-09. Now look at the other people who produced comparable production in that time span, i.e. his peers, the people you should evaluate him by. I'm very confident that most of them were paid more than him. If he's paid less than his peers, than he is underpaid.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 09:54 PM
  #549
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 24,022
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
There are no guarantees in life Kriss. However, reasonable people make projections and live their lives where in a manner where they treat near-certainties as certainties and pay attention to odds.

The name of this board is hockeys future. The entire purpose is to estimate the future.

Did you have a preference between Obama and Romney? If so, why? There are "NO GUARANTEES".

The point here, is that a plan that solves none of the league's problems is more likely to lead to more lockouts than a plan that does solve many or all of the league's problems. I am not sure why you're disagreeing with this.

Definitely, I don't know if the odds of another lockout in the Bettman are 90% or 95%; I just know that it's very high, so I won't belabour the point by picking an artificial number.
We are just focusing on different things. I understand, and have from the beginning, that if they don't fix what they consider is the problem, then they will have to deal with similar issues down the road. That's fine, never denied it.
What I'm saying is that this doesn't mean it'll go to the NHL missing games again.
You seem to think it's almost certain they will lose more games and possibly a full season again over it. I rather wait to see what the CBA is, for how long and how the league progresses over that span.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Kovalev and Hammer took us deeper into the playoffs then we had any right to go, and they no doubt increased regular season TV ratings. Don't worry about George Gillette. He's fortunate to have spent money on those contracts. He's a much richer man for it, probably by a few tens of millions.

Look at Kovalev specifically. 19 million over 4 years for 260 points, between 2005-06 and 2008-09. Now look at the other people who produced comparable production in that time span, i.e. his peers, the people you should evaluate him by. I'm very confident that most of them were paid more than him. If he's paid less than his peers, than he is underpaid.
Kovalev earned his money. He had one amazing year, and one crap year.

Anyways, let's just stop discussing this as it's going nowhere. Let's just end it as us both hoping hockey will be back this year, soon enough, and congratulate each other for keeping this a civil debate.

Kriss E is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 10:40 PM
  #550
OneSharpMarble
Registered User
 
OneSharpMarble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,266
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blind Gardien View Post
Considering the number of things that would have to happen and the timescales involved, I don't think there is any chance a replacement player scenario could materialize before next season. Some will say it may not be possible at all. But if it did occur in the summer with full camps and everything opening up, I could see it being better than the AHL. Depending on how many international players in general were willing to sign on. It would definitely be better than the AHL in Year 2, at least.

Two letters: C H
I wouldn't even watch it for free on the internet. What a total disaster that would be for the owners, they should do it for sure.

OneSharpMarble 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 06:59 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.