The Business of HockeyDiscuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Franchise sales, valuations, TV contracts, ratings, expansion, relocation, the CBA and work stoppage discussion goes here.
Mark Recchi's advice to players is to sign CBA now
Well considering the league has made every concession they pretty much can on the way to 50/50, covering make whole, lowering elc years, establishing moderation for discipline, increasing revenue sharing, etc and Fehr hasn't backed off a delinked cap with guaranteed increases built in...were not gonna have hockey this year.
Just because league offered something completely ridiculous and then offered something a little better doesn't make that a concession. I can say I'll give you a penny for your car and because I offer you $1,000 for a $5,000 car, I've given a concession?
If the owners want the players to go down to 50% of revenue, covering their salaries on their way there isn't a concession. A concession in this CBA negotiation is something the owners give the players. Saying drop your salaries 12% but we'll let you do that slower than requesting it immediately isn't a concession. Please check the definition of concession.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sina220
It comes down to this. The current system doesn't allow enough teams to break even. Even teams like minny and Pitt in great markets with new arenas and great leases need several rounds of playoff revenue or to spend several mil below the cap to break even. The league NEEDS a system that allows more teams to cover costs during the regular season, especially if they intend on increasing revenue sharing past 150 mil. Reducing what is by far the largest and fastest increasing cost is the easiest and most logical thing, employee/player salaries. Chances are teams utilities, taxes, and leases didnt increase 80% like player costs did the past 7 years.
I'll give you that the current system doesn't work for these teams. But both the league and the players have to work together to make sure that the league is sustainable in the markets that they've chosen to be in. The league selected those markets and are asking the players to compensate the owners for poor league choices. I agree that reducing your biggest expense is the easiest way of fixing it but the league is exacerbating the problem with five year contract limits and the other player contracting issues. Those aren't necessary beyond what fixes cap circumvention. They're both talking revenue sharing now and it must be a linked 50-50, but the markets that the league has decided to put teams in has contributed to the league's financial position. And these additional CBA complications are demands by the league.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sina220
The system fehr is proposing, however, aims to change the entire structure of money division. It plans to use fuzzy things like projections and estimated growth to establish guaranteed figures each year for the players before total revenue is even known. It also includes automatic % increases in the players share that have no basis in real numbers, but instead use projections for the upcoming years before the fact. It also only approaches a true 50/50 split in years where the projections for revenue are much higher than they should be. It will always be harder, if not impossible, for owners to get 50% in this system than the players. And it plans to increase revenue sharing towards the 200 mil mark which is essentially the entire operating income of the top 8-10 teams. Think mtl, nyr, tor, etc are willing to fork, basically, their WHOLE profit to revenue sharing, in a system that sees players still get a majority of revenue and guaranteed raises? Ya, thats how dumb the nhlpa thinks you are.
Getting the owners more money is BY FAR the most important thing in all of this. A league that is widely profitable benefits everyone, including the players in the long run. A profitable league doesn't see teams like Dallas, atl, stl, phx, NJ, Tampa, etc sit on the market or look for investors for over a year. If more teams made money outside investment would climb. The stability of many teams could be solidified with one or two more investors, but smart men dont invest in losers. And losers is what this current system, and the nhlpas, will produce. The average payroll per team last year was 59.2 mil with 12 teams spending at or below that number and 18 over. A hrr % split and cap number that work out to roughly that max cap is about whats sustainable. And wouldn't you know in the leagues latest proposal the cap would be 59.9 mil in 13/14. The league understands its problems and is working within itself. The nhlpa is trying to get the most for itself regardless of consequence or health of the league. They dont care what kinda pie it is as long as they get the biggest piece.
The part I agree with you on is it should be a linked 50-50. But don't be fooled by these concessions you speak of. Concessions are things that you don't benefit from that the other party does.
That's way too easy. The players also need to take a stance that they need to creatively find a way to help the owners get the win they need while the PA also achieves it's goals.
Most of this thread is about win-lose negotiating. Why not win-win?
I put your words right back on you and now it's too easy. It's as easy as the argument you were trying to make.
Strange how Andrew Ference led the NHLPA mutiny against Paul Kelly and is now nowhere to be found with CBA negotiations. APB sent out.
13h Allan Walsh Allan Walsh @walsha
Funny how only people in hockey still talking about Kelly are few in media+NHL executives. What does that tell you? @DamoSpin @GlobeKPD
Expand
13h Damien Cox Damien Cox @DamoSpin
@walsha Funny how agents who purport to care for players don't demand openness, release of Kelly report. What is there to hide? #alltalk.
13h Allan Walsh Allan Walsh @walsha
NHLPA has never been so open+ communicative. Players have never been so active, involved as right now. Credit Don Fehr for that. @DamoSpin
13h Damien Cox Damien Cox @DamoSpin
@walsha Same line that was used under Goodenow. Same propaganda. And I notice u still won't demand release of Kelly report. Why? #alltalk
13h Allan Walsh Allan Walsh @walsha
A bit preoccupied in the throes of an owners lockout. Haven't heard Kelly demand release of Kelly report, not that anyone cares. @DamoSpin
13h Allan Walsh Allan Walsh @walsha
All I ever heard was Kelly insisting on confidentiality clause to prevent NHLPA from ever releasing facts. Kelly waived clause? @DamoSpin
13h Gregory Moore Gregory Moore @sirgregmoore
@walsha @damospin you've got plenty of time to spend on Twitter Allan, why not take some time away from tweeting and release the report!
Is it up to Walsh to release a private document regarding Kelley, and in fact, their agreement may stipulate that it not be released?
At the same time, it has nothing to do with the current negotiations as the entire union has been overhauled, new structure and rules.
No, it's not up to anyone to release it but reporters have long memories of how the reps were treated and strongarmed into doing that. Par for the course for the PA office.
No, it's not up to anyone to release it but reporters have long memories of how the reps were treated and strongarmed into doing that. Par for the course for the PA office.
I believe privacy issues are what's behind the lack of some public release. Cox should know that.
I'm not even saying there weren't issues and that I liked how Kelley was treated, but this has nothing to do with the current hierarchy and leadership. Fehr was brought in for the rebuild, not the blow up.
The numbers do not support your position. All players on average hit their prime around 27 and have it last around 5 years. It's a physical thing. It just takes longer for some positions to translate that to the NHL.
As for this "lack of performance" after 27, it is just flat out not true anyway and the facts do not support you. 11 of the players in the top-20 in scoring last season were 27 or older. 3 more of those remaining 9 would be UFA eligible July 1st (one other was a defenseman). The average age of the top-20 is over 28.4, even after the youth movement after the lockout.
In fact, just took a quick glance at 21-30 in scoring. 9 of those 10 were over UFA age, with multiple in their 30s..
I have never seen anything on reaction time decline being that young. Would like some sources.
Even though if it's not noticeable until well into the 30s, it doesn't really matter, does it.
Strength peaking at the start of your prime makes perfect sense.
Is this true? Individual year salaries don't count.
Well, at any rate, the max contract wouldn't drop lower than any possible contract that will be signed, so it is still irrelevant.
I did work on playoff performance. It did not go far back into the 90s, late 90s and later. The top performers at forward were very predominantly pre-27 and cup winners only. I am old, over 60. Some of the research to which I am referring was done as far back as the 50s and 60s. The reaction time stuff is from pinball type setups (eye/hand and eye/foot) that was related to measuring braking times/reaction in vehicles (I was one of many test subjects). It also studied the effect of alcohol on those times. I got it while studying psychology. It is not stuff that I grabbed off the internet.
I am aware of the background for what you present. It is stuff that is considered axiomatic from some GMs. I don't know all of the background, but the axioms spurred some of my own investigation which was in part aimed at the age composition of winning teams.
Another small piece for you is that there is a Finnish medical study stating that there is medical evidence for almost universal deterioration of groin and hip at age 31 for professional goalies. Tim Thomas is very much an outlier. I did check for the generational goalies and did find decline at that age despite their continuing play, Roy, Brodeur, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kemisti
Reg. peformance
Also from players who were top20 in scoring last season and were older than 26, some had had better seasons when they were younger.
Spezza was 22. As was Kovy. Thornton was 26, same with Pominville.
Though I didn't adjust with differences in league-wides scoring.
Thank you for this data. I had not seen it. It is very supportive of my point.
Just because league offered something completely ridiculous and then offered something a little better doesn't make that a concession. I can say I'll give you a penny for your car and because I offer you $1,000 for a $5,000 car, I've given a concession?
If the owners want the players to go down to 50% of revenue, covering their salaries on their way there isn't a concession. A concession in this CBA negotiation is something the owners give the players. Saying drop your salaries 12% but we'll let you do that slower than requesting it immediately isn't a concession. Please check the definition of concession.
I'll give you that the current system doesn't work for these teams. But both the league and the players have to work together to make sure that the league is sustainable in the markets that they've chosen to be in. The league selected those markets and are asking the players to compensate the owners for poor league choices. I agree that reducing your biggest expense is the easiest way of fixing it but the league is exacerbating the problem with five year contract limits and the other player contracting issues. Those aren't necessary beyond what fixes cap circumvention. They're both talking revenue sharing now and it must be a linked 50-50, but the markets that the league has decided to put teams in has contributed to the league's financial position. And these additional CBA complications are demands by the league.
The part I agree with you on is it should be a linked 50-50. But don't be fooled by these concessions you speak of. Concessions are things that you don't benefit from that the other party does.
Interesting tweet I like to see answered:
Scott Cullen @tsnscottcullen
Regarding the give-and-take of CBA negotiations, does anyone know what the NBA or NFL players gained from last year's lockouts?
Strange how Andrew Ference led the NHLPA mutiny against Paul Kelly and is now nowhere to be found with CBA negotiations. APB sent out.
13h Allan Walsh Allan Walsh @walsha
Funny how only people in hockey still talking about Kelly are few in media+NHL executives. What does that tell you? @DamoSpin @GlobeKPD
Expand
13h Damien Cox Damien Cox @DamoSpin
@walsha Funny how agents who purport to care for players don't demand openness, release of Kelly report. What is there to hide? #alltalk.
13h Allan Walsh Allan Walsh @walsha
NHLPA has never been so open+ communicative. Players have never been so active, involved as right now. Credit Don Fehr for that. @DamoSpin
13h Damien Cox Damien Cox @DamoSpin
@walsha Same line that was used under Goodenow. Same propaganda. And I notice u still won't demand release of Kelly report. Why? #alltalk
13h Allan Walsh Allan Walsh @walsha
A bit preoccupied in the throes of an owners lockout. Haven't heard Kelly demand release of Kelly report, not that anyone cares. @DamoSpin
13h Allan Walsh Allan Walsh @walsha
All I ever heard was Kelly insisting on confidentiality clause to prevent NHLPA from ever releasing facts. Kelly waived clause? @DamoSpin
13h Gregory Moore Gregory Moore @sirgregmoore
@walsha @damospin you've got plenty of time to spend on Twitter Allan, why not take some time away from tweeting and release the report!
Walsh responded by posting an article about Kelly reportedly accessing sealed PA meeting minutes. Cox challenged him to have the PA release the actual reports and he responded back to Cox with a link to an article written by an outside source covering the accusations. I don't even know why Walsh even bothered. Did he think people wouldn't know that it's not the actual report he's posting?
I did work on playoff performance. It did not go far back into the 90s, late 90s and later. The top performers at forward were very predominantly pre-27 and cup winners only. I am old, over 60. Some of the research to which I am referring was done as far back as the 50s and 60s. The reaction time stuff is from pinball type setups (eye/hand and eye/foot) that was related to measuring braking times/reaction in vehicles (I was one of many test subjects). It also studied the effect of alcohol on those times. I got it while studying psychology. It is not stuff that I grabbed off the internet.
I am aware of the background for what you present. It is stuff that is considered axiomatic from some GMs. I don't know all of the background, but the axioms spurred some of my own investigation which was in part aimed at the age composition of winning teams.
Another small piece for you is that there is a Finnish medical study stating that there is medical evidence for almost universal deterioration of groin and hip at age 31 for professional goalies. Tim Thomas is very much an outlier. I did check for the generational goalies and did find decline at that age despite their continuing play, Roy, Brodeur, etc.
Thank you for this data. I had not seen it. It is very supportive of my point.
Wondering what your opinion is on where the league is aiming the additional restraints with the contracting rights issues? If you consider the average career length (and thus length of service) for the mean/median typical NHL'er, the restraints wouldn't really change much for them versus the last CBA-- or am I off on that calculation. I don't recall the mean and median NHL career lengths.
It seems to be aimed at the cream of the crop, getting rid of the timeframe that allows a bridging to the UFA years.
I believe privacy issues are what's behind the lack of some public release. Cox should know that.
I'm not even saying there weren't issues and that I liked how Kelley was treated, but this has nothing to do with the current hierarchy and leadership. Fehr was brought in for the rebuild, not the blow up.
In my opinion, Fehr played a role in getting Kelley fired. MOD
Last edited by Fugu: 11-14-2012 at 07:07 PM.
Reason: generalized flaming
Please explain. I'm not sure I understand your post.
You said:
Quote:
The players might have chosen to strike and yet they might not have. We will never know. The League made it's choice, and I'll not pretend this was forced upon them.
So you have an issue with the league taking a preventative stance. However, when I remove context from the player's situation (as you did with the owners), you conveniently add context back into the equation and justify why the players are allowed to take a preventative position in their negotiating tactics. It's either simple or it's not. It either works both ways or it doesn't.
Fehr was brought in as an adviser to the NHLPA late summer 2009 (possibly in August) after he left his position in the MLB . I do not believe there was an exact date, but he was there in Kelly's final months.
"It's difficult to predict who the next NHLPA executive director will be. The committee members seem to want former Major League Baseball players union boss Donald Fehr, who has been acting as an unpaid advisor for nearly a year."
So you have an issue with the league taking a preventative stance. However, when I remove context from the player's situation (as you did with the owners), you conveniently add context back into the equation and justify why the players are allowed to take a preventative position in their negotiating tactics. It's either simple or it's not. It either works both ways or it doesn't.
Ahhhh... I think you misunderstood my post. I wasn't removing context at all. I don't advocate "first strike" bargaining by either side.
I was saying it's in the players' best interest to understand the challenges faced by the owners and work to help them solve them.
Fehr was brought in as an adviser to the NHLPA late summer 2009 (possibly in August) after he left his position in the MLB . I do not believe there was an exact date, but he was there in Kelly's final months.
"It's difficult to predict who the next NHLPA executive director will be. The committee members seem to want former Major League Baseball players union boss Donald Fehr, who has been acting as an unpaid advisor for nearly a year."
Fehr retired in June of 2009.
The NHLPA brought him in in November of 2009 as an unpaid consultant:
The union announced Thursday that Donald Fehr, executive director of the Major League Baseball Players Association since 1983, has agreed to work with members of two new committees established by the NHLPA.
"Hopefully, my experience at the MLBPA will be of help as the NHLPA members consider the reorganization of their union," Fehr said. "You have an organization of professional athletes who are in a period in which they can use some help, and if I can be of some assistance to them in the process, given the long experience I've had, I'd like to try and do it."
Kelly was fired in August of 2009. Penny resigned Oct 31, 2009.
Ahhhh... I think you misunderstood my post. I wasn't removing context at all. I don't advocate "first strike" bargaining by either side.
I was saying it's in the players' best interest to understand the challenges faced by the owners and work to help them solve them.
I had to reread our conversation but I see where the breakdown was for me. When you said that's too easy, I thought you meant I was trying to simplify the PA's stance, not that you were actually talking about the PA's stance. That made me misinterpret the rest of your post. i scrolled through some of your other posts as well so that also helped things make sense for me. Sorry about that! Had I followed the content of some of your other posts, I probably wouldn't have misunderstood you to begin with.
Wondering what your opinion is on where the league is aiming the additional restraints with the contracting rights issues? If you consider the average career length (and thus length of service) for the mean/median typical NHL'er, the restraints wouldn't really change much for them versus the last CBA-- or am I off on that calculation. I don't recall the mean and median NHL career lengths.
It seems to be aimed at the cream of the crop, getting rid of the timeframe that allows a bridging to the UFA years.
As a group, the contracting rights that the league seeks is aimed at paying the very top tier of players and only after they have put forth their performances. An attempt to ratchet back the salary distribution to the pre-cap days. In that sense, it hurts the vast majority of players. You would likely get a bunch of max contracts, but the second tier would take a hit. Using the Sharks, JT gets a max, but Marleau takes a small hit and Pavelski a big hit. Wings, Dats and Z get big bumps while Franzen takes a hit. Obviously this is regards future players of similar skills to those named.
My take on career length is that a lot of posters look at the average. The median is far more informative. They get the 5 year average because there is a large group of players who never get to 80 games. If a player is top 3 or top 2, he is looking at 15 years or better. If a players is second line or second pairing, he is looking at 11 to 14 years. It is when you go below top 6/top 4 that it gets ugly. Very few players survive even 5 years as bottom 6 or bottom pairing. There is a very select group of high end third liners that match the second group for career length (another distortion). Goalies are another story, much less than 10 years for #1 goalies.
Kelly was fired in August of 2009. Penny resigned Oct 31, 2009.
I stand corrected their time correlated officially.
Anyway, I do think some of the media want the Kelly report released simply because they'd like to know not just why it happened, but if there was an issue behind it where are those people now. And of course because that's their job to snoop around.
Looking at 30+ goal seasons, here is how many of the top 100 goal scorers broke thirty at each age:
At 21: 45
At 22: 56
At 23: 63
At 24: 61
At 25: 63
At 26: 72
At 27: 66
At 28: 57
At 29: 61
At 30: 46
At 31: 33
At 32: 30
At 33: 19
Also from players who were top20 in scoring last season and were older than 26, some had had better seasons when they were younger.
Spezza was 22. As was Kovy. Thornton was 26, same with Pominville.
Though I didn't adjust with differences in league-wides scoring.
First, why is this only looking at elite players?
Second, this is out of date, and done during a terrible time period for any analytics.
Third, why are you only looking at goals? These things called playmakers exist.
Fourth, that data suggests that the current setup would see them get paid the most. Best season the year before payday.
Fifth, who cares if a couple of the older people had a better season in the past, largely as a result of who they played with at the time (and increased league scoring out of the lockout)? Going PPG or placing top-20 means you didn't drop off a cliff as claimed.
