HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Everybody's talking at me; I don't hear a word they're saying (CBA/Lockout XXIX)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-16-2012, 03:33 PM
  #376
Stewie Griffin
Moderator
Benevolent Overlord
 
Stewie Griffin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Calgary
Posts: 7,133
vCash: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
I agree, they'll get to 50% imo.

Why go after contracts length so aggressively? 5 years from unlimited is a huge concession, why does the NHL need that on top of cost certainty?
The big question is why the NHL continues to approve cap circumvention contracts (see: Zach Parise, Ryan Suter, etc.), yet they are willing to lose a season over stopping them.

Stewie Griffin is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 03:35 PM
  #377
EdAVSfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,041
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
Limiting the length of deals and front loading is going to make it harder for those teams to sign star players. Term and front loading offer flexibility.

Corey Perry and Ryan Getzlaf are worth 10m per x 5 years. Good luck Anaheim.
Limiting length and front loading is going to make it harder for weaker financial teams to sign star players????

So how many teams were able to dish out a ton of money up front like Shea Weber's deal? Some 27 million in the first 2 years. Or Parise's contract, with 24 million in the first 2 years, of which $20 million is signing bonus. Teams are unable to sign these guys BECAUSE of this, not in spite of it.

Perry and Getzlaf are absolutely not worth 10M each. There are a total of a whopping 7 players earning a 10M or more salary. Please. And the only reason they are getting 10+ is because of front loading.

If they signed regular contracts at 35M for 5 years, theyll be up for a new contract when league revenues should be even higher.

In fact, if guys like perry and getzlaf become UFAs more often, its less likely that a guy like David Jones will get 4M a season because there will be better players available.

The reason why mediocre players continue to get bigger pays is because the superstars are never available come free agency time.

EdAVSfan is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 03:39 PM
  #378
Ari91
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
Limiting the length of deals and front loading is going to make it harder for those teams to sign star players. Term and front loading offer flexibility.

Corey Perry and Ryan Getzlaf are worth 10m per x 5 years. Good luck Anaheim.

Most of the rich teams spend closer to the cap. I can easily argue that term and flexibility give rich teams an even bigger advantage because aside from easily affording these players, they have the opportunity to play around with the numbers to adjust the caphit in order to get these players under or at the cap ceiling.

If contracts are limited with a variance applied year to year, how many of these teams have 8-10M in cap space to afford even one of Getzlaf or Perry? Of the rich teams, Detroit and Rangers could bid on one of their services and that's about it. Even middling teams would have to consider adjusting their roster to fit that kind of caphit. The richer teams spending near or at the cap, they'd have to overhaul way too much of their roster to sign those players. It certainly limits the players options of who can realistically afford their services with all things considering, but it can be argued that the limitations do give smaller to middle teams a chance at star players on the UFA market.

But to be clear, I do find some of the contracting requests to be unnecessary. Aside from the 5% variance and ELCs at 2 years, the rest can be tossed.

Ari91 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 03:43 PM
  #379
Powdered Toast Man
Is he a ham?
 
Powdered Toast Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,632
vCash: 500
Good businessmen find out what the term "revenue" means before hitching their wagon to it.

Powdered Toast Man is online now  
Old
11-16-2012, 03:47 PM
  #380
Butch 19
King me
 
Butch 19's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: L.A. suburb
Country: United States
Posts: 9,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bp13 View Post
I don't mean this aggressively at all, but that's patently false. After all, wasn't the overwhelming consensus after the last lockout that the players got bent over?
No, it wasn't. Maybe for the first few days it was, but I remember a week or so after the deal, I read several articles that the players did pretty well for themselves.



Quote:
Originally Posted by bp13 View Post
Well how come there are still so many unhealthy teams?
um,... things change over time? Is your financial situation the same as it was 7 years ago?

And GMs have had years to study the CBA and take advantage of it when they can.

Butch 19 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 03:49 PM
  #381
bobafettish*
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,961
vCash: 500
first twinkies and now hockey.

bobafettish* is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 03:49 PM
  #382
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,056
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterSidorkiewicz View Post
Not to be a jerk, but that line really doesn't seem like something great businessmen do.
It seems silly but if you have enough money to buy an NHL franchise, the money +/- that it offers is not worth a huge investment of your time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EddieAVS View Post
Limiting length and front loading is going to make it harder for weaker financial teams to sign star players????

So how many teams were able to dish out a ton of money up front like Shea Weber's deal? Some 27 million in the first 2 years. Or Parise's contract, with 24 million in the first 2 years, of which $20 million is signing bonus. Teams are unable to sign these guys BECAUSE of this, not in spite of it.
How does that make sense? They did sign them. Nashville and Minnesota aren't big spending, high revenue franchises. They were able to sign those players. How would 5 x 14m have been better for Nashville? At least this way, they take a hit now but benefit long term.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EddieAVS View Post
Perry and Getzlaf are absolutely not worth 10M each. There are a total of a whopping 7 players earning a 10M or more salary. Please. And the only reason they are getting 10+ is because of front loading.
That's because those stars have been trading money for term, which won't be a possibility anymore.

Scurr is online now  
Old
11-16-2012, 03:50 PM
  #383
SidTheKid8787
Registered User
 
SidTheKid8787's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,289
vCash: 500
http://www.cbc.ca/podcasting/includes/hnicsirius.xml

If you miss it or don't have Sirius. HNIC shows are archived here.

SidTheKid8787 is online now  
Old
11-16-2012, 03:51 PM
  #384
Noldo
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,024
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stewie Griffin View Post
The big question is why the NHL continues to approve cap circumvention contracts (see: Zach Parise, Ryan Suter, etc.), yet they are willing to lose a season over stopping them.
Because without rules in place the NHL does not have the power to reject those contracts. Thus NHL needs to get the necessary rules in place, like they are now trying to do.

Noldo is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 03:52 PM
  #385
CerebralGenesis
Registered User
 
CerebralGenesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 23,673
vCash: 500
The 5 year term limit is stupid and I don't believe that it is a real sticking point for the league, regardless of media posturing.

CerebralGenesis is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 03:52 PM
  #386
Orrthebest
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 806
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
Gary brings in absentee owners so that he can continue to run the league how he sees fit. They're great business men, they just don't pay much attention and buy whatever Gary is selling. Bettman won't let you get close enough to get a team if you don't play ball with him.
You make it sound like Bettman can pick and choose who he wants to buy teams. If there is all these people lining up to invest in the NHL why is it taking on average over 2 years to sell the franchises south of the Boarder?

Orrthebest is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 03:57 PM
  #387
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,056
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orrthebest View Post
You make it sound like Bettman can pick and choose who he wants to buy teams. If there is all these people lining up to invest in the NHL why is it taking on average over 2 years to sell the franchises south of the Boarder?
Because it's a poor investment with that jackass running the league. That leaves Gary hunting down rich guys that don't know any better, usually takes him a while.

Scurr is online now  
Old
11-16-2012, 03:59 PM
  #388
Samzilla
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Samzilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 9,621
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KidRobot View Post
The hell?

Where did you get these cities from? Nashville has been doing great, Columbus can absolutely sustain a team, if they had the slightest bit to cheer for. They barely have an AHL roster out there.
Yeah, about that...
http://www.tennessean.com/article/20...nclick_check=1

Samzilla is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 04:02 PM
  #389
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 56,803
vCash: 500
http://aol.sportingnews.com/nhl/stor...ns-quotes-lupu

Spector: owner's best idea is a lot of nothing

(Talking about two week break of negotiations)

LadyStanley is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 04:05 PM
  #390
Cliffy1814
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 647
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterSidorkiewicz View Post
For being such savvy businessmen who earned a lot of money, these owners really aren't good with running pro sports franchises, are they? Maybe they should look at themselves and replacing their own management instead of trying to solve everything with trying to squeak it out of the players.

Or maybe, if they're losing so much money on these pro sports franchises, they should cut their losses, sell their teams, and venture into something more profitable?
They lose money in many cases, but they are generally seeing their franchise values rise quite significantly.
I lose $20m for 5 years and then sell my franchise for $125 more than I bought it for. I made money while most likely gaining tax advantages along the way.

Cliffy1814 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 04:06 PM
  #391
FanSince2014
What'd He Say?
 
FanSince2014's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Slovenia
Posts: 3,065
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandit View Post
Does anybody really care to hear this gas bag talk about how he's not solving the problem anymore?
What do you mean, anymore?

He's not about solving problems, he's about being the problem.

FanSince2014 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 04:06 PM
  #392
BLONG7
Registered User
 
BLONG7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 12,613
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CerebralGenesis View Post
So they refuse the break of negotiations but aren't negotiating. Cool.
Exactly, go figure...whine about a 2 week break, but when approached a year ago, they told the league to buzz off....

BLONG7 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 04:06 PM
  #393
bp13
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 11,254
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Butch 19 View Post
No, it wasn't. Maybe for the first few days it was, but I remember a week or so after the deal, I read several articles that the players did pretty well for themselves.





um,... things change over time? Is your financial situation the same as it was 7 years ago?

And GMs have had years to study the CBA and take advantage of it when they can.
Butch I can't technically argue with your points because they're obviously valid, but I will say this as simply as I can:

CBA's are agreements both parties enter based on both their analysis of current situation and their predictions for the future term of the CBA. They enter these agreements because they think they can make money from them. If "things change" is their excuse, they might want to try their hand at another line of work.

bp13 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 04:07 PM
  #394
Whydidijoin*
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,812
vCash: 500
Contract limits are primarily for insurance purposes, and the league would probably drop down to 7 years.

Whydidijoin* is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 04:08 PM
  #395
Whydidijoin*
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,812
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliffy1814 View Post
They lose money in many cases, but they are generally seeing their franchise values rise quite significantly.
I lose $20m for 5 years and then sell my franchise for $125 more than I bought it for. I made money while most likely gaining tax advantages along the way.
What franchise is going up 125 million in 5 years?

Whydidijoin* is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 04:10 PM
  #396
FanSince2014
What'd He Say?
 
FanSince2014's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Slovenia
Posts: 3,065
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
http://aol.sportingnews.com/nhl/stor...ns-quotes-lupu

Spector: owner's best idea is a lot of nothing

(Talking about two week break of negotiations)
Quote:
...as Toronto Maple Leafs winger Joffrey Lupul put it on Twitter: “Ya lets take 2 weeks off negotiating. Great approach 10,000+ people out of a job because of this and we want to take a 2 week break.”
Lupul fails to mention how he slid into to some less fortunate players slot on his new team, stealing his job.

Clearly hypocritical, but hey, it's all about NHL players, their greed, and selfishness.

FanSince2014 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 04:12 PM
  #397
HH
GO HABS GO!
 
HH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,300
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FanSince2012 View Post
Lupul fails to mention how he slid into to some less fortunate players slot on his new team, stealing his job.

Clearly hypocritical, but hey, it's all about NHL players, their greed, and selfishness.
Someone should tell them that making a deal is not sitting at a table and offering the same crap over and over again.

HH is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 04:13 PM
  #398
Orrthebest
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 806
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
Because it's a poor investment with that jackass running the league. That leaves Gary hunting down rich guys that don't know any better, usually takes him a while.
You mean the guys who have had the league growing at a better rate than the other 3 big sports. The guys that have seen players salaries increase by a factor on 6 higher than the other sports. Yes its all Gary's fault.

Orrthebest is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 04:15 PM
  #399
Butch 19
King me
 
Butch 19's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: L.A. suburb
Country: United States
Posts: 9,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bp13 View Post
Butch I can't technically argue with your points because they're obviously valid, but I will say this as simply as I can:

CBA's are agreements both parties enter based on both their analysis of current situation and their predictions for the future term of the CBA. They enter these agreements because they think they can make money from them. If "things change" is their excuse, they might want to try their hand at another line of work.
yeah, good points.

But tell me, the first time you saw a frontloaded contract paying amounts of $11m, 11, 12, 12, 9, 8, 5, 2, 1, 1, 1 - didn't that just look "wrong?" The average team just can't sustain that kind of pricing. Somewhere along the line, it had to hit the fan.

I know these retirement contracts are for only a few players, but it set a silly precedent that each GM had to try to outdo the next GM. And it snowballed from there.

Butch 19 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 04:15 PM
  #400
LetangInTheSO
Registered User
 
LetangInTheSO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country:
Posts: 2,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orrthebest View Post
You mean the guys who have had the league growing at a better rate than the other 3 big sports. The guys that have seen players salaries increase by a factor on 6 higher than the other sports. Yes its all Gary's fault.
I don't understand how those who support the owners espouse this idea that Gary Bettman has done a superb job of growing the game while simultaneously lamenting the fact that 2/3 of the league's franchises lose money. You really have to decide one way or the other whether the NHL is in good shape.

LetangInTheSO 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 04:22 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.