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.

NHL Lockout XXVIII: Don't worry about the lockout. Let me worry about blank.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-13-2012, 09:05 PM
  #951
JAX
Registered User
 
JAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sault Ste. Marie
Country: Canada
Posts: 896
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetangInTheSO View Post
That they fought tooth and nail to maintain a free market for their labor as opposed to a socialized system that the league said would fix the league's problems.

Lo and behold, the league got the system it asked for and *surprise surprise* it isn't working and *surprise surprise* the solution is to pay the players less money!


I think you were looking for a different expression.


I usually try to refrain from being an internet grammar policeman, but I'd be willing to wager that you're one of the guys who gets off by putting the payers down for their educational credentials but couldn't spell your way out of a kindergarten spelling bee.



I can't stand to hear this talking point again. THE PLAYERS' SALARIES INCREASED AS A DIRECT FUNCTION OF LEAGUE-WIDE REVENUE GROWTH. Begrudging them for this makes absolutely no sense.
.

What makes no sense is someone thinking "league wide revenue growth" but fails to unterstand 85% comes from 3 teams.

JAX is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:07 PM
  #952
NJDevs26
Moderator
Status quo
 
NJDevs26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 22,990
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleedred View Post
Yeah this is exactly how I feel. I'm 55% percent sure a deal gets done, and there's a season, but it will go until right before the games from January 15th are to be cancelled. 55/45 isn't too confident, but it's how I feel though. If games are cancelled from January 15th I expect the rest of the season will go with it unless a deal has been made, and they're cancelled to rewrite the schedule cause I think those games will need to be cancelled anyway.

I don't think a deal gets done until second week of January. It will be a deal, or no deal, and the season is called.
I'm at about 55-45 now too...and the only reason I'm still there is because it would be a total disaster for the NHL to miss another season. Both sides are going to have to give, especially since they're not 'that' far apart. They're only far apart in the sense that nobody's moving an inch closer to the middle until mid-January.

Problem is there are still too many guys in both camps who don't care about hockey and wouldn't mind missing a season just to 'win' - Fehr and some of the hard-line owners among them. I can't stand Bettman but I think he knows he created a Frankenstein with the hard-line block and that losing another season would mean the end of the NHL as the fourth major sport.

NJDevs26 is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:07 PM
  #953
Kirk Muller
Registered User
 
Kirk Muller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Brrr -18, Gomez Cold
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,330
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DyerMaker66 View Post
Why do I need to elaborate? The NHL doesn't exist without the top 700 players in the world; the nhl can exist without the owners: They are merely place-holders. The community could run the franchises if they chose to and if the population wanted them to. Ron Burkle is not needed in the best hockey league in the world, Sidney Crosby is.
actually no Crosby isnt needed. If Crosby disappears off the face of the earth tomorrow, does the league die? No it moves on.

fact is, the players need the owners just as much. A good majority of North American players have ZERO interest in playing overseas on a permanent basis. Most dont even care to play an entire season over there. No matter what, the players need the owners.

if the players didnt need the owners, and sorry your sad sack reasoning that the government, community etc could run the team is laughable. Then they become owners, you think they will accept operating at losses. Thats a ridiculous argument. If the owners werent needed, the players would ALL be in Europe right now. They fully know the cash is here in North America which is why they are willing to fall off a cliff to try and win this CBA

Kirk Muller is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:08 PM
  #954
Kings4thecup
Registered User
 
Kings4thecup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 473
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetangInTheSO View Post
I disagree. 50-100 players is only 2-3 players per team. Think of the last 25 Stanley Cup Championship teams. Of course, most of them had 2-3 good-to-elite players, but was the rest of the roster "interchangeable?" Hardly. In fact, quite the opposite. Most championship teams win because of their depth. It's the competitive market for second tier players that drives the market for those players up (as opposed to pure lunacy on behalf of the owners). I might agree that the bottom third of NHL players become more interchangeable, but even so, there is a still a discernable drop off between NHL-calibre third/fourth liners and mid-level talent in the AHL/KHL/other second-tier professional leagues.
But if you take the bottom 400 players out of the picture, and replaced them with the next 400 players, there would be talent descrepancies between those players just the same. Then, the team that has the best of those players, would have the most depth. The talent pool is already pretty thinned out. There are plenty of players in the AHL, ECHL and CHL as well as Europe, that if put in the right opportunity, they could compete in the NHL right now. So many of the bottom tier players are there because they were put in the right spot at the right time. That's my point.

Kings4thecup is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:13 PM
  #955
Ducks DVM
Moderator
There is no grunion
 
Ducks DVM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,415
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetangInTheSO View Post
I disagree. 50-100 players is only 2-3 players per team. Think of the last 25 Stanley Cup Championship teams. Of course, most of them had 2-3 good-to-elite players, but was the rest of the roster "interchangeable?" Hardly. In fact, quite the opposite. Most championship teams win because of their depth. It's the competitive market for second tier players that drives the market for those players up (as opposed to pure lunacy on behalf of the owners). I might agree that the bottom third of NHL players become more interchangeable, but even so, there is a still a discernable drop off between NHL-calibre third/fourth liners and mid-level talent in the AHL/KHL/other second-tier professional leagues.
Now think of the bottom teams every year for the last 25 years. How many of those teams had 0-1 good (much less elite) players, and how many of the depth players on those teams were easily replaceable. It's probably a number somewhere closer to 150, but the falloff between everyone past that point and everyone in the rest of the world isn't THAT special. More to the point, you can mostly replace those top players in 5-10 years, and the rest of the pack in fewer. There's a reason the average NHL career is 4-5 years - they get replaced.

Ducks DVM is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:13 PM
  #956
Kirk Muller
Registered User
 
Kirk Muller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Brrr -18, Gomez Cold
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,330
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crows View Post
Remember when daly said they only needed to " tweak" the last CBa..? Yeah...

What... A ... Joke
well going by the league offers, they are tweaking the old CBA. the league wants essentially a lower percentage and closing loopholes on circumventing the cap, and reducing long term contracts. Those arent drastic changes to the CBA

the PA and Fehr want to change the system again. Its obvious based off his negotiation tactics. He has convinced the PA they can re-write the last lockout. Many players said as well it shouldnt have been this hard but its not consistent with how they negotiated. Continually offering de-linked proposals proves this

Kirk Muller is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:13 PM
  #957
JAX
Registered User
 
JAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sault Ste. Marie
Country: Canada
Posts: 896
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=LetangInTheSO;56525897]That they fought tooth and nail to maintain a free market for their labor as opposed to a socialized system that the league said would fix the league's problems.Lo and behold, the league got the system it asked for and *surprise surprise* it isn't working and *surprise surprise* the solution

is to pay the players less money!


before you pass the collection plate around, the league needs a system that will work the last cba is the last cba, it doesn't mean the 05 is the CBA for life just like the other sports corrections need to be made.


Ithink you were looking for a different expression .

no I think that expression is clear.

I usually try to refrain from being an internet grammar policeman, but I'd be willing to wager that you're one of the guys who gets off by putting the payers down for their educational credentials but couldn't spell your way out of a kindergarten spelling bee.



I can't stand to hear this talking point again. THE PLAYERS' SALARIES INCREASED AS A DIRECT FUNCTION OF LEAGUE-WIDE REVENUE GROWTH. Begrudging them for this makes absolutely no sense.[/QUOTE

I am not PC friendly...

JAX is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:14 PM
  #958
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,197
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanwest View Post
Millions of dollars.
1%

That is the total loss of revenue Bell Canada will incur for the Leafs not playing. I doubt they even notice. It'd be akin to my losing a penny.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:15 PM
  #959
LetangInTheSO
Registered User
 
LetangInTheSO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country:
Posts: 2,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAX View Post
[/B].

What makes no sense is someone thinking "league wide revenue growth" but fails to unterstand 85% comes from 3 teams.
85% of the league's revenue does not come from 3 teams. Not even close.

There is indeed, however, a massive revenue disparity between the teams. That is not a fault of the "greedy" players. It is the fault of short-sighted owners who expanded into markets they had no business being in. Of course, the players reaped benefits of this in the form of jobs, but nonetheless, the problem with the NHL's business model is not that they pay the players 7% more of the revenue than they should. The problem with the NHL's business model is that they operate a handful of franchises that will never be viable in their current markets.

LetangInTheSO is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:17 PM
  #960
LetangInTheSO
Registered User
 
LetangInTheSO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country:
Posts: 2,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by StittsvilleJames View Post
I hear ya. The Kings would have not even come close to winning without Dwight King to push them over the edge...
Brown, Kopitar, Richards, Carter, Quick, Doughty. That's 6 players. I guarantee you that every single SC winning team for the last 25 years can name 6 players who were vital to their championship win. Again, I might concede that the bottom 200 players in the league are somewhat interchangeable, but the I was refuting the claim that only the NHL's top 100 players were elite on a worldwide level.

LetangInTheSO is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:17 PM
  #961
StittsvilleJames
Registered User
 
StittsvilleJames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 806
vCash: 500
I
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
1%

That is the total loss of revenue Bell Canada will incur for the Leafs not playing. I doubt they even notice. It'd be akin to my losing a penny.

Only if your annual revenue was $1.00

StittsvilleJames is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:19 PM
  #962
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,197
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by mossey3535 View Post
So let me get this straight. If you guys were middle tier players right now, you'd be ok with the NHLPA dragging this out until the deadline?
I understand the rationale for contending contract length but would be trying to work out an arrangement the league could swallow much earlier so as to hopefully get that negotiated down or out completely. The PA pushed too much on everything and now may get nothing.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:19 PM
  #963
BonkTastic
"Small Sample Size!"
 
BonkTastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Jakarta, IDN
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,209
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanwest View Post
Sure. But that's 40-45% of a much bigger whole. That's a great deal for the baseball players.
Agreed. Baseball players earn slightly less as a percentage of revenue than NHL players would under a 50-50 deal, BUT baseball has ridiculous revenue streams that allow their best players to sign $25mil/year deals like Josh Hamilton just did.

If the NHL has a TV deal (or deals) that was even a third as good as MLB's, we would be playing hockey right now, guaranteed.


Last edited by BonkTastic: 12-13-2012 at 09:27 PM.
BonkTastic is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:20 PM
  #964
Ducks DVM
Moderator
There is no grunion
 
Ducks DVM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,415
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetangInTheSO View Post
85% of the league's revenue does not come from 3 teams. Not even close.

There is indeed, however, a massive revenue disparity between the teams. That is not a fault of the "greedy" players. It is the fault of short-sighted owners who expanded into markets they had no business being in. Of course, the players reaped benefits of this in the form of jobs, but nonetheless, the problem with the NHL's business model is not that they pay the players 7% more of the revenue than they should. The problem with the NHL's business model is that they operate a handful of franchises that will never be viable in their current markets.
Not true at all. The problem with the NHL's business model is that the cap system is structured such that outliers at the top end skew the league to where most teams can't profit. The revenues in Toronto, Montreal and New York screw it up for all the teams in the middle, who would actually be in far worse shape if there weren't some anchor teams losing money - lose the current cellar dwellers and all you get is a surge upwards of the cap and floor and the teams that are currently marginal become the new big money losers.

Ducks DVM is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:21 PM
  #965
Austy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 22
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=JAX;56526245]
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetangInTheSO View Post



I usually try to refrain from being an internet grammar policeman, but I'd be willing to wager that you're one of the guys who gets off by putting the payers down for their educational credentials but couldn't spell your way out of a kindergarten spelling bee...

Nobody's perfect, can't we all just get along?

Austy is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:21 PM
  #966
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,197
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by StittsvilleJames View Post
I


Only if your annual revenue was $1.00
You missed the point. A penny is so irrelevant, I wouldn't miss it. By comparison the Leafs represent such a minuscule amount of revenue for Bell, they are equally irrelevant by the end of the day.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:30 PM
  #967
GrandChelems
Registered User
 
GrandChelems's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,719
vCash: 2209
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAX View Post
[/B].

What makes no sense is someone thinking "league wide revenue growth" but fails to unterstand 85% comes from 3 teams.


I couldn't agree more. This should be the starting point of any argument / discussion not the end point.

It is so blatantly obvious it is just mindboggling.

Also: inflation?

GrandChelems is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:34 PM
  #968
McRib
2nd Rate Fan
 
McRib's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Saskatoon
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,493
vCash: 500
I see that President Obama addressed the lockout today and urged the two sides to figure it out for the fans. Good on him.

But then I realized... Will a bunch of Republican voting rich guys listen to Obama? heh.

McRib is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:35 PM
  #969
LetangInTheSO
Registered User
 
LetangInTheSO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country:
Posts: 2,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducks DVM View Post
Not true at all. The problem with the NHL's business model is that the cap system is structured such that outliers at the top end skew the league to where most teams can't profit. The revenues in Toronto, Montreal and New York screw it up for all the teams in the middle, who would actually be in far worse shape if there weren't some anchor teams losing money - lose the current cellar dwellers and all you get is a surge upwards of the cap and floor and the teams that are currently marginal become the new big money losers.
This is actually untrue. I just used Forbes' #s (not perfect, but certainly not wildly far off) and calculated this:

Salaries aside, the average operating costs for each team average ~$50M.
The top 20 teams gross a total of ~$2.3B in revenue (/20 = an avg. of ~$115M revenue/team).
57% of $2.3B is ~$1.3B (/20 = ~$65M salary cap).
Thus, with 57% of revenues going to players and another $50M/team for operations, the league could break even.


Thus, the NHL could operate at break-even (the actual #s show them coming out just above) by lopping off the bottom 10 teams and maintaining a 57% salary cap.


I'm actually not even advocating for a 57% salary cap, I'm just saying that the league's problem isn't the salary cap, the problem is a handful of poorly located and/or poorly run franchises.

LetangInTheSO is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:36 PM
  #970
LetangInTheSO
Registered User
 
LetangInTheSO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country:
Posts: 2,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrandChelems View Post


I couldn't agree more. This should be the starting point of any argument / discussion not the end point.

It is so blatantly obvious it is just mindboggling.

Also: inflation?
Are you guys serious? 85% of league revenue comes from 3 teams? Are you insane? You might be thinking of PROFIT instead of revenue? (ironic considering how the "pro owner" camp rightly berates other people for not understanding the difference between revenue and profit)

EDIT: Name me the 3 teams that bring in 85% of the league's revenue and I'll cut a check to you for any sum you name :p


Last edited by LetangInTheSO: 12-13-2012 at 09:43 PM.
LetangInTheSO is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:36 PM
  #971
Kopistar
Registered User
 
Kopistar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scoobs View Post
I see that President Obama addressed the lockout today and urged the two sides to figure it out for the fans. Good on him.

But then I realized... Will a bunch of Republican voting rich guys listen to Obama? heh.
When did he do this??? I remember he did it a few months back on Leno, but has he said it anywhere else???


Also, LOL at Colin Wilson's comments

Kopistar is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:37 PM
  #972
Legionnaire11
Registered User
 
Legionnaire11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hendersonville
Country: United States
Posts: 2,750
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik Estrada View Post
I think Fehr has always been sceptical of team owners. He's well versed in baseball labor history. He's said that since the late 19th century owners always claim that they're going bankrupt and the fears have never panned out... In the 1994 baseball CBA negotiations, the baseball owners were claiming that 12 to 14 teams (out of 28) were losing money...

Add to that the fact the NHL owners multiply ultimatums, gimmicks, deadlines, temper tantrums, pull deals off the table and yet, like clockwork, always keep upping their offers... The NHL can say anything right now, I'm sure Fehr believes little or nothing and is convinced there's alot more to get from them.
False, the agreement is almost complete. There are just a few sticking points left and we know where those will fall..

Contract limits will be between 5-10 years

Variance limit will be between 5%-25%

CBA length will be between 6-10 years


So no, there isn't a lot more to be gained on either side, they're both to the point where whatever gains can be made on the remaining issues are not worth losing the rest of this season. That's the most frustrating part of this mess right now.

Legionnaire11 is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:37 PM
  #973
RockLobster
Moderator
Beatles Guru
 
RockLobster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Kansas
Country: Germany
Posts: 12,013
vCash: 905
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kopistar View Post
When did he do this??? I remember he did it a few months back on Leno, but has he said it anywhere else???


Also, LOL at Colin Wilson's comments

****EDIT****

Nevermind...found them.

RockLobster is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:38 PM
  #974
ltrangerfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 933
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetangInTheSO View Post
85% of the league's revenue does not come from 3 teams. Not even close.

There is indeed, however, a massive revenue disparity between the teams. That is not a fault of the "greedy" players. It is the fault of short-sighted owners who expanded into markets they had no business being in. Of course, the players reaped benefits of this in the form of jobs, but nonetheless, the problem with the NHL's business model is not that they pay the players 7% more of the revenue than they should. The problem with the NHL's business model is that they operate a handful of franchises that will never be viable in their current markets.
The top 3 teams earn the equivalent of 83% of the leagues profits not revenues.

You are correct in your assessment about some franchises. I believe that ultimately the NHL will have to fold some locations since they really will never be viable and will only survive if both the owners and players engage in revenue sharing for those marginal teams.

I view the owners and players as partners. A 50-50 share of revenues (not profits) gives both parties a common interest to expand the sport. I believe it is unrealistic for the players to assume whatever moves the owners make is the owners problem alone. If franchises close and the league shrinks does hockey become a more regional sport than it is? Perhaps NBC loses all interest as does many sponsors? I love how the players complain about the owners inability to control the players salaries and the poor business decisions the owners make yet the players are the direct beneficiaries of both actions until the CBA expires. I would love to work in a business that paid me 50% of the revenues and let the owner worry whether he can make money on his 50%.

ltrangerfan is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:39 PM
  #975
McRib
2nd Rate Fan
 
McRib's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Saskatoon
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,493
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kopistar View Post
When did he do this??? I remember he did it a few months back on Leno, but has he said it anywhere else???


Also, LOL at Colin Wilson's comments
Obama: Do right by the people that support you.

McRib 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 06:27 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.