HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

Lockout V: Take the Long Way Home

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-21-2012, 08:02 AM
  #601
Fourier
Registered User
 
Fourier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Waterloo Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,784
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Can you explain to me how you're making that connection from my response to building a team along the lines of the Oilers' draft record vs other teams' abilities to get players of a similar caliber--when there are 30?
It's pretty hard to invision any system that would allow all 30 teams to add players the quality of those that Edmonton has drafted in the last three years. There will never be enough of them to go around. But what this system does at least is that it will vary the teams that will be able to rebuild through high draft picks. The system where money rules the day pretty much means that the same teams will generally be the ones benefitting from the rules.

I know we don't see eye to eye on this but I can say that being a fan of a team that was consistently viewed as a farm team for clubs with more resources pretty much killed my interest in the league as a whole.

Philly made things tough for Nashville with the Weber deal, but aside from having to pay the bonus money up front the total investment the Flyers were making in Weber was not so different than what the Preds would have offered him. In fact, they actually had the cap space and financial resources to keep both Weber and Suter under the current rules. Does anyone doubt that in a completely free system that we would be seeing offers of $20M+ for players like Weber. Pittsburghs payroll for their current roster could be $20-30M higher than it already is.

Fourier is online now  
Old
12-21-2012, 10:49 AM
  #602
zero8771
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 802
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by robla View Post
nice to read this. so you support the owners move to reduce the hrr?
wait.. you will say: "no, but there are other ways to make this NHL more healthy".
guessing the suggestions are:

- shrink the league by reducing the amount of franchise (will hurt the players by destroying jobs: should be no argument that the mid level US/Canadian players won't be paid these salaries anywhere else in the world)

- better TV contracts/marketing > won't happen: it's f***ing hockey.. a niche sports!

- reduce the expenses for player salaries by cutting the hrr and introduce measures to prevent cap circumvention

seems like there's no way around it..
hope the NHLPA uses some common sense before they manage to destroy their member's work places... by the looks of it it's almost too late.. some franchise will die off in the following few years.
The players agreed to the 50/50 split months ago. They also want to get back to the table but the NHL wants to know "what their plans is". Aka what else will you budge on because we wont budge on anything. Sorry but I'll never understand how anyone is pro owner at this point in time.

zero8771 is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 10:54 AM
  #603
Turbofan
The Full 60 Minutes
 
Turbofan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,344
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by boardin087 View Post
The players agreed to the 50/50 split months ago. They also want to get back to the table but the NHL wants to know "what their plans is". Aka what else will you budge on because we wont budge on anything. Sorry but I'll never understand how anyone is pro owner at this point in time.
Because you don't understand that the players' version of 50/50 really isn't.

Turbofan is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 11:01 AM
  #604
zero8771
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 802
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wings View Post
Because you don't understand that the players' version of 50/50 really isn't.
considering where they came from, how the league has been boasting about its record revenues, how the last lockout played out, how the owners are the ones who write every damn contract, and how the owners are responsible for their own spending, I'd say that its close enough to 50/50. Make whole is something that the players deserve, these owners wrote those contracts then came out and offered a 14 percent reduction in players share. Thats a joke.

zero8771 is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 11:05 AM
  #605
aj8000
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 716
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by boardin087 View Post
The players agreed to the 50/50 split months ago. They also want to get back to the table but the NHL wants to know "what their plans is". Aka what else will you budge on because we wont budge on anything. Sorry but I'll never understand how anyone is pro owner at this point in time.
It is easy to be pro owner. My guess is that the PA stepped over the line during the last set of negotiations. The owners at the meeting thought they had the pieces for an agreement and that was blown up by Fehr. The PA tried to play the owners and ended up shooting themselves in the foot.

The players will get one last chance to agree to the new CBA before the season is cancelled. The question is whether Fehr is smart enough to realize that if he calls the bluff of the owners, it will only make things worse for the players when the season is cancelled.

aj8000 is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 11:08 AM
  #606
RedMenace
Zero ***** Given
 
RedMenace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Under the Bridge
Posts: 4,266
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wings View Post
Because you don't understand that the players' version of 50/50 really isn't.
This has probably been covered before, but can anyone explain to me how the PA-proposed escrow cap system works, and how that affects the HRR split?

Or if it's been discussed previously, link me to that discussion?


Last edited by RedMenace: 12-21-2012 at 11:23 AM.
RedMenace is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 11:08 AM
  #607
zero8771
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 802
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by aj8000 View Post
It is easy to be pro owner. My guess is that the PA stepped over the line during the last set of negotiations. The owners at the meeting thought they had the pieces for an agreement and that was blown up by Fehr. The PA tried to play the owners and ended up shooting themselves in the foot.

The players will get one last chance to agree to the new CBA before the season is cancelled. The question is whether Fehr is smart enough to realize that if he calls the bluff of the owners, it will only make things worse for the players when the season is cancelled.
Its tough to say how these negotiations actually go down in the room. But from where things were to where they are, I think the players have moved enough. And if not.... players want a shorter CBA anyway

zero8771 is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 11:11 AM
  #608
aj8000
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 716
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
As a casual baseball fan, I'm more likely to tune in to see big powerhouse teams like the Yankees or Red Sox or Dodgers.
As a casual baseball fan, I am more likely to tune out once I know the team I would cheer for is so far out of the playoff race weeks into the schedule.

aj8000 is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 11:18 AM
  #609
aj8000
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 716
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by boardin087 View Post
Its tough to say how these negotiations actually go down in the room. But from where things were to where they are, I think the players have moved enough. And if not.... players want a shorter CBA anyway
It has nothing to do with how much the players have moved. This is not a normal union business relationship. The owners have the CBA in mind they want with a small margin of change to those terms. This negotiation was going to result in the players giving up everything to meet the criteria set out by the owners.

The only thing the owners gave up was the make whole provision. The players have now maxed that amount and the deal will not get any better ( it may even start to drop)

Going forward, the players are going to give up thousands of dollars to get back a few hundred. Not smart bargaining

And I am using the term "negotiation" etc for convenience. Like it or not the owners are dictating the terms of the CBA, and the players are not smart enough to realize that they should have taken the deal back when they had the 82 game schedule available to them.

aj8000 is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 11:33 AM
  #610
ottawah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,623
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedMenace View Post
This has probably been covered before, but can anyone explain to me how the PA-proposed escrow cap system works, and how that affects the HRR split?

Or if it's been discussed previously, link me to that discussion?
It would limit the percentage of money going into escrow. That means the NHLPA has proposed a 50% floor, and no upper limit.

For example, the NHLPA proposal is asking for a cap of 67M this year and limited escrow (10% I heard, but never saw that in print). Last year a 50/50 split would have been ~49M per team average . So unless the growth rate is 20%, the owners will pay a huge amount over 50. And that does not include the make whole or compliance buyouts.

Rough numbers of course, but you get the idea. Basically the players want a cap number that is not close to realistic for 50/50, and want to limit the downside of that to the players in limited escrow.

ottawah is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 11:45 AM
  #611
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,322
vCash: 500
Anyone hear anything about the PA vote to authorize a DOI?

haseoke39 is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 11:53 AM
  #612
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,463
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Given where you have to draft to benefit along the lines of Edmonton (or Pittsburgh, Washington), the cycle you mention isn't sufficient to help all 30 teams. If every team took turns tanking, one per year, how long would it take to get anywhere?
With 30 teams, all else being equal, it would be a 60 to 90 year cycle. Winners would need to tank more than once in a short time span. Although Detroit is not an exemplar of this, their draft success is. They hit on two cycles consecutively and bridged the two cycles with one player (Lidstrom). The first cycle was Federov/Yzerman/Lidstrom, the second Datsyuk/Z with the Lidstrom carryover. Through the draft, it is two or three players, not just one. And a team has to nail the secondary players as well through draft or trade.

SJeasy is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 11:55 AM
  #613
RedMenace
Zero ***** Given
 
RedMenace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Under the Bridge
Posts: 4,266
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ottawah View Post
It would limit the percentage of money going into escrow. That means the NHLPA has proposed a 50% floor, and no upper limit.

For example, the NHLPA proposal is asking for a cap of 67M this year and limited escrow (10% I heard, but never saw that in print). Last year a 50/50 split would have been ~49M per team average . So unless the growth rate is 20%, the owners will pay a huge amount over 50. And that does not include the make whole or compliance buyouts.

Rough numbers of course, but you get the idea. Basically the players want a cap number that is not close to realistic for 50/50, and want to limit the downside of that to the players in limited escrow.
Okay, I think my major point of not understanding was how the escrow system actually works.

To be quite honest, I still don't fully understand. This is why I'm not in finance. Ugh.

I think I'm just going to step out at this point. Heh. Thanks for trying, though.

RedMenace is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 12:02 PM
  #614
NJDevs26
Moderator
Status quo
 
NJDevs26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 24,741
vCash: 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
Anyone hear anything about the PA vote to authorize a DOI?
Supposedly ended at noon, but knowing the PA it'll probably take a week to count the vote.

NJDevs26 is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 12:06 PM
  #615
CerebralGenesis
Registered User
 
CerebralGenesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 23,672
vCash: 500
Mossey had a nice post where the latest PA offer of "50/50" has the players at 2.0B or something. What a concession. Someone will find it though, I wouldn't want to misquote the great work he did there. The PA's version of 50/50 is a sham and probably why they say they are really close and the league tells them to get lost and take their napkin back with them.

CerebralGenesis is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 12:09 PM
  #616
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 56,803
vCash: 500
David Pagnotta ‏@TheFourthPeriod How's this for a coincidence, given the hoopla over today (no joke): To date, total player salaries lost due to lockout: $666M.

LadyStanley is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 12:20 PM
  #617
Conflicted Habs fan
Registered User
 
Conflicted Habs fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Montreal
Country: Martinique
Posts: 562
vCash: 763
Another ruse by Bettman and co, this time he's getting Bill the Hill to drop false info into the media that a season will be had. They have a whole bag of tricks to ruse the PA into believing a deal can be made only to pull the rug out from everyone. They're operating to a timeline and they never intended to have a season. Just a season of bargaining tricks to reduce the player's share.

Conflicted Habs fan is online now  
Old
12-21-2012, 12:20 PM
  #618
ThePhoenixx
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 846
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
If a player (or players) sued on anti trust grounds, the League and every team would be named as defendants - since there is no anti trust case if there isn't collusive actions by the League and/or multiple teams.

In the McNeil case (and the recent Brady v NFL) the suits named the NFL and every team as defendants.

Sue them all. Let a judge sort it out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuklaNation View Post
He would sue the company the contract is signed with. Could be a holding company of some sort. Who knows. Highly unlikely its Ilitch personally. Players suing teams that are struggling financially will likely get zero.
Thanks!

Follow up question.

The NHL obviously doesn't have the money if the players win.

So would the owners then be on the hook for the tab? If so, aren't players really suing their own owners? It would be like Horcoff is suing Katz, or Crosby is suing...etc.

ThePhoenixx is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 12:50 PM
  #619
cheswick
Non-registered User
 
cheswick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Peg City
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,174
vCash: 540
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
David Pagnotta ‏@TheFourthPeriod How's this for a coincidence, given the hoopla over today (no joke): To date, total player salaries lost due to lockout: $666M.
Never quite understand when reporters quote this. They use the salary figures players would have earned under the previous CBA, which is the whole point of the lockout, so the amount of salary lost they quote would never have been earned under any circumstances.


The true salary lost would be the amount the players could have earned accepting a particular offer the NHL gave them for a certain number of games.

cheswick is online now  
Old
12-21-2012, 01:04 PM
  #620
GordieHoweHatTrick
Registered User
 
GordieHoweHatTrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 13,138
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conflicted Habs fan View Post
Another ruse by Bettman and co, this time he's getting Bill the Hill to drop false info into the media that a season will be had. They have a whole bag of tricks to ruse the PA into believing a deal can be made only to pull the rug out from everyone. They're operating to a timeline and they never intended to have a season. Just a season of bargaining tricks to reduce the player's share.
Jesus, this needs to be dropped. He was asked to give a yes or no answer. I suppose he could have said no comment but you're not going to hear any side come out and say, "No, we don't expect to have a season"

GordieHoweHatTrick is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 01:11 PM
  #621
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
David Pagnotta ‏@TheFourthPeriod How's this for a coincidence, given the hoopla over today (no joke): To date, total player salaries lost due to lockout: $666M.
Is that through December 21st or January 14th?

haseoke39 is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 01:16 PM
  #622
ottawah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,623
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedMenace View Post
Okay, I think my major point of not understanding was how the escrow system actually works.
The salary cap is set to limit spending "in the hopes" that it will cause salaries to be approximately what the overall cap should be, but its pretty much never the case. Basically the cap is estimated (as you do not know revenues), and thats the midpoint. Salary caps and floors are calculated off of the midpoint.

Escrow is a tax on salaries paid into a fund. At the end of the year the players % share is calculated against what they made, and the owners get cash from the escrow account to make up the difference the players owe them for over paying.

ottawah is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 01:26 PM
  #623
Do Make Say Think
Soul & Onward
 
Do Make Say Think's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 18,930
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedMenace View Post
Okay, I think my major point of not understanding was how the escrow system actually works.

To be quite honest, I still don't fully understand. This is why I'm not in finance. Ugh.

I think I'm just going to step out at this point. Heh. Thanks for trying, though.
It's not too complicated actually

The players were getting 57% of HRR but how do you determine how much that translates into real dollars?

You wait for the season to end and run the numbers and then divide the pie up. However the players get paid during the season so a certain amount of their pay is basically docked in order to make sure they actually get 57% once the season is over.

This means that sometimes the players don't get the exact amount of dollars the contract stipulates because it would make the players share go over 57%. However there have been two (maybe three, don't have the numbers with me) when the players actually got more money at the end because revenues were good enough that the players' salaries and their docked pay was under 57% (actually when that happened I think the player's share of HRR was 53%)

Do Make Say Think is online now  
Old
12-21-2012, 01:47 PM
  #624
Capsized
Parity is a Disease
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,688
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourier View Post
It's pretty hard to invision any system that would allow all 30 teams to add players the quality of those that Edmonton has drafted in the last three years. There will never be enough of them to go around. But what this system does at least is that it will vary the teams that will be able to rebuild through high draft picks. The system where money rules the day pretty much means that the same teams will generally be the ones benefitting from the rules.

I know we don't see eye to eye on this but I can say that being a fan of a team that was consistently viewed as a farm team for clubs with more resources pretty much killed my interest in the league as a whole.

Philly made things tough for Nashville with the Weber deal, but aside from having to pay the bonus money up front the total investment the Flyers were making in Weber was not so different than what the Preds would have offered him. In fact, they actually had the cap space and financial resources to keep both Weber and Suter under the current rules. Does anyone doubt that in a completely free system that we would be seeing offers of $20M+ for players like Weber. Pittsburghs payroll for their current roster could be $20-30M higher than it already is.
In this system a team like Edmonton, Pittsburgh, ect. tank for several years so they can draft and develop a winning team only to have that team broken up as soon as it has success. As soon as any of those high picks hit free agency they are bound to be broken up and evenly distributed. It makes sustained success highly improbable. Why would I want to support a league where failure is the price for success? In a cap free league the draft order is the same. The worst teams get the highest picks. They are rewarded for their failure and lifted up. The difference is that the owner that made smart decisions and therefore made money, can spend some of that money to sustain quality without having to tank every few years. When even the best revenue generating franchises aren't good their revenue drops. Being that they make the higher percentage of revenue that drop costs the league overall.

Capsized is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 02:06 PM
  #625
madhi19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Cold and Dark place!
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,318
vCash: 500
What are the odds that Gary and Don get visited by three Ghost next week! loll

madhi19 is online now  
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 11:01 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.