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.

The Line Has Been Drawn. Choose Your Side!

View Poll Results: Are You Pro Owners or Pro NHLPA??
Owners All The Way Baby! Let's Have a Cap Or Tax! 127 82.47%
I Vote NHLPA! Open Market (with a few concessions) 27 17.53%
Voters: 154. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-09-2004, 05:26 PM
  #26
Digger12
Registered User
 
Digger12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Defending the border
Posts: 14,567
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkwild
I think there is a definite lack of respect for how hard it is to build a great team. And a lack of clear thinking on how money isnt an advantage in that process.
Money may not be the #1 prerequisite in building a great team, but it sure is damn important when it comes to keeping that team intact.

Digger12 is offline  
Old
09-09-2004, 05:41 PM
  #27
missthenet
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 369
vCash: 500
reality and salary

this is the reality. Keith Tkachuk makes 11mm per year, $134,146.00 per game based on an 82 game schedule. Based on him playing 25 minutes a game he would make $$2,236.00 per minute or $55,894.00 for 25 minutes. All I gotta say is WOW no one is worth that much money

missthenet is offline  
Old
09-09-2004, 06:10 PM
  #28
garry1221
Registered User
 
garry1221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Walled Lake, Mi
Posts: 2,232
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to garry1221
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackRedGold
No you do not sign him for that amount. You sign him for the market rate. You pay him what his bargaining power enables him to get.



Once again a team does not pay a player based upon a percentage of their budget.



Name one real life example of anything that even remotely resembles this fantasyland notion.



The current system is not flawed. Right now young players are cheap and old players tend to be expensive. Just because Pittsburgh has to have a young team right does not mean it cannot be a good team.



If the owners can't run their businesses profitably maybe they should get out and let someone who can try and run it.

Why should the players agree to a system where the owners are guaranteed a profit? Last time I checked North America had a capitalist economy. If the owners want a socialist system maybe they should move their teams to Sweden.
in the free market of the nhl today i'd ask you to find teams that aren't in the red and compare and contrast what they've done with the teams that are in the red, with so many teams claiming they lost money, i'd be interested in what has happened all around, if it turned out not to be the players' salaries, then point proven, case closed and all those who say it aint the nhlpa who have put the league in this spot they're in now would have won your argument

if the players' salaries are shown to be the problem, then obviously something needs to be done about it, just what has been debated over countless threads here

garry1221 is offline  
Old
09-09-2004, 06:11 PM
  #29
thinkwild
Veni Vidi Toga
 
thinkwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,279
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by missthenet
this is the reality. Keith Tkachuk makes 11mm per year, $134,146.00 per game based on an 82 game schedule. Based on him playing 25 minutes a game he would make $$2,236.00 per minute or $55,894.00 for 25 minutes. All I gotta say is WOW no one is worth that much money
Its amazing some owner thought it was a good investment at one time eh? What was he thinking?

Didnt they steal that player from some poor struggling small market team? And now they are complaining the system is unfair? Good one. I suppose they wont be able to help themselves now but to offer Palffy a $12mil contract. How can they compete otherwise.

thinkwild is offline  
Old
09-09-2004, 06:42 PM
  #30
Toonces
The beer kitty
 
Toonces's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New Jersey
Country: Ireland
Posts: 3,676
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rand
Neither.


Right now I'm sick of both of them. Enough of this BS, get a deal done...

Toonces is offline  
Old
09-09-2004, 08:18 PM
  #31
Lobstertainment
Registered User
 
Lobstertainment's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,259
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Lobstertainment
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLONG7
Tough call, but I am inclined to side with the owners...there are very valid arguements for both sides... but at the end of the day, I see the owner as the guy with all the risk of running a business like this that can make a little money, or lose alot.

Lobstertainment is offline  
Old
09-09-2004, 08:36 PM
  #32
Pavel
Registered User
 
Pavel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Houston
Country: United States
Posts: 2,593
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digger12
Money may not be the #1 prerequisite in building a great team, but it sure is damn important when it comes to keeping that team intact.
Well said Digger!!

Pavel is offline  
Old
09-09-2004, 11:34 PM
  #33
ModestoFan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: And the fascination never ends...
Posts: 670
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to ModestoFan
Seriously, all this talk of money of the trees in the forest. The owners of these teams or ownership groups, don't care if players make $10 mil a year, so long as they, the owners can make some green. Players don't want a cap, because its the lazy way out of paying players at a "real" market rate.

Reality Time: Most players don't care about a CAP; however, the "superstar"-paid players, Lawyers, and most importantly AGENTS don't want a cap.
Now for the Owners: Most owners/ownership groups have multiple ventures in thier home city or entire region....Owning a Hockey team is only 10-30% of thier ownership portfolio. Look at SVSE (Silicon Valley Sports & Entertainment). They own the rights to concerts at HP Pavilion, the SJ Sharks, the SJ Stealth, rights to the Seibel Open, etc, etc, etc. They claim SJ lost $10MIL, and maybe as a business unit they did, but those losses offset the profits held in other areas of thier ownership portfolio. They wouldn't stay in business or even get in business if they weren't able to sustain a profit.

Those 2 points made; some-type of CAP system needs to be installed in order for the league to continue. As I don't doubt most teams are ok, there are others that could fold. They should be moved to cities with larger fan-bases and "better" hockey potential. If people won't pay to see Mario play, then...well...they lose.

Unfortunately for the owners and the players, if they continue to dig the hole any deeper, we may see the rise of another league (WHA*cough*cough*). That league would have an immediate following should things get nastier.

Sadly, both the players and the owners aren't learning the lesson of the 1990's. Baseball's fiasco should be a stiff wake-up call to anyone at the bargaining table, get a deal done, even if it is just an extension.

ModestoFan is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 03:05 PM
  #34
Vlad The Impaler
Registered User
 
Vlad The Impaler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 11,727
vCash: 500
I am siding with the owners, of course. As a hockey fan, it is in my best interests to do so.

Vlad The Impaler is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 03:16 PM
  #35
Licentia
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DementedReality
this is what i dont get. if the salaries will just go up, doesnt that mean thats where they should be ?

i mean, the owners sure seem convinced that player salaries must come down, so why would they just allow them to increase again unless they could afford it ?

dr
We've been through this dr. New York can spend $5 million on a $3 million dollar player and for New York that is a good value. It's not a good value for teams like Calgary though. Then, because the New York player is making so much, other players expect more.

Licentia is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 03:39 PM
  #36
Licentia
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by George Bachul
gkj, that is a slippery slope. Here is more of an issue that that, which I have posted before.

1. You are the GM of NYR. A 40 goal scorer is worth 10% or your budget. You sign him for $7 million dollars.

2. You are the GM of Pittsburgh. A 40 goal scorer is worth 10% of your budget. You offer him $4 million dollars. He holds out because he wants what the other 40 goal scorers make.

3. You are the agent of a RFA 40 goal scorer for Pittsburgh. You file for arbitration and use the NYR player as comparable. You are awarded $7 million dollars.

The system is flawed. The system must be fixed. Pittsburgh either goes bankrupt or can't afford to field a competitive team. The league needs to standardize on a system that makes sense.

And the players ARE at fault. The NHL has a pie. They want to give the players around 55-60% of that pie. They don't care how the players want to divide their pie, as long as the owners get to keep enough pie so that the plane tickets, arena staff, coaches, scouts, can be bought....and for (Insert swearword here) sakes maybe, just maybe, a team could profit just a wee bit for being a multi million dollar corporation.
Very well worded. 100% correct.

Licentia is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 04:37 PM
  #37
Licentia
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by go kim johnsson
Once again, no one held a gun to the owners' head and told them to give these guys that money
There is no sense arguing with these NHLPA fans. They just don't get it. You give a clear answer explaining fully the reason why one owner has to pay so much to a player, yet they come up with answers like this. It's the only thing more insane than the current CBA.

Look, kim johnsson. If you were GM of the New York Rangers, it would be your job to improve your team. You have a $60 million dollar budget. Calgary has a $30 million dollar budget. Calgary has a player that you know would improve your team. He is a UFA waiting to resign with Calgary, or take another bid. Wait, now Detroit is interested. They have a $50 million dollar budget. Calgary makes the first offer $4 million. That's the minimum the greedy player will sign for. But since Detroit wants the guy too, and they have a bigger budget, they can out-bid Calgary. They offer $5 million. Now you as the New York GM will get fired if you don't improve your team. Are you going to offer $4 million too and not get the player? Of course not. You have a bigger budget, you have fans and a boss to impress. You are going to grab that player and not let him get away. So make a $6 million dollar offer, and he's yours.

That's the gun to the head kim. You need to improve your team. You get fired if you don't. Too a team with a big budget, spending more is smart because you can afford to, and it pleases the fans. It's not a crime if you can pay a little more to keep your job and get a good player. Problem is, teams like Pittsburgh and Calgary and Edmonton can't afford to outbid the bigger teams. They will always have to settle for second rate players and will only win with great effort or by fluke.

Now please NHLPA fans, let's not hear the "no one forced the GMs to pay that much" argument anymore.

Licentia is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 06:31 PM
  #38
Licentia
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckhead
This post is BANG ON! Cheers GB! I realize that the owners have created the problem by giving out to much money, but the real problem is the system which establishes the market place. Teams like Boston, and Tampa Bay are looked at as cheap, because they walked away from players who were awarded hefty pay raises by the flawed system. I think it is great to see them walk away, and if more teams would do that it never would have gotten to this stand off now. But, there will always be a deep pocket owner who is willing to take that over valued player, and thus the solution to the problem is scrapped at the infancy stage.

I think this answer is even better.

If every single team had the exact same players, coaches, management, scouts, etc over the last 10 years, if every team was the same in every possible way, according to NHLPA fans, then we would have perfect equality in the league. No teams would be poorly run by unfit GMs, because every team would have the same GM. No team could have outdrafted another, because each team drafted the same.

So what would the difference be? Only one difference would exist. Give every team a different budget based on their respective revenues. Let's say every team was exactly like the Colorado Avalanche. Lots of great players for sure. Now small market teams wouldn't be able to keep all of the players they drafted. They just don't have the money to do so. So Calgary may have to give up their Joe Sakic and so might Edmonton have to give up their Joe Sakic. Now New York and Detroit can each sign another Joe Sakic. Those large market cities would be able to sign and pay more good players than the small market teams would. Therefore, the large market teams would have more success than the small market teams.

What is the difference? Not management, not scouts, not any other circumstance, except that one team makes more revenue than another.

As far as i'm concerned, that is the final argument.

Licentia is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 06:47 PM
  #39
Licentia
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digger12
Money may not be the #1 prerequisite in building a great team, but it sure is damn important when it comes to keeping that team intact.
And adding those big name free agents for the cup run like Colorado and Detroit and Toronto have done so many times.

Licentia is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 06:48 PM
  #40
Licentia
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by missthenet
this is the reality. Keith Tkachuk makes 11mm per year, $134,146.00 per game based on an 82 game schedule. Based on him playing 25 minutes a game he would make $$2,236.00 per minute or $55,894.00 for 25 minutes. All I gotta say is WOW no one is worth that much money

Nope, but maybe New York was offering $10 million so St. Louis had to pay up or lose him. If they lost him they would be less competitive and the fans would be peeved.

Licentia is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 06:50 PM
  #41
Licentia
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by garry1221
in the free market of the nhl today i'd ask you to find teams that aren't in the red and compare and contrast what they've done with the teams that are in the red, with so many teams claiming they lost money, i'd be interested in what has happened all around, if it turned out not to be the players' salaries, then point proven, case closed and all those who say it aint the nhlpa who have put the league in this spot they're in now would have won your argument

if the players' salaries are shown to be the problem, then obviously something needs to be done about it, just what has been debated over countless threads here
It doesn't matter what the problem is. One team can afford better players than another. End of story.

Licentia is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 06:59 PM
  #42
Motown Beatdown
Need a slump buster
 
Motown Beatdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Indianapolis
Country: United States
Posts: 8,554
vCash: 450
Quote:
Originally Posted by Licentia
Nope, but maybe New York was offering $10 million so St. Louis had to pay up or lose him. If they lost him they would be less competitive and the fans would be peeved.

Just like when New Jersey lost Holik, replaced him with cheaper players and won the cup the following year. If you dont want to pay player X 6 million a year there is nothing stopping a team from signing 3 players worth that same total.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Licentia
There is no sense arguing with these NHLPA fans.

And the same can be said with you on the owners side. You people think business men should be guaranteed a profit. You think players should have to give back money that was giving to them in a fair bargaining practice. It's not upon the players to save the owners from themselves, it's upon the man writing the paycheck to balance his own budget.

Motown Beatdown is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 07:02 PM
  #43
Russian Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,475
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Russian Fan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Licentia
It doesn't matter what the problem is. One team can afford better players than another. End of story.
You are making 15,000$/year
Your neighbour is making 50,000$/year

You can't afford a plasma TV & your neighbour can. End of story.

How old are you ?

Russian Fan is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 07:05 PM
  #44
VanIslander
17/07/2014 ATD RIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 18,057
vCash: 500
Don't choose either side because there is no line.

Don't buy into it. Choose your own side: they both are willing to turn their backs on the fans to get what they want.

This is is a three-dimensional problem fought on a two-dimensional surface.

They both need to voluntarily submit to a form of short-term arbitration by a mutually approved judiciary body.

Why? For the fans and for the longterm interest of the game!

VanIslander is online now  
Old
09-11-2004, 07:07 PM
  #45
Licentia
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JWI19
And the same can be said with you on the owners side. You people think business men should be guaranteed a profit. You think players should have to give back money that was giving to them in a fair bargaining practice. It's not upon the players to save the owners from themselves, it's upon the man writing the paycheck to balance his own budget.
I couldn't care less about owners making money. All I care about is every team having an equal budget, so that the talent of scouts, GMs, coaches, etc will be the deciding factor, not that one team can spend more than another. I don't care how the league gets there either. If they want to share revenue i'm all for it. But that's a big concession. I think the players should agree to a salary cap, and the owners should agree to revenue sharing. Then both sides have compromised and we can start the season.

Licentia is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 07:07 PM
  #46
Russian Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,475
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Russian Fan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Licentia
And adding those big name free agents for the cup run like Colorado and Detroit and Toronto have done so many times.
Colorado won cups with their core players, they add a few free agents but if you look carefully they made HUGE TRADES that made them give up a LOT OF FUTURE in order that today in 2004, they are very thin in prospect.

Can you tell me if it's a normal cycle that a team like Colorado was a power house for a few years & they will soon be in a HURTFULL rebuilding mode when Forsberg-Sakic-Blake will be gone ?

Detroit won cups with their core players, they add a few free agents but if you look carefully they made HUGE TRADES that made them give up a LOT OF FUTURE in order that today in 2004, they are very thin in prospect.

Can you tell me if it's a normal cycle that a team like Detriut was a power house for a few years & they will soon be in a HURTFULL rebuilding mode when Lidstrom-Yzerman & others will be gone ?

Toronto got a lot of money, they made more playoffs series than anyone in the last X years but they still are looking for 1 cup since 1967 !!! They hired very old UFA's & they have nothing in term of youth to trade for. (Technically they have some like Colaiacovo - Stajan) . Now is money so much a concern to you that makes you think that other teams then Toronto can't go to the cup without the same resources ?

Russian Fan is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 07:12 PM
  #47
Russian Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,475
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Russian Fan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Licentia
I couldn't care less about owners making money. All I care about is every team having an equal budget, so that the talent of scouts, GMs, coaches, etc will be the deciding factor, not that one team can spend more than another. I don't care how the league gets there either. If they want to share revenue i'm all for it. But that's a big concession. I think the players should agree to a salary cap, and the owners should agree to revenue sharing. Then both sides have compromised and we can start the season.
that's the thing you don't understand. You have 2 GM's from the same franchise

Andre Savard & Bob Gainey. One was awful with the financial aspect of the game but he had a lot of instinct to draft. The result was that with the money Andre Savard had, he was stuck with a lot of overpaid players while you have Bob Gainey on the other side where he continue the work of Mr.Savard but succeed in the financial department & now he's got room to buy a Alex Kovalev while Mr.Savard couldn't.

Is Montreal not competitive enough because Toronto spend 20,000,000$ ? They don't even know what to do with the 20,000,000$+ that they spend to still overpay their players ? (Please TO fans, I'm not into creating a MTL-TOR war).

The Cincinnati Bengals are in the same playing field of the New England Patriots how come they struggle for more than a decade & that suddenly they are progressing ?

Was it because of MONEY ? or because of good management.

Think outside the players to find your cause on why your (put your team) is suffering because of the CBA.

Russian Fan is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 07:14 PM
  #48
Licentia
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russian Fan
You are making 15,000$/year
Your neighbour is making 50,000$/year

You can't afford a plasma TV & your neighbour can. End of story.

How old are you ?
My age is not important, nor is yours.

If my neighbour has a better job then he should get more.

If another player scores more goals then you he should get more.

If one hockey team can't compete consistently at the level of another team, then for the sake of the NHL's survival as a 30 team league, something needs to be done.

Licentia is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 07:21 PM
  #49
Licentia
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russian Fan
You are making 15,000$/year
Your neighbour is making 50,000$/year

You can't afford a plasma TV & your neighbour can. End of story.

How old are you ?
My age is not important, nor is yours.

If my neighbour has a better job then he should get paid more.

If another player scores more goals then you should get paid more.

If one hockey team can't compete consistently at the level of another team, then for the sake of the NHL's survival as a 30 team league, something needs to be done.


Last edited by Licentia: 09-11-2004 at 07:37 PM.
Licentia is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 07:40 PM
  #50
Russian Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,475
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Russian Fan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Licentia
My age is not important, nor is yours.

If my neighbour has a better job then he should get more.

If another player scores more goals then you he should get more.

If one hockey team can't compete consistently at the level of another team, then for the sake of the NHL's survival as a 30 team league, something needs to be done.
Well your age matter to help me understand which experience you have or if you still dreaming of a perfect work.

All team in the NHL can compete. You saw TB compete over TOR , MINNY over NYR.

Again you related the competitivity to players when you should go where (put your team) has done to help you believe they will be competitive.

Russian Fan 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 10:53 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.