HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

NHLPA scoring system revealed

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-08-2004, 09:33 PM
  #1
Infensus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 487
vCash: 500
NHLPA scoring system revealed

Link Pretty slick system they have to control the marketplace.

Infensus is offline  
Old
11-08-2004, 10:28 PM
  #2
Brooklyn Ranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn, of course
Posts: 8,263
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Infensus
Link Pretty slick system they have to control the marketplace.
Information is everything. All they are doing is collecting the it and sharing it. It's not like they are stealing anything.

Brooklyn Ranger is offline  
Old
11-08-2004, 10:33 PM
  #3
Slats432
Registered User
 
Slats432's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,594
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooklyn Ranger
Information is everything. All they are doing is collecting the it and sharing it. It's not like they are stealing anything.
No, but they use each other's contracts to collude to get a higher pay. Which is what is wrong with the free market system. Agents for two players in two markets like Edmonton and NY are looking for the same money regardless of one's ability to pay over another.

Slats432 is offline  
Old
11-08-2004, 10:38 PM
  #4
Brooklyn Ranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn, of course
Posts: 8,263
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by George Bachul
No, but they use each other's contracts to collude to get a higher pay. Which is what is wrong with the free market system. Agents for two players in two markets like Edmonton and NY are looking for the same money regardless of one's ability to pay over another.
Pay is based on ability--if a team can't pay, that's another issue.

Brooklyn Ranger is offline  
Old
11-08-2004, 10:42 PM
  #5
NYR469
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Infensus
Link Pretty slick system they have to control the marketplace.
the players can't control the market since they can only sign what the teams offer them...all they are doing is determining the marketplace to set an asking price, it is then up to the owners to say yes or no to that asking price

NYR469 is offline  
Old
11-08-2004, 10:51 PM
  #6
NYR469
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by George Bachul
No, but they use each other's contracts to collude to get a higher pay. Which is what is wrong with the free market system. Agents for two players in two markets like Edmonton and NY are looking for the same money regardless of one's ability to pay over another.
first this isn't something new, it is just a more advanced way of doing it and most of the info used is public knowledge so they aren't exchanging secret info...

second, comparing a player to a handful of other players and asking for a similar salary is NOT collusion, it is called finding fair market value...if all 700 players refused to sign for less then $2 mil each then that would be one thing, but that isn't what is happening...

third, how can the players collude when they don't determine the salary level?? the only thing the players do is determine their asking price and then the owners either give it to them or they don't...asking for more $$ isn't collusion it is called negotiation and if the owner gives them that $$ thats the owners fault. the nhlpa could set iginla's 'marketvalue' at $20 mil, does that mean a team has to give him that?? no

last, bill daly stated that the league has similar technology but the nhlpa uses it better...you can't fault the nhlpa for being more intelligent and better prepared when it comes to contract negotiations. its the agent's job to get his client the best deal possible, so don't fault the agents for doing their jobs well, fault the owners for not being smart enough to get people in place to counter what the player agents are doing to get the best deal possible for the club...instead when agents say jump, the gm says 'how high?' and hands over the $$ with a signing bonus on top. that isn't the agents fault

NYR469 is offline  
Old
11-09-2004, 01:43 AM
  #7
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
The problem is it only takes one or two "idiots" to throw everything else out of whack.

It's like the old gun argument. It's not the guns that kill people. They don't fire themselves or hold grudges.....it is the idiots holding guns and the bullets within them that kill people.

And just like anything else you can't simply hope that everyone has enough common sense to do the better good. Heck just the past 2000 years of history has proved that point.

Edge is offline  
Old
11-09-2004, 06:18 AM
  #8
Fish
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: New Zealand
Posts: 2,177
vCash: 500
To be honest I thought the article did a poor job of explaining exactly what these systems are used for. On the face of it, the purpose of sharing the information or making designations such as "market cluster" would appear to be ways to control the market (upwards in terms of the players, downwards in terms of the owners).

It's kind of an interesting concept I guess, makes it more like an auction and less like individual negotiation.

Fish is offline  
Old
11-09-2004, 09:02 AM
  #9
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish
It's kind of an interesting concept I guess, makes it more like an auction and less like individual negotiation.
When all is said and done, it is just a smart way to use statistics to your advantage.

True Blue is offline  
Old
11-09-2004, 09:25 AM
  #10
nyr7andcounting
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,919
vCash: 500
The PA and the player agents exist solely to make sure the players make their money, and when it comes to free agency they exist solely to make sure the players make as much as they can. This is just a system that helps them do it more effectively. More power to em.

nyr7andcounting is offline  
Old
11-09-2004, 10:06 AM
  #11
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
So the union...

is using available information in a smart way to help its players get the most out of their contract. Is it much different than saying Boston signed Lapointe for $5 million per, thus third line grinders may be looking for that as the going rate? I don't need a database to determine that.

Fletch is offline  
Old
11-09-2004, 03:04 PM
  #12
Fish
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: New Zealand
Posts: 2,177
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
When all is said and done, it is just a smart way to use statistics to your advantage.
Well I don't know that I agree, there seems like touches of collusion in the system on both sides as described in the article. It doesn't sound much like a free market system as a way to inflate (or deflate on the owners side) the salaries.

If it was on an individual agent basis, then I think you'd have more of an argument, but when groups get together they have the ability to control the market and in some ways create a monopoly...after all the agent has to be registered with the NHLPA.

Fish is offline  
Old
11-09-2004, 05:20 PM
  #13
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 17,507
vCash: 500
What's the difference between this and say the owners

using that same information to offer lower annual contracts to players league wide?

pld459666 is offline  
Old
11-09-2004, 06:03 PM
  #14
Infensus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 487
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666
using that same information to offer lower annual contracts to players league wide?
The league was sued for doing that according to the article in the past. If 2 or more teams use common information to offer lower salaries to players it is considered collusion and illegal.

The difference is the league (owners) are competing against each other for a player. The NHLPA forces agents to register with the system and post contract information and then all information is shared by this software to tell agents what asking price to go for.

It is illegal for one group, but legal for the other. But hey, if the rules are on your side then go for it.

Infensus is offline  
Old
11-09-2004, 06:08 PM
  #15
NYR469
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666
using that same information to offer lower annual contracts to players league wide?
well first the owners do use the same information/technology, just not as well...

the difference comes from the fact that the players don't determine their salary level, they determine the asking price and then the owners say yes or no. the owners determine the salary level. if the owners set a salary level across the board it would be collusion which is illegal...but players aren't colluding by setting an asking price since the end salary level is determined by the owner

and it also isn't a salary level across the board, if all the players were refusing to sign for less than a certain amount then it would probably be a problem. but really what is happening here is the agent for (lets say) lecavalier looks at other player salarys and says "i should be paid the same as joe thornton". they will throw in a few more comparable players and argue that he is on the same level and should be paid similar, that is simply determining market value...and of course the agents are going to point toward the similar guys with high salaries cause it favors them, so it is then up to the owners to find less favorable comparisions that pull that 'market value' down.

NYR469 is offline  
Old
11-09-2004, 06:17 PM
  #16
NYR469
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Infensus
The league was sued for doing that according to the article in the past. If 2 or more teams use common information to offer lower salaries to players it is considered collusion and illegal.

The difference is the league (owners) are competing against each other for a player. The NHLPA forces agents to register with the system and post contract information and then all information is shared by this software to tell agents what asking price to go for.

It is illegal for one group, but legal for the other. But hey, if the rules are on your side then go for it.
it isn't simply that it is illegal for one group and legal for the other, when it comes to labor contracts the 2 groups are on complete opposite sides of the spectrum. employers (the owners) are subject to different rules then the employees (the players)

and again the players only determine an asking price, they can't determine the final salary...the arguement that they could make is that they are setting their asking price at what they feel is fair value and when the team counters with what they feel is fair value, negotiations take place.

also the agents are using a sophisticated way to share public information, they are not sharing secret information and this info is available to the owners too...if thornton and heatley are both free agents, the bruins & thrashers can't call each other and say "don't offer your guy more then $3.5 mil" but if thornton signs a new deal this year, next summer when heatley's contract is up, the thrashers can refer back to thornton's deal and argue that heatley deserves less or the same...

there is a big difference between collusion and using current contracts to determine market value...the owners are doing the same thing, they are just getting beat at the game.

NYR469 is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 08:35 AM
  #17
Laches
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 2,175
vCash: 500
I don't see anything sinister about this. Sharing information is fine.

However, it is more evidence of the tunnel vision of the players. They're concerned only with their ability to maximize their salaries, and not at all with the health of the league. One of these days they're going to have to wake up and realize that they're going to have to think beyond their own narrow self-interest and make a legitimate effort to compromise.

This whole thing is such a frickin' mess. Yes Bettman is primarily to blame for starting it, but the two sides are equally guilty of escalating it to where it is now.

And to think we were arguing about ways to make the game more interesting a year ago. I'd happily sit through Carolina and Anaheim trapping each other to a 0-0 tie at this point.

Laches is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 09:00 AM
  #18
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
I think many employees...

would think the same way. It's not the players' job to run the team, it is their job to attract fans, and for that they try to get every last dollar. Why wouldn't they? Don't they have the right to make as much as they can? As mentioned numerous times, an owner can say no. Should Jagr say, 'I should accept a salary that's $3 million less over two less years so the league will be healthy, and the owner, a huge conglomerate whose ownership is multi-tiered, can make more money off me'. I don't think he should. A player wants to maximize his income. He shouldn't be required to look at the P&L and balance sheet of the organization, and then look at like players around the league who may be on teams that cannot afford the salary he's about to receive that could set a benchmark, and then determine his salary.

Fletch is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 09:08 AM
  #19
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch
Don't they have the right to make as much as they can? As mentioned numerous times, an owner can say no.
Exactly, Fletch. I do not understand fans that for some reason have it in their heads that players should be treated differently than all other employees across America. Why should not the players go after every last dime? Why should they not ask for the moon? Wouldn't YOU (the fans/other posters) do the same where you work? How many of YOU out there would happily accept a 35% pay cut and would be thankfull so long as you are just getting a paycheck?
It is a players right to seek to maximize his profits. And that comes in form of salary. On any professional interview that people go on, when the topic comes to $$$, do you not look to make the most? Who out there happily accepts less money, knowing that another company will pay more?

True Blue is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 09:28 AM
  #20
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
Exactly, Fletch. I do not understand fans that for some reason have it in their heads that players should be treated differently than all other employees across America. Why should not the players go after every last dime? Why should they not ask for the moon? Wouldn't YOU (the fans/other posters) do the same where you work? How many of YOU out there would happily accept a 35% pay cut and would be thankfull so long as you are just getting a paycheck?
It is a players right to seek to maximize his profits. And that comes in form of salary. On any professional interview that people go on, when the topic comes to $$$, do you not look to make the most? Who out there happily accepts less money, knowing that another company will pay more?
But who also drives their profession into the ground in search of that. And who can also have a company continue to pay them the same salary when they fail to do their job. Who can also afford to sit out when they are unhappy about something and not have to worry about their family Etc. Etc.


It's a two way street on that one and comparing to the "average" job is just a weebit over-simplified.

I can see the players points, but i can also see the owners as well. When you're a team working on a budget, you can let a player sit out and then trade him but the odds of getting a good return are less than other sports {the talent pool just isn't as deep}.

For every season like last year that a team like Calgary can put together, there is another 10 of futility and constant rebuilding.

You're 100% right, the players have a right to seek every last dime they can get. But the owners have the right to draw a line in the sand and say "this is what each of us can spend".

The bottom line is that at the end of the day no one really cares that there is no hockey. Except for it's limited fan base, the rest of the country is oblivious. If ever there is a sign that the sport cannot support 10 million dollar salaries and the paths it was venturing down, that is it.

A salary cap means that a player can still make 10 million but a team is only going to have another 25 million or so to spend on everyone else. Whether we like it or not, that is the owners perogative. Now if my firm said "this our budget" i should be so lucky as to be able to go overseas and wait my time out. Salaries have just gone too far out of whack at this point. Heck even many of the players cant and wont deny that, but have to stay "hush hush" or else their union "buddies" will get upset.

Edge is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 09:43 AM
  #21
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
Edge...

I get your point, but I want to answer who: I've seen it time and again in my industry. A smallish broker/dealer signing on a few guys/ a team, from a big firm, for a contract that's a couple years' in length, and several million $$$. Mind you, the little broker/dealer has stars in his eyes because he see the production of the group (while they were at an entirely different firm) and knows that if they can do only half that, millions in profits will go into the onwer's pockets. Of course they don't pan-out, the owner's obligated to pay the group and either sells or guts his firm, putting it on life support. I've seen it before, so even outside the hockey world, it happens.

I too can see both points. But like I've said all along, it's still a business. Owners should operate it as such, and a business is in it to make a profit. There's a reason why Vancouver can make $15 million pretax, or Boston, or other teams can make money and still be successful. There's also a reason why the Rangers lose so much money and are not successful. I do agree something has to be done (for the betterment of the Rangers so we don't keep seeing such a crappy product on ice), but there are many ways to do that than a cap.

Fletch is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 09:48 AM
  #22
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
You're 100% right, the players have a right to seek every last dime they can get. But the owners have the right to draw a line in the sand and say "this is what each of us can spend".
In the end, that is what I am saying. Just becuase a player asks for the sky, moon and the stars, does not mean that he should get it. An owner is perfectly capable of knowing what he can or cannot afford. And if he is such a bad businessman that he cannot make the distinction, then either sell the team to someone who can, or if driven far into the red, FOLD the team and get out of the buisiness entirely.

"The bottom line is that at the end of the day no one really cares that there is no hockey."

Sad fact, but very true. This is one of my many reasons why I think that Esche was right when he called Bettman a "madman". If nothing else, that should be a clear sign that a lockout is about the last thing that the sport needs. All the lockout does is hurt hockey as a sport every day.

"A salary cap means that a player can still make 10 million but a team is only going to have another 25 million or so to spend on everyone else."

A stiff luxury tax means exactly the same thing. All a salary cap is screaming for is the ability to ENFORCE spending limits. An owner should already be aware of what he can or cannot spend. At least with a luxury tax, there would be a redistrubution of income. If there is a harsh penalty for going over a specified limit, even a team like the Rangers will eventually come to see the law of diminishing returns. Proponents of the cap will say that a luxury tax is not enough of a deterent. But what does that mean? Why does there HAVE to be a deterent? Let the owners spend what they will. But with a stiff luxury tax (say $ for $ over a certain amount), eventually owners will get tired of making a $4m player, essentially become a $8m player (becuase of the luxury tax penalty).

"Heck even many of the players cant and wont deny that"

They don't deny it. That is why they have already proposed what should have been a springboard to discussions. They already offered cutbacks in salary. They have proposed a luxury tax system. If nothing else, they have offered to come to the table, willing to conceded that salaries need to be reduced. At the very least, that should have been enough to start a negotiation.

True Blue is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 09:58 AM
  #23
Laches
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 2,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
Exactly, Fletch. I do not understand fans that for some reason have it in their heads that players should be treated differently than all other employees across America. Why should not the players go after every last dime? Why should they not ask for the moon? Wouldn't YOU (the fans/other posters) do the same where you work? How many of YOU out there would happily accept a 35% pay cut and would be thankfull so long as you are just getting a paycheck?
It is a players right to seek to maximize his profits. And that comes in form of salary. On any professional interview that people go on, when the topic comes to $$$, do you not look to make the most? Who out there happily accepts less money, knowing that another company will pay more?

---Nobody is asking the players to 'happily' to anything or to act any differently. I'm just asking them to recognize reality. Unions agree to salary reductions all the time when business realities require it. Airline pilots did it just recently, did they not? Did they do it happily? Of course not, they did it out of necessity.

Laches is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 10:21 AM
  #24
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
I guess laches...

the players, and others, are trying to determine that necessity. There is a stated loss in the league, and I don't believe everybody would agree that it's a real number. The top three losers make up about 40% of the entire loss, which is led by the Rangers at about 20% of the loss and they most likely end up making money on the Rangers (possibly aided by the $11 million property taxes it doesn't pay the City on the Garden, which I learned today).

Having said that, yes, salaries need to come down. But personally, I don't think it's the players' responsibility for that to happen. You talk about unions, but this is different. If you're in a union, say a carpenter union in NYC, your pay is fixed with the rest of the guys, typically (with little variance). You don't have a star carpenter getting paid twice as much as the next guy. Each carpenter's package is not worked-out separately. You cannot compare the two as it is Rangers and Devils.

Fletch is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 10:32 AM
  #25
NYR469
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,785
vCash: 500
another thing that i didn't think of yesterday is the fact that we always talk about owners vs players, but a story like this really starts to show you that the real conflict has become gms vs agents...

the owners & players aren't actually involved in these contract negotiations, the players hire an agent to get them a deal and then sit at home until the agent calls them to come sign the deal. the owners hire the gms to negotiate for them...so it all comes down to the agents whipping the piss out of the gms because the agents are lawyers and the gms are hockey guys. so maybe a big way to balance the power would be for teams to start hiring agents to represent their team, let your agent battle their agent to negate that difference

NYR469 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 07:18 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.