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.

Hard Salary Cap and the end of NHL trades

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-22-2005, 01:11 PM
  #26
hockeytown9321
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,343
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by s7ark
1. Why does this trade not happen?

Just curious.
I don't know for certain it wouldn't. I'm taking an educated guess based on the way trades are conducted in the NFL. But, I don't think so because the salaries were not exactly matched. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but the Red Wings actually shed payroll through the trade. Primeau and Coffey most likey would have put Harford over their hypothetical cap, so they would have needed to part with someone else with a decent salary (they did also give Detroit Brian Glynn, but he never saw the light of day in Detroit), in turn they would have requested more from Detroit, and if Detroit doesn't get rid of someone else, they can't fit Shanahan and whoever else under the cap.

Heres another from the same year: Detroit trades nothing to Toronto for Larry Murphy. Toronto pays a good portion of his salary for 2 years, but all of his salry would have counted against Detroit's cap so there's no way they could have done it. Again, not a salary dump, Toronto could easily afford Murphy's deal, but were desperate to get rid of him. Any team in the League could have gotten the deal Detroit did. He was a very solid addition and was great with Lidstrom in the Finals against Lindros. Whats wrong with that type of trade? Or the Islanders trade of Dave Lewis to LA for Buthc Goring in 1980? Or any of a hundred deals teams on the cusp of winning make to put them over the top or just to add depth.

hockeytown9321 is offline  
Old
01-22-2005, 01:13 PM
  #27
Trottier
Very Random
 
Trottier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 27,750
vCash: 500
Note to Sidorkiewicz

Fear not for bringing up a very fair concern about the potential detrimental effects of a hardcap on the fabric of the game. I, like you, respect the opposing point of view. Its a shame, however, that your legitimate concern here, with few notable exceptions, gets only immature, mocking responses, ie., " ...this 'there will be no trades' garbage...."

You'd think/hope that those who (admirably) believe so strongly in a particular point of view (on whatever side) would be able to defend their position in an unemotional way, without mocking. Guess that is asking too much from a few.

Quote:
Originally Posted by robcav
Trades will become less frequent in a capped environment as all trades will become equal salary for equal salary. Salary decisions will outweigh talent decisions in a capped environment.
The concern of some of us, in a nutshell. One doesn't have to agree with it, or "not care" as one poster intelligently put it. However, it is a legitimate issue, that transcends which "side" one is on in this CBA.

Trottier is offline  
Old
01-22-2005, 01:15 PM
  #28
hockeytown9321
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,343
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by iagreewithidiots
When was the last time a trade the magnitude of the Jagr trade occured in the hard capped NFL?
I don't see your point. Are you saying in order to eliminate trades like Jagr's, all trades have to be eliminated?

I guess teams will start saving alot of money on GM's with a hard cap too. Evidently teams are only allowed to draft players. No FA's, no trades, no need for a GM. Put all that money into scouting.

hockeytown9321 is offline  
Old
01-22-2005, 01:15 PM
  #29
CarlRacki
Registered User
 
CarlRacki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,423
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeytown9321
So why do you want a cap?
Name the many current NFL stars who, while in their prime, have left their teams when they had a chance at free agency?
Let's see:
Peyton Manning? Nope.
Michael Vick? Nope.
Donovan McNabb? Nope.
LaDanian Tomlinson? Nope.
Brian Urlacher? Nope.
Brett Favre? Nope.
Ray Lewis? Nope.
Tom Brady? Nope.
Steve McNair? Nope.
Randy Moss? Nope.

I could continue, but I suspect (or at least hope) you get the point. Contrary to the anti-cap rhetoric, the system does not prevent teams from keeping their star players. It does force tough choices regarding middle-of-the-road guys, but that's a very different story.

CarlRacki is offline  
Old
01-22-2005, 01:16 PM
  #30
hockeytown9321
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,343
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by iagreewithidiots
Answer what question? I thought this was a thread asking for opinions.

My opinion is I dont care. Trades, free agency, doesnt matter to me. Ill find something else to pleasure myself over on trade deadline day.

No trades. A salary cap. It doesnt matter. All the anti cappers will return like sheep when the NHL comes back with a cap.
The question was why should the Red Wings and Hartford not have been allowed to make the trade they did in October 1996?

Your avoidance of it tells me you don't have an answer.

hockeytown9321 is offline  
Old
01-22-2005, 01:17 PM
  #31
CarlRacki
Registered User
 
CarlRacki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,423
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeytown9321
When was the last time a trade of the Shanahan magnitude happened in the hard capped NFL?
Clinton Portis for Champ Bailey, about 9 months ago.

CarlRacki is offline  
Old
01-22-2005, 01:18 PM
  #32
txomisc
Registered User
 
txomisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 8,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeytown9321
There are virtually no trades in the NFL.

I know I'm just looking out for the Red Wings in all of this, but I'd like a pro capper to explain something to me:

The Red Wings built a pretty good team through the draft starting in 1983 with Yzerman. By the early 90's, they were close to being Cup contenders. Between 1993 and 1996, they were generally the favorites to come out the West. But every year, the team failed. They were missing one key ingredient. In October 1996, Brendan Shanahan requested a trade from Hartford. His request was not made because of financial reasons. He simply didn't want to play in Hartford anymore. The Red Wings agreed to trade Keith Primeau, Paul Coffey and a 1st round pick to Hartford for Shanahan. Hartford felt they were getting fair value and agreed. It was this trade that put the Red Wings over the top, and led them to two consecutive Stanley Cups. Now, in a hard capped world, this trade does not happen. Its not a salary dump, its not the Red Wings "buying" anybody. Its a trade that gives the Red Wings the ingredient they were missing, and gives Hartford a future all star and one of the best offensive defensemen of all time. Without this trade, the Red Wings do not win any Stanley Cups with a team that they built over 14 years.

Now, someone tell me why the Red Wings and Hartford shouldn't have been allowed to make that trade.
what makes you so sure this trade doesnt happen? not only should not all teams be right at the cap but you were trading Coffey and his salary along with Primeau and his salary for Shanahan and his salary. I dont know how much each guy was making at the time but were they so far off that a team with a cap buffer couldnt have made the trade?

txomisc is offline  
Old
01-22-2005, 01:21 PM
  #33
txomisc
Registered User
 
txomisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 8,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterSidorkiewicz
A lot of movement through just free agency and not through trades. Which In my personal opinion I hate that the NFL is all free agency and no player trades. And its funny how EVERYONE on here has such a sour puss attitude when I ask just a SIMPLE question on everyones thoughts about trades and if youll be disappointed to see them go away cause of an nfl styled cap. Its an honest question and most people give sour answers that had nothing to do with my question such as "the sky is falling." I guess ill have to READ into that and say youd be fine with no more fun trade deadlines and stuff. Of course you could have just said that to begin with instead of getting all defensive about it.
this entire board is filled with sour answers to all kinds of questions...what do you expect everyone is sick of no hockey and people on both sides often intentionally manipulate facts to make them look good for what they want

txomisc is offline  
Old
01-22-2005, 01:21 PM
  #34
hockeytown9321
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,343
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarlRacki
Name the many current NFL stars who, while in their prime, have left their teams when they had a chance at free agency?
Let's see:
Peyton Manning? Nope.
Michael Vick? Nope.
Donovan McNabb? Nope.
LaDanian Tomlinson? Nope.
Brian Urlacher? Nope.
Brett Favre? Nope.
Ray Lewis? Nope.
Tom Brady? Nope.
Steve McNair? Nope.
Randy Moss? Nope.

I could continue, but I suspect (or at least hope) you get the point. Contrary to the anti-cap rhetoric, the system does not prevent teams from keeping their star players. It does force tough choices regarding middle-of-the-road guys, but that's a very different story.

I guess I can explain this to you one more time.

Those NFL teams keep their players through the signing bonus loophole.

Now, in a hard capped NHL there will either be a loophole or there won't. Might be with bonuses, might not. Whatever it is, if it exists, the rich teams will exploit the hell out of it. The poor teams will continue to be farm teams for everyone else. If there isn't a loophole, teams can't hang onto their players.

hockeytown9321 is offline  
Old
01-22-2005, 01:24 PM
  #35
txomisc
Registered User
 
txomisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 8,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Iconoclast
No one is saying that deal can't be made. In fact, it can be made. At that point Detroit just has to make a conscious decision which assets they wish to give up, which they did. Its not like Hartford did not take on salary in the transaction as well. Coffey was not earning peanuts. Frankly I think you post a trade that has very little relevance to the discussion at hand. The type of deals you should be talking about are the Jagr deals, or the Bure deals. The ones where huge salaries are dumped for nothing. Those are ones you need to be talking about because the Shanahan deal was a pretty fair deal all around and likely would have been one that would be consumated even today.

I don't buy this "there will be no trades" garbage. Teams are already making deals where salaries are balanced out. Its just going to be a little more precise for teams. Teams looking for that push over the top are going to have to be very careful in what they acquire and what they give away. Its been that way for the past four or five years for most teams, so now the large market teams are going to have to get used to dealing in this fashion. Trades will continue to happen. That'e the way of the NHL. A new salary structure is not going to chage that.
yeah alot of the problem with potential NFL trade is signing bonus money and how it affects the cap.

txomisc is offline  
Old
01-22-2005, 01:25 PM
  #36
CarlRacki
Registered User
 
CarlRacki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,423
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeytown9321
The question was why should the Red Wings and Hartford not have been allowed to make the trade they did in October 1996?

Your avoidance of it tells me you don't have an answer.
Why are you so certain a cap would've prevented this deal? Caps make trades more difficult, but not impossible.
In '96-97 Shanahan was earning $3.975 million. Coffey and Primeau were earning a combined $4.4 million, meaning the Whale would have needed $425K in cap room to make the deal work. That's hardly the mission impossible you'd like us to believe.

CarlRacki is offline  
Old
01-22-2005, 01:26 PM
  #37
txomisc
Registered User
 
txomisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 8,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeytown9321
When was the last time a trade of the Shanahan magnitude happened in the hard capped NFL?
umm
Corey Dillon to New England
Clinton Portis to Washington

txomisc is offline  
Old
01-22-2005, 01:26 PM
  #38
hockeytown9321
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,343
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarlRacki
Clinton Portis for Champ Bailey, about 9 months ago.
OK. Did you know that Portis was making only about 300K?

Is that the only trade you can think of?

hockeytown9321 is offline  
Old
01-22-2005, 01:28 PM
  #39
CarlRacki
Registered User
 
CarlRacki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,423
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeytown9321
I guess I can explain this to you one more time.

Those NFL teams keep their players through the signing bonus loophole.

Now, in a hard capped NHL there will either be a loophole or there won't. Might be with bonuses, might not. Whatever it is, if it exists, the rich teams will exploit the hell out of it. The poor teams will continue to be farm teams for everyone else. If there isn't a loophole, teams can't hang onto their players.
That's just wrong. The so-called bonus loophole (it isn't) is there for anyone to use. There's nothing to prevent Dallas from offering a larger bonus than Indy for Peyton Manning. Nothing stops Washington from offering Tomlinson twice the bonus he received from San Diego. Sorry, but you are just wrong about this.

CarlRacki is offline  
Old
01-22-2005, 01:31 PM
  #40
iagreewithidiots
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,524
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeytown9321
The question was why should the Red Wings and Hartford not have been allowed to make the trade they did in October 1996?

Your avoidance of it tells me you don't have an answer.
I thought I did answer the question. I said its just a what if question that cannot be answered.

You dont even know the answer to your own question.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeytown9321
I don't know for certain it wouldn't.
Way to talk in circles though.

iagreewithidiots is offline  
Old
01-22-2005, 01:32 PM
  #41
hockeytown9321
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,343
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarlRacki
That's just wrong. The so-called bonus loophole (it isn't) is there for anyone to use. There's nothing to prevent Dallas from offering a larger bonus than Indy for Peyton Manning. Nothing stops Washington from offering Tomlinson twice the bonus he received from San Diego. Sorry, but you are just wrong about this.
There isn't anything stopping Dallas, but loyalty is a factor. And most major free agents are resigned by ther teams before they become free agents. Anyone can use the loophle becuase they have the revenue to do so. NHL teams don't.

By the same token, what to stop the Red Wings from offering twice the bonus Calagry can to Iginla? How does Calagry match that?

hockeytown9321 is offline  
Old
01-22-2005, 01:33 PM
  #42
hockeytown9321
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,343
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by iagreewithidiots
I thought I did answer the question. I said its just a what if question that cannot be answered.
Its not a what if question. Why should Detroit and Hartford not have been allowed to make the trade?

hockeytown9321 is offline  
Old
01-22-2005, 01:34 PM
  #43
CarlRacki
Registered User
 
CarlRacki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,423
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeytown9321
OK. Did you know that Portis was making only about 300K?

Is that the only trade you can think of?
You asked for one trade, I gave you one trade.

Did you know that before completion of the deal, both Portis and Bailey worked out new deals with their new teams? Apparently not.
Portis - 8 years, $50.5 million with $17 million up front.
Bailey - 7 years, $63 million with $18 million up front.

How about former Pro Bowl receiver Marty Booker from Chicago to Miami for Pro Bowl DE Adewale Ogunleye? That one happened in August.
How about Terrell Owens to Philadelphia?

CarlRacki is offline  
Old
01-22-2005, 01:34 PM
  #44
txomisc
Registered User
 
txomisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 8,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeytown9321
The question was why should the Red Wings and Hartford not have been allowed to make the trade they did in October 1996?

Your avoidance of it tells me you don't have an answer.
the answer is of course they should be able to make the trade. If theyd managed their money well (ie they arent right at the cap) they wouldnt have to worry about it. Once again the cap will emphasize smart front office work. It wouldnt be very smart to be right at the cap. Teams with good gms who draft well and manage their money well will greatly benefit

txomisc is offline  
Old
01-22-2005, 01:36 PM
  #45
hockeytown9321
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,343
vCash: 500
article on the lack of NFL trades, and the causes:
http://www.jsonline.com/packer/news/oct03/177371.asp

hockeytown9321 is offline  
Old
01-22-2005, 01:36 PM
  #46
Trottier
Very Random
 
Trottier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 27,750
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarlRacki
Contrary to the anti-cap rhetoric, the system does not prevent teams from keeping their star players. It does force tough choices regarding middle-of-the-road guys, but that's a very different story.
Racki, for once I agree with you. Under the NFL system, teams can indeed retain their star, core players. But I think you and others mistakenly pass over the detrimental effect that the never-ending annual carousel of mercenary "support players" on and off of rosters has on teams and the overall quality of the league. Some view the NFL's parity as nirvana. Others of us see it as watered down, forced medicority. (It's a matter of taste.)

Among the latter group of us, the concern is that the same could occur were a hardcap instituted in the NHL. To simply pass that concern (read: I am not stating it to be fact) out of hand is, well, intellectually dishonest.

Trottier is offline  
Old
01-22-2005, 01:37 PM
  #47
txomisc
Registered User
 
txomisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 8,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeytown9321
OK. Did you know that Portis was making only about 300K?

Is that the only trade you can think of?
unless bailey was making exactly 300K at the time too that completely blows your theory out of the water

txomisc is offline  
Old
01-22-2005, 01:37 PM
  #48
hockeytown9321
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,343
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=txomisc]the answer is of course they should be able to make the trade. If theyd managed their money well (ie they arent right at the cap) they wouldnt have to worry about it. Once again the cap will emphasize smart front office work. /QUOTE]

So the Red Wings didn't have smart front office work to get the team to where it was before the Shanahan deal?

hockeytown9321 is offline  
Old
01-22-2005, 01:39 PM
  #49
hockeytown9321
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,343
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by txomisc
unless bailey was making exactly 300K at the time too that completely blows your theory out of the water
Not quite. Denver was obviously so well managed that they had the cap room to add Bailey.

hockeytown9321 is offline  
Old
01-22-2005, 01:39 PM
  #50
txomisc
Registered User
 
txomisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 8,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeytown9321
There isn't anything stopping Dallas, but loyalty is a factor. And most major free agents are resigned by ther teams before they become free agents. Anyone can use the loophle becuase they have the revenue to do so. NHL teams don't.

By the same token, what to stop the Red Wings from offering twice the bonus Calagry can to Iginla? How does Calagry match that?
whats to stop it is the nhl isnt going for teh EXACT nfl cap. the signing bonus situation will likely be extremely different from the nfls
whats also stopping them is the huge compensation they have to give up for signing RFAs

txomisc 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 01:19 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.