HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
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.

NHL close to new Player Transfer Agreements, World Cup becoming more of a reality

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-16-2013, 02:59 PM
  #126
Kloparren
Hth
 
Kloparren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,449
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke the Legend View Post
Well I think this is paving the way for a league run "World Cup" tourney to replace the Olympics as the premier best on best intl. tourney. The first thing to do is to end longtime grievences between the NHL and Euro leagues, such as compensation for European talent. A lot of Europeans are angry about seeing their best leave and go to the NHL, so even some token payments could go a long way to smoothing that over.

The revenues at stake are north of $100 million, currently all flowing to the IOC. The NHL and Euro leagues would be interested in that pie.
But the World Cup is mainly NHL players. We as NHL fans want NHLers on those teams anyways and for it to be an 8 team tourney. Does the IIHF really need to be a big part of it? A joint-WC can happen anyways without a transfer agreement and more on the NHL's terms.

Secondly when it comes to compensation...what is the NHL really getting out of it? Is the NHL compensated when our prospects or young players go there which is happening increasingly? I agree the NHL should be giving them some $ but it doesn't have to be through an intricate transfer agreement. NHL needs to improve its player quality or at least maintain it as the KHL expands and that means they have to play a bit dirtier like they did in the days of Smyth or Campbell or Norris Sr.

Kloparren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 03:05 PM
  #127
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,384
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jekoh View Post
Talented players are usually paid more, so yes it is based on how much effort the team put into the player.
No. You're confusing salary, with the cost/effort of developing a player (trainers, facilities, time spent on the player, etc). The effort is more or less the same regardless of the player. Sure you might spend a bit more time with the top end players, but not hundreds of thousands of dollars more.

__________________
"Itís not as if Donald Fehr was lying to us, several players said. Rather, itís as if he has been economical with information, these players believe, not sharing facts these players consider to be vital."
Riptide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 03:23 PM
  #128
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,384
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vorky View Post
Not every Euros is worth of 300 000 USD, some of them are worth of 1M or more.
Says who? How are you defining a players value? This is a team/league looking for a cash grab. And the NHL has (rightly so) decided not to play that game.


Quote:
What would you say if NHLPTA was aplicable for euro clubs and canadians players? Lets say, KHL/SHL club has right to sign 18-20y old F Tyler Hall if KHL/SHL club pays 300 000 USD to NHL club. Does Hall has valid contract with Oilers for next XY years and Oilers does not want to void contract? Who cares! Once KHL/SHL club pays 300 000 USD to Oilers, Hallīs contract is voided and he can sign in KHL/SHL.
Do you like this model? This is reality with euros coming to NHL. That is my problem.

If euro player does not have buy out clause Ok, NHL club waits until player is free agent. Does euro player have contract untill he is 25 yrs? Ok, NHL club waits. Or the player terminates the contract (and pay his euro club of course) or NHL club pays euro club (soccer model).

Hope you get it.
So you don't have an issue if a player leaves when he doesn't have a valid contract? Typically they will have a contract expire between 19-22. At which point you're okay with them leaving while the team receives absolutely no compensation.

As for them leaving while having a contract, and getting paid for the development costs (as per the PTA) I'm alright with that. And to be honest it wouldn't bother me if it went the other way either (players leaving NA to go to Europe). But good luck getting Tyler Hall to leave the NHL to go play in the KHL. Which is basically the difference. The NHL is the premiere hockey league in the world. And it's in North America where the vast majority of the players come from (something like 60-75%). Good luck getting young players from NA to go play in Russia/Europe instead of playing in the NHL. Which is essentially the issue. These young players aren't being sent to NA against their will. This is them wanting to leave their current teams to come to North America. Which as per the PTA they are able to do. And the team/league is compensated for that.

Riptide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 03:26 PM
  #129
vorky
@vorkywh24
 
vorky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,446
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
No. You're confusing salary, with the cost/effort of developing a player (trainers, facilities, time spent on the player, etc). The effort is more or less the same regardless of the player. Sure you might spend a bit more time with the top end players, but not hundreds of thousands of dollars more.
You consider NHL payment to euro clubs as development fee. I (and jekoh as well, IMO) would like to consider NHL payment to euro clubs as transfer fee which is based on worth of player (losing asset).

Look, footballer Neymar, 21yrs old, moved from brazilian club Santos to spanish club FC Barcelona for transfer fee €57 million (£48.6m), because he was under contract with Santos. Sure, FC Barcelona or other club to aquire him earlier, when he was 18 yrs (just an example because I am sure you will write that Euros coming to NHL at 18/19yrs), but FBC would pay to Santos as well.

I dont says that NHL clubs should pay 30M USD for players but definitelly not fixed 300 000 USD.

EDIT:

to reply your post #128

It is not important where players want to play. Of course, all footballers want to play in Spain or England, but some of them play in Germany, Itally or Russia as well.

You dont undestand my idea, so I have nothing more to tell.

vorky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 03:27 PM
  #130
jekoh
Registered User
 
jekoh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,752
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
No. You're confusing salary, with the cost/effort of developing a player (trainers, facilities, time spent on the player, etc).
Ultimately the distinction between the two is completely unimportant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
The effort is more or less the same regardless of the player. Sure you might spend a bit more time with the top end players, but not hundreds of thousands of dollars more.
The teams do pay more for top end players and therefore it's only natural that they would ask for better compensation. There is no reason for the fee to merely cover the cost of development: a team that loses players they did not develop themselves should still be compensated if they lose said player mid-contract.


Last edited by jekoh: 07-16-2013 at 03:36 PM.
jekoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 03:36 PM
  #131
jekoh
Registered User
 
jekoh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,752
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
I think that pretty much sums it up. KHL is looking not only for development compensation (which the NHL is willing to provide), but compensation for all expenses incurred.
Yes they are. And they are also looking for compensation for the fact that their player did not fulfill his contractual obligation. Imagine that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
Overlooking the fact that the KHL teams also received the benefit of the player playing for them while paying him a salary. As such, the KHL was already compensated for this... they payed, and the player played for them.
Yes, as did Nashville with Radulov: they paid and he played for them. What was their beef with him when he left, I have no idea.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
So you don't have an issue if a player leaves when he doesn't have a valid contract? Typically they will have a contract expire between 19-22. At which point you're okay with them leaving while the team receives absolutely no compensation.
I'm pretty sure players older than 22 also have contracts.


Last edited by jekoh: 07-16-2013 at 03:45 PM.
jekoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 03:41 PM
  #132
Burke the Legend
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,695
vCash: 2615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kloparren View Post
But the World Cup is mainly NHL players. We as NHL fans want NHLers on those teams anyways and for it to be an 8 team tourney. Does the IIHF really need to be a big part of it? A joint-WC can happen anyways without a transfer agreement and more on the NHL's terms.

Secondly when it comes to compensation...what is the NHL really getting out of it? Is the NHL compensated when our prospects or young players go there which is happening increasingly? I agree the NHL should be giving them some $ but it doesn't have to be through an intricate transfer agreement. NHL needs to improve its player quality or at least maintain it as the KHL expands and that means they have to play a bit dirtier like they did in the days of Smyth or Campbell or Norris Sr.
Even the "top 8" can't fill out rosters with just NHL players, only 4 really can. IIHF wouldn't need to be involved, but European pro leagues would since their players would be needed. It's politics, a transfer agreement isn't necessary, but it's a thorny issue that if removed, paves road to future projects like World Cup.

Burke the Legend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 03:41 PM
  #133
jekoh
Registered User
 
jekoh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,752
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kloparren View Post
Is the NHL compensated when our prospects or young players go there which is happening increasingly?
Ufa offered to compensate Nashville for the loss of Radulov but Nashville declined, remember?

Make up your mind people, do you want the transfer agreement to be reciprocal, yes or no?

jekoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 05:25 PM
  #134
Jussi
I am siege face
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Finland
Posts: 42,279
vCash: 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
No. You're confusing salary, with the cost/effort of developing a player (trainers, facilities, time spent on the player, etc). The effort is more or less the same regardless of the player. Sure you might spend a bit more time with the top end players, but not hundreds of thousands of dollars more.
It needs to be said again that the way player are developed in Europe varies as well. In Finland (and I assume Sweden too) the kids pay for their own development basically until they hit 14-15 years age, when the SM-Liiga clubs juniors get their equipment, coaching etc. paid by the pro club's organization. The money spent is minimal. The transfer money more than compensates not only the development but in young player's case their salary in the league as well. That is why Finnish clubs don't have an issue with it (though sure they wouldn't mind getting more money, but realize the futility of such discussion). The money is also dived between the clubs the player played the last three seasons for. In Russia however the clubs have their own hockey schools that develop the kids from the youngest juniors so naturally the development costs are higher (I assume the parents don't pay to get their kids into these schools?).

Jussi is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 05:26 PM
  #135
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,384
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jekoh View Post
I'm pretty sure players older than 22 also have contracts.
Yes, however these kids are not signing contracts at the age of 17 for 6+ years. They sign a deal around 17/18 for 2-4 years. Then sign another one. There's nothing stopping a player who's a RFA but doesn't have a valid contract from playing in a different league with no compensation.

Just like RFA's in the NHL can go back to the KHL and there's nothing the NHL can do about it.

Riptide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 05:30 PM
  #136
vorky
@vorkywh24
 
vorky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,446
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
Yes, however these kids are not signing contracts at the age of 17 for 6+ years. They sign a deal around 17/18 for 2-4 years. Then sign another one. There's nothing stopping a player who's a RFA but doesn't have a valid contract from playing in a different league with no compensation.

Just like RFA's in the NHL can go back to the KHL and there's nothing the NHL can do about it.
Players would sign 6+ years at the age of 17 if NHL/KHL pays transfer money, believe me. Of course with buyout (release) clause of 1,2, 5M USD. Not all, but very best players for sure.

vorky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2013, 10:46 AM
  #137
njdevsfn95
Help Vas, Sprite.
 
njdevsfn95's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 29,320
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
So you think Kovy should have had to buy his release from New Jersey to go play in Russia? He had 77m left over 12 years. So what does he or St Petersburg owe New Jersey?
Um, how about he owed NJ the service he promised by signing a 15yr deal?

If SKA wants his service instead, the club couldve paid the Devils, the Devils agree to let him "retire," and they go on their way.

This ludicrous "Devils get out of the contract" is ********. That's not a win for the Devils. They lose a tremendous talent.

Kovalchuk circumvented his service to the Devils while the Devils get screwed (cap penalty, lose Top 2 winger), Kovalchuk still gets paid, and SKA gives the Devils nothing.

If some type of transfer agreement was in place a la Euro football, the Devils couldve received some compensation. THAT would be a financial benefit.

njdevsfn95 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2013, 11:07 AM
  #138
vorky
@vorkywh24
 
vorky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,446
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by njdevsfn95 View Post
Um, how about he owed NJ the service he promised by signing a 15yr deal?

If SKA wants his service instead, the club couldve paid the Devils, the Devils agree to let him "retire," and they go on their way.

This ludicrous "Devils get out of the contract" is ********. That's not a win for the Devils. They lose a tremendous talent.

Kovalchuk circumvented his service to the Devils while the Devils get screwed (cap penalty, lose Top 2 winger), Kovalchuk still gets paid, and SKA gives the Devils nothing.

If some type of transfer agreement was in place a la Euro football, the Devils couldve received some compensation. THAT would be a financial benefit.
I agree but it should work both ways, so NHL clubs should pay to euro clubs TRANSFER MONEY FOR LOSING ASSET. Does Florida want Barkov? Ok, Florida to pay finnish club lets say 1-2M USD (depends on deal finnish club-Florida). Etc etc. Is NHL ready for it? No.

vorky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2013, 10:10 PM
  #139
CoolForumNamePending
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 963
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by njdevsfn95 View Post
Um, how about he owed NJ the service he promised by signing a 15yr deal?

If SKA wants his service instead, the club couldve paid the Devils, the Devils agree to let him "retire," and they go on their way.
Would you be cool with SKA paying the Devil's $240,000, the going rate that the NHL is offering European leagues/federations, to the buy rights to Kovalchuk's services?

CoolForumNamePending is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 09:34 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.