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, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

Why I'm glad Crosby is leveraging against NHL entry-level limits.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-07-2005, 03:52 PM
  #76
A Good Flying Bird*
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by free0717
Crosby has no leverage. The CBA Deal is the deal. Crosby wont go to Europe and risk his endorsement deals. He will just have to live on $850K per year for the 1st 4 years of his career. Poor Sidney.
Wow. I give up.
You win. I am convinced.

A Good Flying Bird* is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 04:01 PM
  #77
Digger12
Gold Fever
 
Digger12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Back o' beyond
Posts: 15,559
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newsguyone
Perhaps you need a history lesson.
The rookie cap was agreed to because the owners caved the last time they wanted a salary cap. The PA threw them the rookie cap as a bone.
The owners pointed to it and said, "now we can control salaries from spiralling out of control"

Well now they have a salary cap. They can rest assured that no matter how stupid they are, they can't let costs go too whacky.
So the need for a rookie cap is gone.
Actually, I remember my history quite well. Thanks for asking.

As I recall, the owners wanted a rookie cap in addition to an overall cap (actually, wasn't the NHL fighting for a luxury tax at the time?) because from about Lindros on, top first round picks were getting harder to sign, and the monies they were receiving didn't justify their output on the ice. The Daigle contract was the icing on the cake. You can be sure many of the NHLPA members weren't too crazy about these kids getting higher contracts than established veterans, too.

Digger12 is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 04:02 PM
  #78
mooseOAK*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 42,437
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newsguyone
Perhaps you need a history lesson.
The rookie cap was agreed to because the owners caved the last time they wanted a salary cap. The PA threw them the rookie cap as a bone.
The owners pointed to it and said, "now we can control salaries from spiralling out of control"

Well now they have a salary cap. They can rest assured that no matter how stupid they are, they can't let costs go too whacky.
So the need for a rookie cap is gone.
That's ridiculous. There is a need to control how much is paid for a player who hasn't even proven he can have an NHL career. Crosby may be worth more but there will be many that will be worth less also.

If you don't want a rookie cap then make the draft age three years older so that teams have a better idea of what player they are getting but in the meantime $850K a year to learn the job isn't too bad.

mooseOAK* is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 04:05 PM
  #79
Boltsfan2029
Registered User
 
Boltsfan2029's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In deleted threads
Country: United States
Posts: 6,289
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digger12
You can be sure many of the NHLPA members weren't too crazy about these kids getting higher contracts than established veterans, too.
I believe the NHLPA's first offer included cutting the rookie max, if that's correct, apparently the PA understands the reasoning...

Boltsfan2029 is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 04:06 PM
  #80
Gary
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Behind enemy lines
Posts: 5,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mooseOAK
That's ridiculous. There is a need to control how much is paid for a player who hasn't even proven he can have an NHL career. Crosby may be worth more but there will be many that will be worth less also.

If you don't want a rookie cap then make the draft age three years older so that teams have a better idea of what player they are getting but in the meantime $850K a year to learn the job isn't too bad.
If you want no rookie salary cap then you can't have guarenteed contracts-That simple. And we all know how players like their security. If I was Bettman, I'd say one or the other-your choice. And I can fully imagine they'd chose the guarenteed contracts and shut their yaps-IMO.

Gary is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 04:11 PM
  #81
FlyerFan
Registered User
 
FlyerFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 221
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Montrealer


THIS thread - the one you are currently reading.


Ah, I see your post. I just read Resolute's response about Crosby's career earning potential which is similar, so I'll address both of them here.

My point in all this is that the NHL does have competition, and that they should take seriously that they will try to lure SOME players away. Restricting what you pay these young players to 850k for 4 years when you already have a 36m team cap provides a low bar for the competition to beat.

As a Flyers fan, I'm want to have guys like Carter and Richards playing for us, not some Swiss League.

The NHL will need these players in order bring fans back to the game, the same players that can only make 850k for their first 4 years.

FlyerFan is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 04:11 PM
  #82
labatt50
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 52
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newsguyone
Dude, talk to any Detroit fan. He's in the top three when fans start listing who will be bought out.
"Dude" I live in Detroit...Not only is McCarty a fan favorite, he is very active in the community with charity events. He may be in the top three for some fans but not the majority.

labatt50 is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 04:13 PM
  #83
futurcorerock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 6,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyB11
If you think there is even a remote chance that Crosby will be playing overseas next season IF the NHL resumes you've got to be off your rocker... I don't care what the signing cap for rookies is, you know that the good players are going to get paid well and once the rooks get past their first deal they'll be fine. No chance Crosby (of all people) heads to Europe for what might be a few extra bucks in the short term rather than play in the NHL.
Definitely didn't say that. However, I did entertain the thought only for the sake of the thread.

futurcorerock is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 04:30 PM
  #84
Isles72
Registered User
 
Isles72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,904
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Epsilon
By the way if I was Crosby, and that offer is in fact legit, I would tkae it for sure. With that much money you are pretty much set in case anything happens to harm or end your career. Then after scoring the easy cash, he comes back to the NHL. If Crosby took three years to develop in Europe and come back over at 21, he could be the baddest thing to hit the league since Teemu Selanne.
yeah , sure , great idea

but what if the nhl says he's still a rookie at 21 and he has to play from 21 to 25 under the rook cap of 850 k - or whatever the thing ends up being

the nhl needs to put rules in place which would encourage the rookies to sign the rook cap then get their 4 years under their belt ASAP --so that by yhe time they are 22-23 , their rook cap years are done and life goes on ...

Isles72 is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 04:35 PM
  #85
CornKicker
Still burning Lowood
 
CornKicker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,544
vCash: 694
Quote:
Originally Posted by misterjaggers
As soon as one realizes that $500,000 is a big salary in the Swiss League, one realizes that the Luongo offer to Crosby is a publicity stunt based on his celebrity. There's no way that they'll be offering his anonymous rookie bretheran big salaries.

Also, Crosby would be a fool to play anywhere but the NHL because he'll surrender many millions in salary and endorsements and he'll never be able to say that he played against the best.
now florida is trying to buy Crosby??

CornKicker is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 04:36 PM
  #86
Digger12
Gold Fever
 
Digger12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Back o' beyond
Posts: 15,559
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isles72
yeah , sure , great idea

but what if the nhl says he's still a rookie at 21 and he has to play from 21 to 25 under the rook cap of 850 k - or whatever the thing ends up being

the nhl needs to put rules in place which would encourage the rookies to sign the rook cap then get their 4 years under their belt ASAP --so that by yhe time they are 22-23 , their rook cap years are done and life goes on ...
According to the last CBA, players are considered rookies up to the age of 26, and as long as they've played fewer than 25 NHL games up to that point. I'll be curious to see if this changes at all. Personally, I don't see why it would.

Digger12 is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 04:38 PM
  #87
A Good Flying Bird*
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mooseOAK
That's ridiculous. There is a need to control how much is paid for a player who hasn't even proven he can have an NHL career. Crosby may be worth more but there will be many that will be worth less also.
Wrong.
How many of this year's picks will even play in the NHL.
Crosby.
Maybe one or two more.
The other guys won't sign until next year, the year after, or in the case of Euro guys, even later.
So NHL bosses are going to have a much better idea about these guys ability.

I'm not saying we have to get rid of the cap. But good lord, don't clamp down on it just when the other leagues around the world are making pitches for our guys.
Right now, with a salary cap, give teams the flexibilty to compete with foreign teams.

The NHL's luster is at an alltime low. If the brightest prospect in recent history is considering his options, that is not good for the game. And it's not good for the player. And it's not good for the team that drafts him.

You guys can keep supporting your rookie cap all you want, but it's a no-win proposition.

Raise the rookie cap to a certain percentage of the overall cap. IMO, a fair rookie cap is $2M a year
And the only guys who should be there are Ovechkin and Crosby.

A Good Flying Bird* is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 04:48 PM
  #88
CornKicker
Still burning Lowood
 
CornKicker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,544
vCash: 694
How would you justify a schremp or vanek making the same 850K as Crosby + Ovechkin? The real piss off for rookies is going to be not that Crosby gets 850K but that your team won’t even pay you that much because you are not Crosby. So we might see guys like O’sullivan etc. who should turn out to be good players get like 550-600K because “ yeah your good but you ain’t no Crosby”

CornKicker is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 04:48 PM
  #89
mooseOAK*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 42,437
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newsguyone
Raise the rookie cap to a certain percentage of the overall cap. IMO, a fair rookie cap is $2M a year
And the only guys who should be there are Ovechkin and Crosby.
Why? What have they done?

The rookie cap is good because it doesn't discriminate between unproven players. If Crosby and Ovechkin are all that then they will get the entry level contract over with sooner and get rewarded with their next contract, they just won't get the money up front.

mooseOAK* is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 04:50 PM
  #90
mooseOAK*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 42,437
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CornKicker
How would you justify a schremp or vanek making the same 850K as Crosby + Ovechkin? The real piss off for rookies is going to be not that Crosby gets 850K but that your team won’t even pay you that much because you are not Crosby. So we might see guys like O’sullivan etc. who should turn out to be good players get like 550-600K because “ yeah your good but you ain’t no Crosby”
That is the downside of being a low first round draft pick. Tomas Kaberle was one of the best picks in his draft but since he went in the 8th round his entry level contract was $250K per year.

mooseOAK* is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 04:54 PM
  #91
Digger12
Gold Fever
 
Digger12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Back o' beyond
Posts: 15,559
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newsguyone
You guys can keep supporting your rookie cap all you want, but it's a no-win proposition.
Perhaps you should explain this to the NHL and NHLPA, since they both seem in favour of it.

No offense, but in my opinion you're overstating this issue.

And besides, do we have ANY confirmation of these numerous multimillion dollar bids for Crosby's services? Other than from his less than impartial agent, anyway?

I'm sorry, but to me this just reeks of agent grandstanding and market manufacturing.

Digger12 is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 05:57 PM
  #92
A Good Flying Bird*
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by labatt50
"Dude" I live in Detroit...Not only is McCarty a fan favorite, he is very active in the community with charity events. He may be in the top three for some fans but not the majority.
McCarty is a great guy.
Problem is, as most Detroit fans realize, he doesn't appear to be to interested in hockey.
I mean when a recovering alcoholic spends the entire off-season touring bars with his rock band, and then has to reenter rehab, and starts the season out of shape, and then gets injured AGAIN, well, I think people get the picture.

The guy will always be fondly remembered for most Wings fans. The sweet cup winning goal. The trouncing of Lemiuex. But god, he's a waste of space out there now. Not to mention nearly $2M a year.

A Good Flying Bird* is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 05:59 PM
  #93
A Good Flying Bird*
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boltsfan2029
I believe the NHLPA's first offer included cutting the rookie max, if that's correct, apparently the PA understands the reasoning...
Apparently the PA knows that the safest route to take with its membership is to screw over the guys who haven't joined the union yet.

I'm on the union's side in the CBA dispute. And not because I agree with their tactics. But because, to me, it beats the alternative of supporting Wirtz and Bettman.

A Good Flying Bird* is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 06:03 PM
  #94
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 22,166
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digger12
Perhaps you should explain this to the NHL and NHLPA, since they both seem in favour of it.

No offense, but in my opinion you're overstating this issue.

And besides, do we have ANY confirmation of these numerous multimillion dollar bids for Crosby's services? Other than from his less than impartial agent, anyway?

I'm sorry, but to me this just reeks of agent grandstanding and market manufacturing.

Agents chasing young stars out of the league just drives down the interest in the league. That in turn, drives down revenue. The NHLPA/players/agents take 54% of that revenue. Now, if IMG send Crosby/others to Europe for every $100m it costs the league that is going to come out a $54m loss for the NHLPA-players and a big loss in agents fees.

me2 is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 06:17 PM
  #95
A Good Flying Bird*
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mooseOAK
Why? What have they done?

The rookie cap is good because it doesn't discriminate between unproven players. If Crosby and Ovechkin are all that then they will get the entry level contract over with sooner and get rewarded with their next contract, they just won't get the money up front.
Why have a draft if you can't discriminate between players.

I haven't seen a lot of Sidney Crosby. But I've seen enough of Ovechkin to know that he's all ready a bona fide NHL player.

Good Lord, every NHL team has scouts who do this for a living.

The chances of Oveckin being worth less than Darren McCarty next year are very, very slim.

If these guys are unproven (and therefore hold less value than a proven player) how about letting Detroit trade Darren McCarty for Ovehckin.

I wonder what Washington would say to that.

A Good Flying Bird* is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 06:25 PM
  #96
Epsilon
#TeamHolland
 
Epsilon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Florence, SC
Posts: 39,118
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by me2
Agents chasing young stars out of the league just drives down the interest in the league. That in turn, drives down revenue. The NHLPA/players/agents take 54% of that revenue. Now, if IMG send Crosby/others to Europe for every $100m it costs the league that is going to come out a $54m loss for the NHLPA-players and a big loss in agents fees.
But if the fans support the jersey and not the player like I've been told, who cares what league Crosby is playing in, it's not going to cost anyone else any money. If anything it will make them more because he's not taking a bite out of the pie.

Epsilon is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 06:29 PM
  #97
Epsilon
#TeamHolland
 
Epsilon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Florence, SC
Posts: 39,118
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isles72
yeah , sure , great idea

but what if the nhl says he's still a rookie at 21 and he has to play from 21 to 25 under the rook cap of 850 k - or whatever the thing ends up being
Then he plays under those rules. Of course, since he's now 21 and much more well-developed, those "very-hard-to-hit" bonuses we've ben hearing about will be much more attainable, and so he might be able to make significantly more than if he had played at 18.

Quote:
the nhl needs to put rules in place which would encourage the rookies to sign the rook cap then get their 4 years under their belt ASAP --so that by yhe time they are 22-23 , their rook cap years are done and life goes on ...
I think the complete opposite is true. The NHL should be encouraging players to take their time before coming into the league so they can begin to contribute significantly rather than toiling on the bottom lines for the first few years. Less Joe Thorntons and more Teemu Selannes.

Epsilon is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 06:31 PM
  #98
mooseOAK*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 42,437
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newsguyone
Why have a draft if you can't discriminate between players.

I haven't seen a lot of Sidney Crosby. But I've seen enough of Ovechkin to know that he's all ready a bona fide NHL player.

Good Lord, every NHL team has scouts who do this for a living.

The chances of Oveckin being worth less than Darren McCarty next year are very, very slim.

If these guys are unproven (and therefore hold less value than a proven player) how about letting Detroit trade Darren McCarty for Ovehckin.

I wonder what Washington would say to that.
Washington isn't going to make the playoffs next season so it really doesn't matter how good Ovechkin will be next season. You can say that isn't the point but nor is comparing a player who has been in the league for over 10 years to a guy who has done nothing yet. Like I said, the rewards will be there for Ovechkin and if he does what he is supposed to do he will be making far more than McCarty is when he reaches his age.

mooseOAK* is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 06:44 PM
  #99
misterjaggers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Duke City
Country: United States
Posts: 14,281
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by misterjaggers
As soon as one realizes that $500,000 is a big salary in the Swiss League, one realizes that the HC Lugano offer to Crosby is a publicity stunt based on his celebrity. There's no way that they'll be offering his anonymous rookie bretheran big salaries.

Also, Crosby would be a fool to play anywhere but the NHL because he'll surrender many millions in salary and endorsements and he'll never be able to say that he played against the best.
Oops. I made a spelling mistake. I've corrected it above for the anal retentive and the uninitiated.

misterjaggers is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 06:47 PM
  #100
I in the Eye
Registered User
 
I in the Eye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country:
Posts: 4,556
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by me2
Agents chasing young stars out of the league just drives down the interest in the league. That in turn, drives down revenue. The NHLPA/players/agents take 54% of that revenue. Now, if IMG send Crosby/others to Europe for every $100m it costs the league that is going to come out a $54m loss for the NHLPA-players and a big loss in agents fees.
Assumption: I assume that the new CBA will strictly define the absolute maximum entry level players can earn...

If salaries are going to be much more predictable and defined for rookie players (i.e. not a lot of room to negotiate), then I can see the agents not being as important as in the past (in the NHL) - for young players, and in particular, young stars who are expected to make the maximum allowable by a rookie... Why does Sydney need an agent if he knows how much money he is going to make (the maximum allowable as strictly defined in the CBA)?... His Dad or Mom could negotiate that - no need to pay an agent their big $ to negotiate something that anyone could...

I think we may see many young players (in particular, young stars) not having formal, expensive agents to negotiate their entry level contracts in the NHL - their parents, uncle, or family lawyer can do it... Either this, or the agents will reluctantly significantly reduce their compensation/cut... Neither of these two options will be very attractive to agents, IMO...

For the agents to keep their current standard of living and gravy train off of the young players (in particular, young stars), I think that they will push and try to persuade their clients to go to Europe for a few years (say 18 to 21)... The new 'agent plan' could be to earn millions in Europe for two or three years, come back to the NHL (sign the entry level maximum), and then have the agent negotiate other NHL contracts from there... Kind of like an 'Agent Package Five Year Plan'... It keeps them in the loop - and maximizes their compensation... Those vultures...


Last edited by I in the Eye: 07-07-2005 at 06:57 PM.
I in the Eye 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 05:26 AM.

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.