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.

Why the CBA won't be ratified.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-07-2005, 12:46 PM
  #26
zeke
#TeamReimer
 
zeke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 27,975
vCash: 500
Quote:
The result:

48% of the players at league minimum.
70% of all players under $1.5M
In 2003-2004, this is how those numbers broke down:

131 players at $500k or less.
490 players at $1.5m or less.

So, in 03/04, approx 20% of players were at or below the new "league minimum".
And, in 03/04, approx 67% of players were at or below $1.5 million.

But the NHLPA offered that 24% rollback, so many other players knew that they'd be in this group as well.

So, with the 24% rollback, here's how many players 03/04 salaries would come in at 500k or less, and $1.5 million or less:

$500k or less: 220 = approx. 30%
$1.5m or less: 533 = approx. 73%

So 30% of the players knew they'd be making $500k or less once the NHLPA offered to cut salaries 24%, and 73% of them knew they'd be making $1.5m or less.

And, from the last post, we also know that 60% of them knew they'd be making $1.0m or less.

zeke is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 12:57 PM
  #27
SENSible1*
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,543
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam I Am
666, you are too generous. Here's my take on the average roster two or three years into the new CBA:

$3.5M:star first line C
$3.0M:star goalie:
$2.5M:1st dman
$2.0M:2nd dman
$2.0M:1st line RW
$2.0M:1st line LW

Now, we've spent only $15M for the starting lineup. Next:

$2.00M:2nd line C
$1.25M:2nd line RW
$1.25M:2nd line LW
$1.25M:2nd d pair
$1.25M:2nd d pair

Highest paid 11 guys comprise a $22M, or approx. 2/3 of team's total payroll.

Six guys in the $800K to $1M range--let's say $5M for the bunch--bringing our running total to $27M for top 17 guys.

Finally, 5-7 utility players and/or young 'uns at an average of $.5M per.

Final payroll: $29.5M - $30.5M depending on how much flotsam you carry.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is how life will be for a mid-range team in the new NHL.
So??

Post the salaries of the star studded Oilers, Canadians or Islanders dynasties. Far more talented players made far less for the vast majority of NHL history.

This particular group of NHLPA members are going to have to accept the market correction. They have NO OTHER OPTIONS.

SENSible1* is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 12:59 PM
  #28
Montrealer
Registered User
 
Montrealer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chambly QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,456
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 666
The rumored deal is 54% of 1.8B or 32.4M per team. Some will be higher some will be lower but lets work with $32.5M.

$4.5M:star first line C
$4.0M:star goalie:
$3.0M:1st dman
$2.5M:2nd dman
2.50M:1st line RW
2.50M:1st line LW

We've spent $19M and we have one line and a goalie with $13.5M left and 17 guys to sign.

2.5M:2nd line C
1.5M:2nd line RW
1.5M:2nd line LW
1.5M:2nd d pair
1.0M:2nd d pair
1.1M:a goon or mucker

4.4M:11 Guys at the league minimum of $400k.

32.5M:total

Top guy only gets $4.5M so you can't take money from the top guys and give it to the minimum guys.
Of course this gets a bit better for the top teams. Depending on rumours it can get about $7M better. That's not much considering the top guys might get up to $6M and even up to 20% of $39M=$7.8M. But along with that we have the teams that can't even reach $32M. What about the teams at the floor of $24M?

The result:

48% of the players at league minimum.
70% of all players under $1.5M

CBA fails player ratification 75:25

666

Miroslav Satan, is that you?

Montrealer is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 01:19 PM
  #29
Chili
Registered User
 
Chili's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: la Belle Province
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 1,952
vCash: 500
You turn down the deal if you feel there's a better one there to be made.

Would the owners give more at this point or would the players be risking losing even more pay checks and more fan backlash?

If I had a vote...I doubt I'd feel good about voting yes but it would be better than the alternative. It's time to get the game back on the ice.

Chili is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 01:37 PM
  #30
A Good Flying Bird*
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 666
The rumored deal is 54% of 1.8B or 32.4M per team. Some will be higher some will be lower but lets work with $32.5M.

$4.5M:star first line C
$4.0M:star goalie:
$3.0M:1st dman
$2.5M:2nd dman
2.50M:1st line RW
2.50M:1st line LW

We've spent $19M and we have one line and a goalie with $13.5M left and 17 guys to sign.

2.5M:2nd line C
1.5M:2nd line RW
1.5M:2nd line LW
1.5M:2nd d pair
1.0M:2nd d pair
1.1M:a goon or mucker

4.4M:11 Guys at the league minimum of $400k.

32.5M:total

Top guy only gets $4.5M so you can't take money from the top guys and give it to the minimum guys.
Of course this gets a bit better for the top teams. Depending on rumours it can get about $7M better. That's not much considering the top guys might get up to $6M and even up to 20% of $39M=$7.8M. But along with that we have the teams that can't even reach $32M. What about the teams at the floor of $24M?

The result:

48% of the players at league minimum.
70% of all players under $1.5M

CBA fails player ratification 75:25

666

This is what I've been saying all along.
In fact, I think it's worse than what you've described in some ways, because I think the big stars, the Inginlas and Forsbergs of the league will still get their big money because teams will bid for their services.
Maybe not $11Million. But 7 or 8 Million.

I think the salary cap is going to squeeze hockey's middle class, the Kris Drapers of the world.

A Good Flying Bird* is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 01:37 PM
  #31
HockeyCritter
Registered User
 
HockeyCritter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 5,656
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunderstruck
So??

Post the salaries of the star studded Oilers, Canadians or Islanders dynasties. Far more talented players made far less for the vast majority of NHL history.

This particular group of NHLPA members are going to have to accept the market correction. They have NO OTHER OPTIONS.
Sure they do ---- they can try to peddle their wares in Europe. They may not be as well paid nor have as many benefits, but they certainly have the choice to go.

(And yes, I said/typed that with tongue firmly ensconced in cheek)

HockeyCritter is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 01:42 PM
  #32
hockeytown9321
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,343
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryz
If the CBA isn't ratified the players will be so villified in the public eye that a good number of them should never show their faces in Canada again.
That'd be enough for me to vote against it right there.

hockeytown9321 is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 01:52 PM
  #33
PredFred
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Over Yonder
Country: United States
Posts: 99
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 666
The rumored deal is 54% of 1.8B or 32.4M per team. Some will be higher some will be lower but lets work with $32.5M.

$4.5M:star first line C
$4.0M:star goalie:
$3.0M:1st dman
$2.5M:2nd dman
2.50M:1st line RW
2.50M:1st line LW

We've spent $19M and we have one line and a goalie with $13.5M left and 17 guys to sign.

2.5M:2nd line C
1.5M:2nd line RW
1.5M:2nd line LW
1.5M:2nd d pair
1.0M:2nd d pair
1.1M:a goon or mucker

4.4M:11 Guys at the league minimum of $400k.

32.5M:total

Top guy only gets $4.5M so you can't take money from the top guys and give it to the minimum guys.
Of course this gets a bit better for the top teams. Depending on rumours it can get about $7M better. That's not much considering the top guys might get up to $6M and even up to 20% of $39M=$7.8M. But along with that we have the teams that can't even reach $32M. What about the teams at the floor of $24M?

The result:

48% of the players at league minimum.
70% of all players under $1.5M

CBA fails player ratification 75:25

666
I think your numbers are fair, for the all-star team, but for the average team, I believe they are high. Since you are using an AVERAGE for the amount you can spend...why not use an AVERAGE on the salaries that you are comparing? If any team is spending that much on the players they put on the ice, they are going to be near the top end of the Salary Cap...but DEFINATELY not the middle.

PredFred is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 01:58 PM
  #34
Resolute
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,125
vCash: 500
Most teams didnt pay that much for many of their players under the last CBA. Not certian why their salaries would go up under this deal.

Which big six team are you a fan of, 666?

Resolute is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 02:25 PM
  #35
Jack Canuck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Hawaii
Country: Canada
Posts: 621
vCash: 500
Don't forget the 54% number. As the league gains back popularity the cap size should also increase. The players will look at the long term and accept this deal.

Jack Canuck is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 02:42 PM
  #36
davemess
Registered User
 
davemess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Scotland
Country: Scotland
Posts: 1,884
vCash: 500
The players already gambled and lost, rejecting this deal would be the equivalent of going double or nothing.

davemess is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 02:49 PM
  #37
Mess
Global Moderator
 
Mess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 59,560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunderstruck
And the players alternative is????
Decertify the Union

and

File anti-trust claims to receive damage payments if they win court cases .. but anti-trust law is tricky stuff .. but this CBA certainly because of how much each player may lose under the system including non-honouring of 04-05 contracts perhaps could be a good case .. IMO but only speculation ..

Not that I believe this will happen .. Just answering the question ...;


Last edited by Mess: 07-07-2005 at 03:10 PM.
Mess is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 02:58 PM
  #38
futurcorerock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 6,435
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to futurcorerock
Why the CBA will be ratified:

It ain't gonna get any better than this.

At this point, saying it wont get ratified is just paradoxial. I'd lump the train of thought in with those people who still think Ralph Nader has a legitimate shot at the presidency.

futurcorerock is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 03:04 PM
  #39
misterjaggers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Duke City
Country: United States
Posts: 14,273
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mooseOAK
Next step after turning the deal down, the players are presented with a worse offer. Then they can all find other leagues where they can get a better one.
No kidding! As the pie continues to shrink, every subsequent offer will worsen.

misterjaggers is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 03:13 PM
  #40
Sens#1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 17
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ResidentAlien
You live in Surrey...do you even have a driveway?
Yeah. I notice Surrey house driveways are filled with about 7 cars each......What's up with that?

Sens#1 is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 03:16 PM
  #41
HockeyCritter
Registered User
 
HockeyCritter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 5,656
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chili
You turn down the deal if you feel there's a better one there to be made.

Would the owners give more at this point or would the players be risking losing even more pay checks and more fan backlash?

If I had a vote...I doubt I'd feel good about voting yes but it would be better than the alternative. It's time to get the game back on the ice.
I agree ----- if I were a player (especially one just coming into the league) Iíd sign off on this deal and aim for better numbers in six years when this CBA is up. If (and thatís a huge if) the league grows, then I would ask for a higher percentage of the revenue as well as increased rookie and team caps.

It seems that it would be best for all involved to take a short term hit for the long term good of the league.

HockeyCritter is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 03:33 PM
  #42
Wolfpack
Registered User
 
Wolfpack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,036
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam I Am
666, you are too generous. Here's my take on the average roster two or three years into the new CBA:

$3.5M:star first line C
$3.0M:star goalie:
$2.5M:1st dman
$2.0M:2nd dman
$2.0M:1st line RW
$2.0M:1st line LW

Now, we've spent only $15M for the starting lineup. Next:

$2.00M:2nd line C
$1.25M:2nd line RW
$1.25M:2nd line LW
$1.25M:2nd d pair
$1.25M:2nd d pair

Highest paid 11 guys comprise a $22M, or approx. 2/3 of team's total payroll.

Six guys in the $800K to $1M range--let's say $5M for the bunch--bringing our running total to $27M for top 17 guys.

Finally, 5-7 utility players and/or young 'uns at an average of $.5M per.

Final payroll: $29.5M - $30.5M depending on how much flotsam you carry.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is how life will be for a mid-range team in the new NHL.


I think this is a pretty accurate model of what a team's salary structure will look like. I heard somewhere this morning that there will be a stipulation that no single player will be able to make more than 20% of the salary cap, meaning that in a $38 million cap world the most a player can make is $7.6 million. With linkage, that number will of course probably rise over the years. Still, just try and juggle the numbers above with a $7.6 million player included. The trickle down effect is substantial, and it makes me believe that even the star players will not be pulling in those types of salaries anymore.

Owners and GM's are going to have to decide whether they want to have a top-heavy team with three or four established stars surrounded by pylons or a deep team with no superstar players, because the cap is going to make it close to impossible to have both.

Wolfpack is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 03:33 PM
  #43
The Nemesis
Global Moderator
Semper Tyrannus
 
The Nemesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Langley, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,988
vCash: 500
The players may not like the deal now, but they must have the forsight to see that if they can resume selling hockey, it will get better for everyone. Of course, the more they sit out and waste away the seasons, the less they will actually be able to sell hockey to the fence-sitting and "don't much care" markets.

The economic model 666 laid out makes sense, and it looks bad for the players, but there is something to remember. Although business mathematics 101 shows you that you can't necessarily make a nice smooth pay scale out of a $32 million cap, elementary school math will be what tells you that 54% of $1.5 billion or $1.3 billion or $1.0 billion is less than 54% of $1.8 billion.

In no uncertain terms, the biggest, most important aspect of the new NHL landscape, the Salary Cap/Linkage issue, can not get better for the players. There are enough owners who have said that they simply cannot maintain a viable franchise at higher levels of linkage (like 60% to players, and up). Therefore the only places the players can make gains are in little areas like UFA age, Arbitration rules, and so forth. This will not be enough to offset their perceived loss on the cap side of things, and certainly won't make up for extra losses from a continued lockout.

The NHL revenue is projected at $1.8 billion per year in revenue right now, correct? Well, a continued lockout means less fan interest. Less fan interest means less interest from sponsors. Less fan interest also means less need for a television presence. Less sponsor interest and less TV demand means smaller and fewer contracts to generate revenue for the league. And that means that the proverbial pie shrinks. If they hate the pay scale that results from a $1.8 billion revenue stream creating a $32 million cap, they'll like a $1.5 billion revenue pie that creates the $27 million cap even less. And a $23 million cap that results from $1.3 billion in revenues even less than that.

As has been said, if the NHL stays on the sidelines any longer, the players will win their moral battle only to lose their entire livelyhood. But if they get the deal signed and get their butts out there playing hockey, maybe they can retain the current fans. And maybe the new NHL will bring in some new fans. Because if the players can swallow one year of a $32 million cap, then if they can push revenues up to $2 billion, the cap goes up to $36 million, and things can start looking better for the players.

The Nemesis is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 03:35 PM
  #44
Hatter
All about the Bob
 
Hatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Ojai, Ca
Country: United States
Posts: 2,799
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 666
The rumored deal is 54% of 1.8B or 32.4M per team. Some will be higher some will be lower but lets work with $32.5M.

$4.5M:star first line C
$4.0M:star goalie:
$3.0M:1st dman
$2.5M:2nd dman
2.50M:1st line RW
2.50M:1st line LW

We've spent $19M and we have one line and a goalie with $13.5M left and 17 guys to sign.

2.5M:2nd line C
1.5M:2nd line RW
1.5M:2nd line LW
1.5M:2nd d pair
1.0M:2nd d pair
1.1M:a goon or mucker

4.4M:11 Guys at the league minimum of $400k.

32.5M:total

Top guy only gets $4.5M so you can't take money from the top guys and give it to the minimum guys.
Of course this gets a bit better for the top teams. Depending on rumours it can get about $7M better. That's not much considering the top guys might get up to $6M and even up to 20% of $39M=$7.8M. But along with that we have the teams that can't even reach $32M. What about the teams at the floor of $24M?

The result:

48% of the players at league minimum.
70% of all players under $1.5M

CBA fails player ratification 75:25

666
First of all we know that there is no way in hell (read: noone has ever en\ven implied ) that the cap would be that low in reality. secondly

Player Total Salary Position
Khabibulin, Nikolai $ 4,434,579 G
Stillman, Cory $ 2,750,000 LW
Lecavalier, Vincent $ 2,625,000 C
Kubina, Pavel $ 2,500,000 D
Richards, Brad $ 2,400,000 C
Boyle, Dan $ 2,300,000 D
Modin, Fredrik $ 1,870,000 LW
Cullimore, Jassen $ 1,650,000 D
Andreychuk, Dave $ 1,550,000 LW
St. Louis, Martin $ 1,500,000 RW
Sarich, Cory $ 1,150,000 D
Svitov, Alexander $ 1,130,000 C
Lukowich, Brad $ 1,100,000 D
Grahame, John $ 1,000,000 G
Fedotenko, Ruslan $ 950,000 LW
Taylor, Tim $ 850,000 C
Roy, Andre $ 825,000 LW
Afanasenkov, Dmitry $ 800,800 LW
Clymer, Ben $ 790,000 RW
Dingman, Chris $ 675,000 LW
Cibak, Martin $ 500,000 C
Pratt, Nolan $ 425,000 D
Rumble, Darren $ 290,000 D


Take that to a 24% rollback. WOw! How did they ever do it?

Hatter is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 03:35 PM
  #45
Free Torts
Registered User
 
Free Torts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,259
vCash: 883
Send a message via MSN to Free Torts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sens#1
Yeah. I notice Surrey house driveways are filled with about 7 cars each......What's up with that?
You guys have it all wrong - we park our cars on our lawn, not the driveway. Mine is cracking from years of non-use and sun damage, so I think Todd and the boys should pave it.

After all, I do buy tickets to the Canucks regularly, and they have refused to lower ticket prices next season, so on some level, I feel they owe me.

Free Torts is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 03:38 PM
  #46
ranold26
Get off my rink!
 
ranold26's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: 127.0.0.1
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,283
vCash: 500
I'll just end this thread now...
If the players fail to ratify it, look for the NHL to declare an impasse and go with replacement players. They will win it too, as they have legitimately shown to have negotiated in good faith. The players don't stand a chance in winning an impasse restriction. Walk into court with your "not involved" union leader, team union member leaders saying "I don't know whats going on, I have not talked to the union in weeks" will have the arbitrating court laughing.
Ratify it or enjoy making nothing and seeing replacements take your job.
They'll ratify it if they were smart.

ranold26 is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 04:19 PM
  #47
flambers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,479
vCash: 500
The players will ratify the deal and it will be a very high percentage that accepts it (In my Opinion). I don't believe the vote will even be close. Not sure why people are even concerned about it. Unions / associations always pass the proposal that their Exec Committee recommends.

If it was rejected the only side that would stupid would be the players. I agree, Impasse would happen if it was rejected.

flambers is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 04:32 PM
  #48
zeke
#TeamReimer
 
zeke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 27,975
vCash: 500
Hmm.

I thought my numbers were pretty good, surprsied nobody looked at them.

The premise of this thread was that "75% of players would make 1.5 million or less, and that 48% would make near the league minimum", and htus the players would not ratify a deal which did this.

I just showed that as soon as the NHLPA offered the 24% rollback, 73% of NHL players knew their salaries would be less than 1.5 mil, and 30% knew that their salaries would be below $500k.


If they knew that back in December, when their union made the offer, than why would it get in the way of ratification now?

zeke is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 05:12 PM
  #49
WalterSobchak
Blues Trololol
 
WalterSobchak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Gutter Alley
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,743
vCash: 500
All that happens here is that the term "star" player does not get used as liberally as it did in the past.

The millionaire's are free to retire, there will always be new stars.

WalterSobchak is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 05:29 PM
  #50
R0CKET
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 320
vCash: 500
Yeah, sure...here's the real important future stat for you to consider:

100% of the players who WERE former millionaires - will earn ZERO $.

For players to reject cuz they feel like they should be getting more, they must realize that they are playing with the abosulte possibility of getting nothing. Again.

Ask Scotty Gomez if playing in another league was a good idea?

Now go and play is some other lower tier league making far less and hope you don't wind up like that poor guy.

R0CKET 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 06:05 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.