HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

a new idea for a cba

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-29-2003, 05:05 AM
  #1
Mr Sakich
Registered User
 
Mr Sakich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Motel 35
Posts: 8,080
vCash: 500
a new idea for a cba

on another thread, an islander fan blamed his teams operating losses on their terrible lease agreement. This lease agreement didn't stop islander ownership from signing yashin, peca, and hammer to long term deals. In other words, they are living way beyond their means and driving up the costs for every team in the league. The islanders have lost over 30 million in the last 3-4 years.

I have an idea for a new cba. Keep the old agreement but punish the teams who are bad business operators. For every nickle you lose in hockey operations, you would be forced to put another nickle into an equalization fund to be distributed amongst profitable teams. The league would create standard accounting practises and audit every quarter.

If the islanders owners want to be big shots and try to buy a cup, they give every other team owner in the league money for compesation. The unwise spenders would subsidize everyone else. Teams that are located in markets that can't support an nhl franchise would be forced to move.

Mr Sakich is offline  
Old
09-29-2003, 05:11 AM
  #2
Lanny MacDonald*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Tuvalu
Posts: 4,457
vCash: 500
WTF??? For every dollar you lose you have to kick in another one? Okay, so that means that pretty well every team in the league, especially the small market teams, is kicking in money to support the teams that are making money (all three of them)??? Oh yeah, that makes sense.


Lanny MacDonald* is offline  
Old
09-29-2003, 05:23 AM
  #3
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 28,933
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thor dyck
on another thread, an islander fan blamed his teams operating losses on their terrible lease agreement. This lease agreement didn't stop islander ownership from signing yashin, peca, and hammer to long term deals. In other words, they are living way beyond their means and driving up the costs for every team in the league. The islanders have lost over 30 million in the last 3-4 years.

I have an idea for a new cba. Keep the old agreement but punish the teams who are bad business operators. For every nickle you lose in hockey operations, you would be forced to put another nickle into an equalization fund to be distributed amongst profitable teams. The league would create standard accounting practises and audit every quarter.

If the islanders owners want to be big shots and try to buy a cup, they give every other team owner in the league money for compesation. The unwise spenders would subsidize everyone else. Teams that are located in markets that can't support an nhl franchise would be forced to move.

Please post a link to the article where C.Wang asked the nhl's other owners, to pay his team's salaries.

I also don't remember Wang declaring bankruptcy.

They have a $20m a yr cable deal and a terrible lease.Wang's trying to buy the nba's NJ Nets and move them to LI.Having 2 pro teams would help his chances to get a new arena.The Colisuem is over 30 yrs old.The oldest arena in the league.

I don't recall other teams or fans worrying about the nyi payroll 4 yrs ago when the Devils payroll was at $35m+,the Ranger payroll was at $55m and the isles payroll was at $18m.


This yr's payroll is at $41m/$42m which is about the league average.

Isles attendance has risen from 3,000-5,000 a night at home to over 14,000 since Wang bought the team 3 yrs ago.

CREW99AW is offline  
Old
09-29-2003, 05:52 AM
  #4
Pure Slaughter Value
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 1,916
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Pure Slaughter Value
I have an idea for a new cba. Keep the old agreement but punish the teams who are bad business operators. For every nickle you lose in hockey operations, you would be forced to put another nickle into an equalization fund to be distributed amongst profitable teams. The league would create standard accounting practises and audit every quarter.

That's just dumb. Half the teams in the league would fold. Point to Ottawa and Buffalo for awful management as well (until recently). Ottawa has a great team, but they've had one of the worst managements the last ten years as well. Should they be forced to help other teams?

You might as well have baseball's cap, where teams like the Rangers, Wings and Stars pay back the other operators of franchises with every nickel they spend over the cap.

Your knowledge of the Islanders situation is awful. Buying a Cup at the league average? It wasn't hard to justify going out and getting a couple of marquee players when your payroll was a staggering 12 million in 00-01.

Pure Slaughter Value is offline  
Old
09-29-2003, 06:25 AM
  #5
Motown Beatdown
Need a slump buster
 
Motown Beatdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Indianapolis
Country: United States
Posts: 8,554
vCash: 450
Quote:
You might as well have baseball's cap, where teams like the Rangers, Wings and Stars pay back the other operators of franchises with every nickel they spend over the cap.

The problem with MLB is that the number is so high it only effects one team (the Yanks)
If the NHL wants to put in a system like MLB. The number has to be around 45 million.

Motown Beatdown is offline  
Old
09-29-2003, 07:28 AM
  #6
Mr Sakich
Registered User
 
Mr Sakich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Motel 35
Posts: 8,080
vCash: 500
my point is this : if a team wants to have more salary than they have revenue, punish them. I read that wang has had to kick in 30-40 mill in the last 3-4 years to keep the team afloat. That is garbage. he should be cutting payroll to the bone like the penguins and building through the draft.

As it is now, the islanders are helping to keep salaries too high for every team. There is no way a team like the blues should be able to sign a doug weight for 9.5 mill and then lose 40 mill in one year. They are destroying the supply / demand balance in the league.

If there is no market for high priced players, their salaries will come way down and most teams should be able to turn a profit. The reason for my proposal is that it is unfair to apply a correct salsary cap for edmonton on a big market team like philly. Philly can and deserves to ice a high priced winner so they should be able to spend until it no longer makes economic sense.

Mr Sakich is offline  
Old
09-29-2003, 07:50 AM
  #7
Pure Slaughter Value
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 1,916
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Pure Slaughter Value
my point is this : if a team wants to have more salary than they have revenue, punish them. I read that wang has had to kick in 30-40 mill in the last 3-4 years to keep the team afloat. That is garbage. he should be cutting payroll to the bone like the penguins and building through the draft.

Don't agree. Understand the logic behind that statement but don't agree. If you're cutting down on salary in order to make revenue, you're looking at more than half the league having total payroll of 20 million for one team, 70 for the upper tiers. Those teams that own their arena or live in a place like the Rangers (Manhattan) will still be able to offer huge contracts because the cost of living in those cities are sometimes 2x as much as say the cost of living is in Edmonton. The competition among UFA's is already fierce between the upper echelon teams, so the high salaries will still be there for the Roenicks, Holiks, etc etc etc.

it is now, the islanders are helping to keep salaries too high for every team.

Don't agree. If the Islanders had an arena they owned and were able to keep more of their concessions/parking fee they'd make money. Probably a significant amount more. If the proposed cap is around 45 million, how is a team with a payroll 3 million less helping to promote salaries too high? Isles previous ownership is the reason why the team is still losing money, and they shouldn't be punished for it. If they should, well then the Sabres and Sens should've folded last year.

There is no way a team like the blues should be able to sign a doug weight for 9.5 mill and then lose 40 mill in one year. They are destroying the supply / demand balance in the league.

Someone else would have to field that question, as I don't have enough of a background in the Blues to comment.

If there is no market for high priced players, their salaries will come way down and most teams should be able to turn a profit. The reason for my proposal is that it is unfair to apply a correct salsary cap for edmonton on a big market team like philly. Philly can and deserves to ice a high priced winner so they should be able to spend until it no longer makes economic sense.

Understandeable, but other than Ryan Smyth what Oiler would stay in Edmonton when teams like Philly, Rangers, Stars and Leafs can offer double the salary while also showing those would-be players that they will always be in the hunt for the Cup (Rangers obviously in theory)?

Pure Slaughter Value is offline  
Old
09-29-2003, 08:47 AM
  #8
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 28,933
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thor dyck
my point is this : if a team wants to have more salary than they have revenue, punish them. I read that wang has had to kick in 30-40 mill in the last 3-4 years to keep the team afloat. That is garbage. he should be cutting payroll to the bone like the penguins and building through the draft.

As it is now, the islanders are helping to keep salaries too high for every team. There is no way a team like the blues should be able to sign a doug weight for 9.5 mill and then lose 40 mill in one year. They are destroying the supply / demand balance in the league.

If there is no market for high priced players, their salaries will come way down and most teams should be able to turn a profit. The reason for my proposal is that it is unfair to apply a correct salsary cap for edmonton on a big market team like philly. Philly can and deserves to ice a high priced winner so they should be able to spend until it no longer makes economic sense.

The isles with a payroll that is the league average are helping to drive up salary


If the nyi are not in the market for high priced players,does this mean that the Wings,NYR,Avs,Stars and Blues,teams that are spending anywhere from $20m-$35m more this yr then the isles,will stop spending and 'bring down salaries so that most teams can turn a profit.

and i'm still waiting for a link to Wang's comments, where he asks other nhl owners to help him meet his payroll.I know there's got to be an article.

CREW99AW is offline  
Old
09-29-2003, 08:56 AM
  #9
West
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 648
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pure Slaughter Value[B
There is no way a team like the blues should be able to sign a doug weight for 9.5 mill and then lose 40 mill in one year. They are destroying the supply / demand balance in the league.[/B]

Someone else would have to field that question, as I don't have enough of a background in the Blues to comment.
Just to fill you in. The Blues were a middle of the road NHL salary wise team from 98-01 and they had an excellent record. In 01-02 their salary structure jumped about 15 million in 02-03 it went up another 5 million or so. They are still an excellent team and a text book example of a team getting good and the salaries increaseing.

The problem is that they've had almost no play-off succuess after their salary structure increased so they aren't getting the extra couple million a round that some teams have. So now you've got a team that spends like a contender and plays like a contender during the regular season but dosn't get much in the way of play-off money.

As a result the Blues are a team that's claiming that they lose about 20 million a year. It's not hard to beleive that this is true because if you figure St. Louis was breaking even between 98-01 they've basically added 20 million in salary and not increased their income (play-off succuess) at all.

West is offline  
Old
09-29-2003, 09:05 AM
  #10
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 28,933
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by West

As a result the Blues are a team that's claiming that they lose about 20 million a year. It's not hard to beleive that this is true because if you figure St. Louis was breaking even between 98-01 they've basically added 20 million in salary and not increased their income (play-off succuess) at all.

So under Thor's plan,since the Blues lost $20m last yr,they should pay the league an additional $20m as a penalty for losing money?

CREW99AW is offline  
Old
09-29-2003, 09:25 AM
  #11
discostu
Registered User
 
discostu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Nomadville
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,283
vCash: 500
This plan would really accelare the level of bankruptcies in the league.

A team that maintains a relatively normal payroll, and manages to make a modest profit will always have the fear of a few things going wrong. A hit to a local economy would send a team into a debt spiral pretty quickly, by taxing the losses. The team would not be able to adjust their payroll quick enough to reflect the changes in their revenues, and the costs that mount could be sufficient to send the team into bankruptcy or relocation before the local economy could recover. It would create a high level of instability within the league without producing any real benefits to compensate.

discostu is offline  
Old
09-29-2003, 09:26 AM
  #12
garry1221
Registered User
 
garry1221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Walled Lake, Mi
Posts: 2,232
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to garry1221
so team's that lose their own revenue should go 2 x more in debt because of it??? .... well this would satisfy those who keep calling for teams to fold .... makes no sense other than that

garry1221 is offline  
Old
09-29-2003, 11:14 AM
  #13
Mr Sakich
Registered User
 
Mr Sakich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Motel 35
Posts: 8,080
vCash: 500
I am saying that the league should punish the teams who can't keep their house in order. The blues are a perfect example. They break even until 01 and then add tkachuk and weight. There was no possibility (short of a trip to the cup finals every year) that they could ever recoup those salaries. Between the two players, you have an extra 19,000,000 in salary. At an average ticket price of $75, the blues have to draw over 5,500 fans to every game just to pay those two.

if they were allready near capacity, then it is pure folly for them to drive up everyone else's costs by paying those two that much money. If nobody offers weight 8 mill, then I guess he wouldn' be worth 8 mill. It isn't doug or kieth's fault, this mess is caused by owners and irresponsible spenders should be punished.

Mr Sakich is offline  
Old
09-29-2003, 11:37 AM
  #14
Motown Beatdown
Need a slump buster
 
Motown Beatdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Indianapolis
Country: United States
Posts: 8,554
vCash: 450
Thor is on the right path. So many teams, big and small market are always running in the red. If the owners couldn't spend more than they could afford, it would keep salaries down. Sure some teams would be able to have a much bigger budget than other teams. But money doesn't always equal winning. Look at the Rangers for the past 6 years. Look at the Wings in 2001 and 2003, look at Philly.

I look at it this way, if i need a new car. And i only can afford a Buick. I dont go out and buy a Lexus

Motown Beatdown is offline  
Old
09-29-2003, 12:14 PM
  #15
Tom Liodice
Registered User
 
Tom Liodice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Long Island
Posts: 2,296
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Tom Liodice
Quote:
Originally Posted by thor dyck
As it is now, the islanders are helping to keep salaries too high for every team. There is no way a team like the blues should be able to sign a doug weight for 9.5 mill and then lose 40 mill in one year. They are destroying the supply / demand balance in the league.
I'm sorry, but I strongly disagree with this. When was the last time that the Islanders were setting the standards for salaries? The isles started shelling out the money when Charles Wang purchase the team in late 2000. Before then, Isles GM Mike Milbury was basically told by then-owners Howard Milstein and Steven Gluckstern that he could have either a $5 million, $10 million, or $15 million payroll. While the Isles were stuck in the crapper, the Rangers were trying to shell out ridiculous amounts of cash for Joe Sakic, which practically forced the Avalanche to match the offer. In my opinion, that is when the salary structure went through the roof. The whole fact of the Blues trying to sign Doug Weight for that much is a non-issue. This has started way before the Isles actually were back by an owner who had faith in the team. Teams like the Rangers aren't helping the current state of the NHL by signing guys like Greg de Vries for a $4.2 million contract. They can survive with this is because they are backed by a major cable television company, Cablevision.

-TL

Tom Liodice is offline  
Old
09-29-2003, 12:27 PM
  #16
JDB3939
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Natrona Heights, PA
Posts: 3,452
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to JDB3939
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW
The Colisuem is over 30 yrs old.The oldest arena in the league.
Melon Arena is the oldest arena in the league. It's original construction dates back to the 50's if I'm not mistake.

JDB3939 is offline  
Old
09-29-2003, 01:29 PM
  #17
Mr Sakich
Registered User
 
Mr Sakich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Motel 35
Posts: 8,080
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Liodice
I'm sorry, but I strongly disagree with this. When was the last time that the Islanders were setting the standards for salaries? The isles started shelling out the money when Charles Wang purchase the team in late 2000. Before then, Isles GM Mike Milbury was basically told by then-owners Howard Milstein and Steven Gluckstern that he could have either a $5 million, $10 million, or $15 million payroll. While the Isles were stuck in the crapper, the Rangers were trying to shell out ridiculous amounts of cash for Joe Sakic, which practically forced the Avalanche to match the offer. In my opinion, that is when the salary structure went through the roof. The whole fact of the Blues trying to sign Doug Weight for that much is a non-issue. This has started way before the Isles actually were back by an owner who had faith in the team. Teams like the Rangers aren't helping the current state of the NHL by signing guys like Greg de Vries for a $4.2 million contract. They can survive with this is because they are backed by a major cable television company, Cablevision.

-TL
the islanders did not do hockey much of a favor when they signed yashin. Who else would have given that guy that contract? It set the bar for a bunch of other players and every team is suffering.

same for the blues. Really and truly, there were 4-5 teams able to pay 5 mill per and there were 7-8 guys availbale. Why didn't they tell doug that he could earn them 5 mill per year so that is what they would pay him?

My whole point is this - the current cba would work if there was a strong enough disincentive to run a loss. The challenge is how to stop the fools from giving contracts that could never make economic sense. How to stop owners from themselves?

3.5 mill per year for todd marchant ????? aaaarrrrgggghhhhhhh

Mr Sakich is offline  
Old
09-29-2003, 02:37 PM
  #18
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 28,933
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thor dyck
the islanders did not do hockey much of a favor when they signed yashin. Who else would have given that guy that contract? It set the bar for a bunch of other players and every team is suffering.

same for the blues. Really and truly, there were 4-5 teams able to pay 5 mill per and there were 7-8 guys availbale. Why didn't they tell doug that he could earn them 5 mill per year so that is what they would pay him?

My whole point is this - the current cba would work if there was a strong enough disincentive to run a loss. The challenge is how to stop the fools from giving contracts that could never make economic sense. How to stop owners from themselves?

3.5 mill per year for todd marchant ????? aaaarrrrgggghhhhhhh
Yashin's deal raises the bar ? I totally disagree.

this summer we've seen teams tightening their belts,preparing for a cap.Yashin's deal has done nothing except tighten the nyi future budgets.


Leetch took roughly a $3m paycut this summer.

Hatcher was signed for $6m,after analysts predicted he'd get $8m a yr.

Feds asked the Wings for $12m and ended up getting $8m from Anaheim.

Where were the bidding fights over Whitney and S. Kozlov,both of whom had very strong yrs,tested the ufa market and then signed reason deals($3m range) with their old teams?



you keep bringing up Weight's contract,basically saying the Blues had to pay Weight big money because the nyi had signed Yashin for big money.

Weight was traded to the Blues and signed his new deal on July 1,2001.
http://www.stlouisblues.com/news/0001/010701.html

ST. LOUIS - July 1, 2001 - St. Louis Blues senior vice president and general manager Larry Pleau announced today that the team has acquired 30-year-old center Doug Weight from the Edmonton Oilers along with right wing Michel Riesen in exchange for center Marty Reasoner, left wing Jochen Hecht and defenseman Jan Horacek.

Following the trade, Weight was signed by the Blues to a multi-year contract. Terms were not disclosed.


Yashin signed his new deal in Sept. 2001

http://www.hockey-stats.com/news/A-2001-09-05-2.shtml

NEW YORK (September 5, 2001) - Alexei Yashin sat out an entire season in a contract dispute just two years ago. Now, the high-scoring center has agreed to the longest deal in NHL history.
The New York Islanders and the 27-year-old Russian

CREW99AW is offline  
Old
09-29-2003, 02:39 PM
  #19
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 28,933
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDB3939
Melon Arena is the oldest arena in the league. It's original construction dates back to the 50's if I'm not mistake.
thanks for the info.

really both teams need a new arena.

CREW99AW is offline  
Old
09-29-2003, 08:19 PM
  #20
Tom Liodice
Registered User
 
Tom Liodice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Long Island
Posts: 2,296
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Tom Liodice
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW
Yashin's deal raises the bar ? I totally disagree.

this summer we've seen teams tightening their belts,preparing for a cap.Yashin's deal has done nothing except tighten the nyi future budgets.


Leetch took roughly a $3m paycut this summer.

Hatcher was signed for $6m,after analysts predicted he'd get $8m a yr.

Feds asked the Wings for $12m and ended up getting $8m from Anaheim.

Where were the bidding fights over Whitney and S. Kozlov,both of whom had very strong yrs,tested the ufa market and then signed reason deals($3m range) with their old teams?



you keep bringing up Weight's contract,basically saying the Blues had to pay Weight big money because the nyi had signed Yashin for big money.

Weight was traded to the Blues and signed his new deal on July 1,2001.
http://www.stlouisblues.com/news/0001/010701.html

ST. LOUIS - July 1, 2001 - St. Louis Blues senior vice president and general manager Larry Pleau announced today that the team has acquired 30-year-old center Doug Weight from the Edmonton Oilers along with right wing Michel Riesen in exchange for center Marty Reasoner, left wing Jochen Hecht and defenseman Jan Horacek.

Following the trade, Weight was signed by the Blues to a multi-year contract. Terms were not disclosed.


Yashin signed his new deal in Sept. 2001

http://www.hockey-stats.com/news/A-2001-09-05-2.shtml

NEW YORK (September 5, 2001) - Alexei Yashin sat out an entire season in a contract dispute just two years ago. Now, the high-scoring center has agreed to the longest deal in NHL history.
The New York Islanders and the 27-year-old Russian
Someone has been doing their homework! :p

-TL

Tom Liodice is offline  
Old
09-30-2003, 02:51 AM
  #21
Mr Sakich
Registered User
 
Mr Sakich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Motel 35
Posts: 8,080
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW
Yashin's deal raises the bar ? I totally disagree.

this summer we've seen teams tightening their belts,preparing for a cap.Yashin's deal has done nothing except tighten the nyi future budgets.


Leetch took roughly a $3m paycut this summer.

Hatcher was signed for $6m,after analysts predicted he'd get $8m a yr.

Feds asked the Wings for $12m and ended up getting $8m from Anaheim.

Where were the bidding fights over Whitney and S. Kozlov,both of whom had very strong yrs,tested the ufa market and then signed reason deals($3m range) with their old teams?



you keep bringing up Weight's contract,basically saying the Blues had to pay Weight big money because the nyi had signed Yashin for big money.

Weight was traded to the Blues and signed his new deal on July 1,2001.
http://www.stlouisblues.com/news/0001/010701.html

ST. LOUIS - July 1, 2001 - St. Louis Blues senior vice president and general manager Larry Pleau announced today that the team has acquired 30-year-old center Doug Weight from the Edmonton Oilers along with right wing Michel Riesen in exchange for center Marty Reasoner, left wing Jochen Hecht and defenseman Jan Horacek.

Following the trade, Weight was signed by the Blues to a multi-year contract. Terms were not disclosed.


Yashin signed his new deal in Sept. 2001

http://www.hockey-stats.com/news/A-2001-09-05-2.shtml

NEW YORK (September 5, 2001) - Alexei Yashin sat out an entire season in a contract dispute just two years ago. Now, the high-scoring center has agreed to the longest deal in NHL history.
The New York Islanders and the 27-year-old Russian
I amnot the most eloquent guy so maybe my point wasn't clear. It wasn't the islanders or blues alone. It was both of them as well as LA (who traded for palfy and allison while losing money), it was the canucks who lost millions for years, etc..

All clubs who sign ridiculously large contracts while they are losing money are the fault for the current econimic crisis in the nhl. When there is no possible finacial justifucation to signing a player, the clubs should be enticed to walk away.My point is that instead of trying to hammer out concessions from the players, the owners should get their own house in order. It is like a salary cap but it is flexible and allows the big market teams to buy talent up to the point where they start losing money. After that point, punish them significantly.

This protects the small market teams because it allows them to keep "heritage" players like iginla if iggy's top end market value is 5 mill.

I have no problem with a big money team like the leafs or

Mr Sakich is offline  
Old
09-30-2003, 03:23 AM
  #22
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 28,933
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thor dyck
My point is that instead of trying to hammer out concessions from the players, the owners should get their own house in order. It is like a salary cap but it is flexible and allows the big market teams to buy talent up to the point where they start losing money. After that point, punish them significantly.

This protects the small market teams because it allows them to keep "heritage" players like iginla if iggy's top end market value is 5 mill.

I have no problem with a big money team like the leafs or
Your a ranger fan right?

At the end of last season the ny press was asking sather what the ranger payroll was.He refused to say,but one writer estimated it was at about $84m.

So yeah, I can see how you'd like to see a flexible cap that allows big market teams to keep buying talent.

and if big market teams can just keep buying talent as you suggest,why would Ignila take $5m from Calagry,when he could get $10m from the rangers,leafs,wings or avs.

Your proposal has been tried out by major league baseball and we've seen how the Yankees with their great cable revenue over the yrs, has reacted to a luxury tax (is it a $160m payroll or $170m payroll this yr for the Yankees?)

CREW99AW is offline  
Old
09-30-2003, 03:47 AM
  #23
Pure Slaughter Value
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 1,916
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Pure Slaughter Value
the islanders did not do hockey much of a favor when they signed yashin. Who else would have given that guy that contract? It set the bar for a bunch of other players and every team is suffering.

Disagree, even Gary Bettman came out and said he "didn't understand giving a player a 10 year deal" and everyone in the league agreed that no player is worth 10 years/90 million.

All that deal did was give everybody associated with hockey one more reason to laugh at Mike KrispyKremebury.

Pure Slaughter Value is offline  
Old
09-30-2003, 05:57 PM
  #24
Motown Beatdown
Need a slump buster
 
Motown Beatdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Indianapolis
Country: United States
Posts: 8,554
vCash: 450
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW
Your proposal has been tried out by major league baseball and we've seen how the Yankees with their great cable revenue over the yrs, has reacted to a luxury tax (is it a $160m payroll or $170m payroll this yr for the Yankees?)

Just because the system doesn't work in MLB doesn't mean it cant work in the NHL. The problem with MLB is that "cap number" is so high it only effects one team.
A 45 million dollar "cap number" would effect about half of the NHL teams. Thats a step in the right direction.

Every one is talking about cap this and cap that. But they are failing to say what the biggest problem between the markets is. And thats difference in revenue. A salary cap does nothing to increase the revenue for the small market teams. All it means is a few more owners make more money for themselves.
If a team can not afford a 29 million dollar payroll what good is a 40 million dollar cap?

Motown Beatdown is offline  
Old
10-01-2003, 03:08 AM
  #25
discostu
Registered User
 
discostu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Nomadville
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,283
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JWI19
Just because the system doesn't work in MLB doesn't mean it cant work in the NHL. The problem with MLB is that "cap number" is so high it only effects one team.
A 45 million dollar "cap number" would effect about half of the NHL teams. Thats a step in the right direction.

Every one is talking about cap this and cap that. But they are failing to say what the biggest problem between the markets is. And thats difference in revenue. A salary cap does nothing to increase the revenue for the small market teams. All it means is a few more owners make more money for themselves.
If a team can not afford a 29 million dollar payroll what good is a 40 million dollar cap?
I am mostly in agreement with you on your points here except for one correction:

But they are failing to say what the biggest problem between the markets is. And thats difference in revenue.

I don't think revenue disparity is the complete issue. I think gross profit (i.e. rev. and costs before salaries) is where there are the most discrepencies. There are many teams that are doing fairly well in the revenue department, however, they have more costs than many other teams (arena costs, taxes, etc.). This has a lot to do with the varying degrees of subsidization across the league.

Other than that though, I do agree that people shouldn't dismiss a luxury tax idea because it didn't work in MLB. First, MLB implemented such a horrible system, that it was doomed to fail. Second, the level of payroll disparity in MLB is much worse than it is in the NHL, and it is more susceptible to teams being able to purchase a championship.

discostu 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 02:57 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.