HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Notices

Trade immenent?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-06-2004, 01:34 PM
  #51
Axis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 129
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Sakich
smith to toronto for coliocovo
laraque and rita to montreal for komaresik

oates to whoever loses a centre to injury for a 2nd round pick. Could be toronto, philly, stl etc

I like your idea of trading for Komisarek but I think it would cost us Jason Smith. Not a bad move but it sure hurts us in the short run. A Janne Niinimaa trade for Joni Pitkanen would have been along the same lines.

Axis is offline  
Old
01-06-2004, 01:36 PM
  #52
speeds
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St.Albert
Posts: 6,822
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by momentai
Very detailed post Rage.

But one point. Why can Denver compete with markets far larger than them?

OWNERSHIP WITH DEEP POCKETS. Something the Oilers don't have the benefit of. It isn't all drafting. While that may be the crux of what makes a good franchise, a good part of it is keeping what you have built. Colorado is a team that has both...

EDIT: the reason why the NFL has so many winners is that there is a lot of player movement every single offseason. As of yet, I don't think there is any reason to believe that their system is going to crumble at the moment. Do you have any leads to that?
http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?threadid=30300

this is an extremely long thread, but I just linked it in case anyone wants to read it. The point I would use from it though is that as teams get better their payrolls increase too, but their revenues go up even moreso because fans will pay to see a winner. I think that is true even in EDM. And ultimately, if it isn't, if the market won't bear it, EDM probably doesn't deserve an NHL team.

speeds is offline  
Old
01-06-2004, 01:37 PM
  #53
momentai
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,352
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axis
I like your idea of trading for Komisarek but I think it would cost us Jason Smith. Not a bad move but it sure hurts us in the short run. A Janne Niinimaa trade for Joni Pitkanen would have been along the same lines.
Both of those deals, I'd probably do.. And you know that I absolutely love Niinimaa.

The deal of Janne for Pitkanen would have made a lot more sense at the deadline than getting rid of a dman on a thin blueline for forwards... which we have plenty of.

momentai is offline  
Old
01-06-2004, 01:40 PM
  #54
momentai
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,352
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by speeds
this is an extremely long thread, but I just linked it in case anyone wants to read it. The point I would use from it though is that as teams get better their payrolls increase too, but their revenues go up even moreso because fans will pay to see a winner. I think that is true even in EDM. And ultimately, if it isn't, if the market won't bear it, EDM probably doesn't deserve an NHL team.
In Edmonton, though, there are a couple more obstacles to overcome before we reach the point in evaluating whether or not Edmonton deserves an NHL team.

The Oilers need a new stadium to play in and a lot of that has to do with whether or not there is hockey in Edmonton at the NHL level period.

Another is ownership stability for once.

Until some of those are addressed at least in part... I'm not sure if that evaluation can be made.

EDIT: i have looked at the thread in question. It's been a while since I went back to it though.

momentai is offline  
Old
01-06-2004, 01:51 PM
  #55
speeds
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St.Albert
Posts: 6,822
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by momentai
In Edmonton, though, there are a couple more obstacles to overcome before we reach the point in evaluating whether or not Edmonton deserves an NHL team.

The Oilers need a new stadium to play in and a lot of that has to do with whether or not there is hockey in Edmonton at the NHL level period.

Another is ownership stability for once.

Until some of those are addressed at least in part... I'm not sure if that evaluation can be made.

EDIT: i have looked at the thread in question. It's been a while since I went back to it though.
I'm no marketing expert, I guess it would come down to could EDM support a 50-60 mil payroll if the team was the best team in the league (and it wouldn't even take that much to be the best, look at OTT or VAN, they are both at around 40-45 mil, and they are as good as anyone in the league), would fans be willing to pay basically double for each ticket they purchase?

who knows I suppose.

speeds is offline  
Old
01-06-2004, 01:58 PM
  #56
theoil
Registered User
 
theoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,155
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by speeds
http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?threadid=30300The point I would use from it though is that as teams get better their payrolls increase too, but their revenues go up even moreso because fans will pay to see a winner. I think that is true even in EDM. And ultimately, if it isn't, if the market won't bear it, EDM probably doesn't deserve an NHL team.
So I am guessing that in order for Edmonton's revenue to increase they would have to increase ticket prices since we are basically sold out and there is very little room to increase revenue through more ticket sales. Since people will pay more to watch winners I am guessing that you think all the current ticket holders will pay more or those that love hockey will be replaced by those who love winners or a combination of the two.
Well, I love hockey and I pay and go to watch the bums no matter how much they drive me crazy but it has been getting more and more difficult to explain to my wife why I spend so much money on this when we do without other things (possible I married badly but that is another subject) so that if ticket prices increase much more I will have to give up my tickets because there are a lot of other things that we could do together for the amount of money I spend to go to games with my brother so I guess I would be one of the people that doesn't deserve to go to the games. And I can live with that.
But don't come back to me when the team stops winning (because that will happen as it happens to every other team in the league and those that enjoy winning give up their tickets because I will be gone by then.
And don't tell me that it is the 'market' that sets salaries at the moment because that is just a bunch of crap spread by sports journalists and hockey players who should be ashamed of themselves for writing and talking about things that they have no understandinf of. The 'market' has never been in operation in the NHL or any other professional sports league that I am aware. The market is when you can go anywhere you want and work for whatever you can get whenever you want to do so. That is the market. A sport's league is a controlled environment defined by a bargaining unit - not a market - and how it is controlled at the moment is not very well. And that would appear to be a problem for a lot of teams. This is a long discussion and has been had here and a lot of other places and it is possible for people of good will to disagree on a number of points but please do not call what we have a 'market' since that just misleads people into thinking that putting a different set of controls on the current environment somehow smacks of socialism, atheism or some other 'ism' that is bound to lead to the collapse of the free (market) world as we know it and that is absolutely untrue.

Sorry, you caught me in a bad moment.

theoil is offline  
Old
01-06-2004, 02:00 PM
  #57
momentai
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,352
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by speeds
I'm no marketing expert, I guess it would come down to could EDM support a 50-60 mil payroll if the team was the best team in the league (and it wouldn't even take that much to be the best, look at OTT or VAN, they are both at around 40-45 mil, and they are as good as anyone in the league), would fans be willing to pay basically double for each ticket they purchase?

who knows I suppose.
Difficult question ask. I'm not sure if I can really give you a straight answer. It could very well be that the fans would not be willing to stomach that kind of ticket raise.

However, how much of an effect can consecutive, IMPROVING, winning seasons generate? At this point, the team is a first round loser barely scraping to get into the playoffs every season. And even with that the Oil nearly sell out every game. A lot of that can be due to low ticket prices however.

Difficult question to propose and not one easily answered. Could they? Who knows. But it might be that they the Oilers and Edmonton will never get the chance to find out.

momentai is offline  
Old
01-06-2004, 02:04 PM
  #58
momentai
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,352
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by theoil
Well, I love hockey and I pay and go to watch the bums no matter how much they drive me crazy but it has been getting more and more difficult to explain to my wife why I spend so much money on this when we do without other things (possible I married badly but that is another subject) so that if ticket prices increase much more I will have to give up my tickets because there are a lot of other things that we could do together for the amount of money I spend to go to games with my brother so I guess I would be one of the people that doesn't deserve to go to the games. And I can live with that.
This is also a very real possibility as well. Fans, no matter how much winning occurs, will just leave because the prices too high considering the alternatives.

Very very tenuous situation to say the least.

momentai is offline  
Old
01-06-2004, 02:32 PM
  #59
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by theoil
And don't tell me that it is the 'market' that sets salaries at the moment because that is just a bunch of crap spread by sports journalists and hockey players who should be ashamed of themselves for writing and talking about things that they have no understandinf of. The 'market' has never been in operation in the NHL or any other professional sports league that I am aware. The market is when you can go anywhere you want and work for whatever you can get whenever you want to do so. That is the market. A sport's league is a controlled environment defined by a bargaining unit - not a market - and how it is controlled at the moment is not very well. And that would appear to be a problem for a lot of teams. This is a long discussion and has been had here and a lot of other places and it is possible for people of good will to disagree on a number of points but please do not call what we have a 'market' since that just misleads people into thinking that putting a different set of controls on the current environment somehow smacks of socialism, atheism or some other 'ism' that is bound to lead to the collapse of the free (market) world as we know it and that is absolutely untrue.

Sorry, you caught me in a bad moment.
Ding ding ding... we have a winner.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
01-06-2004, 03:03 PM
  #60
speeds
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St.Albert
Posts: 6,822
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by theoil
So I am guessing that in order for Edmonton's revenue to increase they would have to increase ticket prices since we are basically sold out and there is very little room to increase revenue through more ticket sales.
that would have to be one avenue. Rink board ads, and other ads within the rink, would have their rates jacked as the team improved, PPV revenues would probably go up, I'm sure they'd get more money from sportsnet if the viewership increased with a better team (which it almost certianly would). This year the Canucks have started a program with season ticket holders where if they can't make a game, the tickets are placed in an on-line auction, with pretty much a 50/50 split betweent he proceeds going to the canucks and to the ticket holder. That's something that should be looked at. Actually, in general, I think the Oilers should look at an on-line bidding system for all tickets that aren't sold to season ticket holders, maybe only for games that will generate a big demand

Quote:
Since people will pay more to watch winners I am guessing that you think all the current ticket holders will pay more or those that love hockey will be replaced by those who love winners or a combination of the two.
I'm not claiming to know what would happen but that's what the team would be banking on.

Quote:
Well, I love hockey and I pay and go to watch the bums no matter how much they drive me crazy but it has been getting more and more difficult to explain to my wife why I spend so much money on this when we do without other things (possible I married badly but that is another subject) so that if ticket prices increase much more I will have to give up my tickets because there are a lot of other things that we could do together for the amount of money I spend to go to games with my brother so I guess I would be one of the people that doesn't deserve to go to the games. And I can live with that.
I understand all of that. I don't like how you use the word "deserve" - I know a ton of people already who would like to go but can't afford it. It's not about deserving, merely about affording.

Quote:
But don't come back to me when the team stops winning (because that will happen as it happens to every other team in the league and those that enjoy winning give up their tickets because I will be gone by then. And don't tell me that it is the 'market' that sets salaries at the moment because that is just a bunch of crap spread by sports journalists and hockey players who should be ashamed of themselves for writing and talking about things that they have no understandinf of. The 'market' has never been in operation in the NHL or any other professional sports league that I am aware. The market is when you can go anywhere you want and work for whatever you can get whenever you want to do so. That is the market. A sport's league is a controlled environment defined by a bargaining unit - not a market - and how it is controlled at the moment is not very well. And that would appear to be a problem for a lot of teams. This is a long discussion and has been had here and a lot of other places and it is possible for people of good will to disagree on a number of points but please do not call what we have a 'market' since that just misleads people into thinking that putting a different set of controls on the current environment somehow smacks of socialism, atheism or some other 'ism' that is bound to lead to the collapse of the free (market) world as we know it and that is absolutely untrue.

Sorry, you caught me in a bad moment.
When I used the word market I was referring to the paying customer and ticket prices, not to the "market" involved with players salaries, draft, etc.

Or am I misinterpreting this last part of your post?

speeds is offline  
Old
01-06-2004, 03:19 PM
  #61
Mizral
Registered User
 
Mizral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Earth, MW
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,112
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oildrop
Why are some of you saying that Jason Smith is going to be a UFA after this season because of the new CBA? RFA's that are going to arbitration will be signed by August 15th, if I remember correctly. Smith will be signed by then and the CBA doesn't get under way until September. So are you saying that all players under contract will have their contracts revoked and then everyone will be a UFA? I highly doubt it, so I don't see why Smith would be a UFA.
Two ways Smith could become a UFA:

#1 - There is a work stoppage for one year, the CBA is redone with the UFA age saying the game. At this point (one year and about 5 or 6 months from now), Smith will be past 31, and out of a contract, thus making him a UFA.

#2 - The UFA age is lowered and Smith hasn't signed by the day the CBA drops (most UFA's, if not all, will not be signed before the CBA comes down, mostly due to financial, and in some cases, management, uncertainty.

The only way Smith does not become a UFA if there isn't a work stoppage and the UFA age isn't lowered, or he signs an extension between now and the CBA.

Anyhow, even if Smith is a UFA, it doesn't mean the Oilers couldn't resign him. You guys are acting as if free agents simply dissapear into the night. I know this has happened in Edmonton often, but consider that some guys have actually be SIGNED as a UFA. Oates for instance. Also, wasn't Staios picked up as a UFA?

Mizral is offline  
Old
01-06-2004, 03:23 PM
  #62
Narnia
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Narnia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,394
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Narnia
And yesterday Ulanov as well.

__________________
"He just ate up Robyn Regehr for dinner, a spectacular play by Hemsky, and Robyn Regehr has got doo doo all over his face" - Rod Phillips call on Hemsky's goal vs the Flames
Narnia is offline  
Old
01-06-2004, 03:43 PM
  #63
Oi'll say!
Registered User
 
Oi'll say!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Oil in 9
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,012
vCash: 500
The Oilers can only pick up the ufa's that noone else wants. They'll have no chance of winning a bidding war for an above average player in his prime like Smith is.

Staios's value was nowhere near what it is now or they wouldn't have gotten him either, we couldn't even afford to keep Igor Ulanov when he went ufa here the first time. The Rag$ gave him $2M/season.

Oi'll say! is offline  
Old
01-06-2004, 06:07 PM
  #64
theoil
Registered User
 
theoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,155
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by speeds
that would have to be one avenue. Rink board ads, and other ads within the rink, would have their rates jacked as the team improved, PPV revenues would probably go up, I'm sure they'd get more money from sportsnet if the viewership increased with a better team (which it almost certianly would). This year the Canucks have started a program with season ticket holders where if they can't make a game, the tickets are placed in an on-line auction, with pretty much a 50/50 split betweent he proceeds going to the canucks and to the ticket holder. That's something that should be looked at. Actually, in general, I think the Oilers should look at an on-line bidding system for all tickets that aren't sold to season ticket holders, maybe only for games that will generate a big demand



I'm not claiming to know what would happen but that's what the team would be banking on.



I understand all of that. I don't like how you use the word "deserve" - I know a ton of people already who would like to go but can't afford it. It's not about deserving, merely about affording.



When I used the word market I was referring to the paying customer and ticket prices, not to the "market" involved with players salaries, draft, etc.

Or am I misinterpreting this last part of your post?
First of all 'speeds' my apologies. I really like your posts and didn't mean to rant at you.

I used the word 'deserves' in pretty much the way you used it in your original post and it was meant to reflect that. You were wondering if Edmonton could prove that it 'deserves' a team.

I guess I am a little skeptical about the business side of hockey. I don't comment on trades much because I don't think I know enough about other team's players and I defer to a lot of you concerning how good or bad so and so is playing. But business. I understand business. I have been running businesses for over 25 years. If you think that there is a 'market' for paying customers and ticket prices but that salaries and drafts are something different then you understand business differently than I do because to me the one is inextricably tied to the other or you have a monoply which is illegal. No. the situation is that the entire package is controlled through the constraints of the CBA which dictates every aspect of what is essentially a controlled artificial construct designed to make money.

The problem is that the NHL is a business but currently operates as though it is 30 businesses imposing a standard for success outside the traditional understanding of competitive sport. In other words victories and losses are not fought in the public arena of the icerink but behind the scenes in the boardrooms of the very rich and the games have become a reflection of those victories and losses. For how long people will pay to see the outcome of whether or not Wal-Mart had a good year (St. Louis I believe) or the twit in Buffalo or Pocklington or whoever is paying the freight in Long Island is debateable. With the return of some strength to the Canadian dollar we should be able to compete in this league unless the point continues to be victory by spending. And yes I know some of these teams are so stupid they can't even win by spending huge amounts of money but they can certainly keep about 20 other teams from winning by taking away their best players.

theoil is offline  
Old
01-06-2004, 06:39 PM
  #65
The Rage
Registered User
 
The Rage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Stamford Bridge
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,791
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by theoil
Since people will pay more to watch winners I am guessing that you think all the current ticket holders will pay more or those that love hockey will be replaced by those who love winners or a combination of the two.
Great post. However, alot of fans (like me) already can't afford to go to many games. I guess I've become callous to the idea that the most hardcore fans should be the ones at the games. But honestly, if the Oilers won the cup, would you care if you couldn't go to many games?


Last edited by The Rage: 01-06-2004 at 06:43 PM.
The Rage is offline  
Old
01-06-2004, 06:44 PM
  #66
theoil
Registered User
 
theoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,155
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Rage
Great post. However, alot of fans (like me) already can't afford to go to many games. I guess I've become callous to the idea that the most hardcore fans should be the ones at the games. But honestly, if the Oilers won the cup, would you care if you couldn't go to many games?
Yeah, I would. I am getting old and have so few pleasures left.

theoil is offline  
Old
01-06-2004, 06:51 PM
  #67
The Rage
Registered User
 
The Rage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Stamford Bridge
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,791
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by momentai
A wealthy owner will sometimes take a hit in the pocketbook if it means a potential cup winner. It drums up a lot more interest for subsequent years in terms of season tickets, promotions, etc.
http://www.forbes.com/free_forbes/2003/1208/094tab.html

The Avs lost 3 million last year. I concede the point. However, interestingly, Detroit and the Rags lost money. Since the info comes from forbes, I think it's credible.

The Rage is offline  
Old
01-06-2004, 09:06 PM
  #68
speeds
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St.Albert
Posts: 6,822
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by theoil
I used the word 'deserves' in pretty much the way you used it in your original post and it was meant to reflect that. You were wondering if Edmonton could prove that it 'deserves' a team.
I used "deserves", which was probably a poor choice in language. What I should have said, instead of:


And ultimately, if it isn't, if the market won't bear it, EDM probably doesn't deserve an NHL team.

was:

And ultimately, if it isn't, if the market won't bear it, EDM simply can't afford an NHL team.

Quote:
I guess I am a little skeptical about the business side of hockey. I don't comment on trades much because I don't think I know enough about other team's players and I defer to a lot of you concerning how good or bad so and so is playing.
fair enough, I sometimes like to think the people involved are making great personel and business decisions, but in the end I don't think that many GM's would do a better job than Lowetide, for example, if Lowetide had all the information available to him that a GM has.

Quote:
But business. I understand business. I have been running businesses for over 25 years. If you think that there is a 'market' for paying customers and ticket prices but that salaries and drafts are something different then you understand business differently than I do because to me the one is inextricably tied to the other or you have a monoply which is illegal.
They are I suppose tied together in the a team probably wants to keep keep their expenses under their revenues, and if your costs go up you'll pass it on to the consumers (ticket holders) provided they will pay it. but the ticket market is much more of an open free market scenario than the restricted system of player allotment in the NHL.

Quote:
No. the situation is that the entire package is controlled through the constraints of the CBA which dictates every aspect of what is essentially a controlled artificial construct designed to make money.
the cba is an agreement between owners and the player's union. It has no bearing on what a team does in terms of setting ticket prices, except in that the CBA influences what you have to pay your help. That's only one (albeit the main) cost of doing business for an NHL franchise.

Quote:
The problem is that the NHL is a business but currently operates as though it is 30 businesses imposing a standard for success outside the traditional understanding of competitive sport. In other words victories and losses are not fought in the public arena of the icerink but behind the scenes in the boardrooms of the very rich and the games have become a reflection of those victories and losses.
Is that true or isn't it? I'm not sold one way or the other. I agree absolutely witht he first part, the league is largely one big company with different franchises trying to make as much money as possible within their own market. Often the markets aren't fighting for the same clients, but in some cases one could make a case that indeed they are. Doesn't really apply to EDM though, IMO, not in any significant way.

Quote:
With the return of some strength to the Canadian dollar we should be able to compete in this league unless the point continues to be victory by spending. And yes I know some of these teams are so stupid they can't even win by spending huge amounts of money but they can certainly keep about 20 other teams from winning by taking away their best players.
To tell the honest truth I think EDM is in a position where they could compete even with the current CBA. That is not to say that things wouldn't be easier if they had more money, but I do think the $$$ problems are exaggerated with a team like EDM.

1.3 mil to BG, 1.9 to Izzy, 3.9 to Salo, that's over 7 mil right there tied up in a 4th line goon, an average starter (in the past coupleyears, not this abomination of a season), and a guy with potential who really hasn't produced as of yet.

speeds is offline  
Old
01-07-2004, 02:10 AM
  #69
oilswell
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Wandering the globe
Posts: 1,760
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by speeds
And ultimately, if it isn't, if the market won't bear it, EDM simply can't afford an NHL team.
I'm probably reading this out of context since I didn't read the whole thread, but it stood out and here, more or less, was my thought train.

The Oilers have excellent attendance. Viewership is strong. The players get paid. They'll be in the black this year. EDM can easliy afford an NHL team.

oilswell is offline  
Old
01-07-2004, 04:49 AM
  #70
speeds
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St.Albert
Posts: 6,822
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilswell
I'm probably reading this out of context since I didn't read the whole thread, but it stood out and here, more or less, was my thought train.

The Oilers have excellent attendance. Viewership is strong. The players get paid. They'll be in the black this year. EDM can easliy afford an NHL team.
I don't think I disagree, I also think EDM can afford a team. That statement that you quoted came about while discussing if EDM could support a 50-60 mil payroll if it were necessary to keep an elite team together.


Last edited by speeds: 01-07-2004 at 04:52 AM.
speeds is offline  
Old
01-07-2004, 04:59 AM
  #71
Digger12
Registered User
 
Digger12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Defending the border
Posts: 14,497
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilswell
I'm probably reading this out of context since I didn't read the whole thread, but it stood out and here, more or less, was my thought train.

The Oilers have excellent attendance. Viewership is strong. The players get paid. They'll be in the black this year. EDM can easliy afford an NHL team.
Can EDM afford an NHL team? Sure.

Can EDM afford an NHL team that could consistently get past the first round of the playoffs without it being considered our own version of 'Miracle on Ice'? Not so sure.

I consider the models of the Nucks and Sens as ones the Oilers should be trying to emulate, but even with superior trading and drafting those teams still pump around 5 to 8 million more into player salaries. Relatively speaking that's not a whole lot, but would the Oilers be willing to even go that far? The impression the ownership group gives me is that they must stay in the black if at all possible, even at the expense of losing an extra round of playoff revenue. They'd rather have a bird in the hand than two in the bush. As long as attendance and viewership stay at current levels, they don't seem compelled to risk any more than they have to.

And of course, this speaks nothing of the drafting and especially trading needing one or two home runs. The drafting at least looks promising so far, the trading aspect I'm not so confident.

Digger12 is offline  
Old
01-07-2004, 07:24 AM
  #72
theoil
Registered User
 
theoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,155
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=Digger12]Can EDM afford an NHL team? Sure.

I consider the models of the Nucks and Sens as ones the Oilers should be trying to emulate, but even with superior trading and drafting those teams still pump around 5 to 8 million more into player salaries.

And this year (and last year) they look like excellent models on the ice but correct me if I a wrong but it seems to me that the Canucks have been for sale for 3-5 years and have lost millions over that time frame and of course the Senators went bankrupt which everybody will tell me was because of excessive debt load etc. as though that debt was accumulated on a whim rather than out of necessity. Doubtful. People who buy assets at 10 cents on the dollar often make things work that the original owner couldn't but such people never actually start things so the business never gets started without somebody going broke and this is a successful business model to sell? I read the first few pages on the CanucksCorner site that Mizral posted a link to on another thread here (too lazy to look it up) between the guy in LA that looked the Kings books and some guy in Vancouver who was trying to argue that why should he care if incompetent owners and management spend more money than they earn? The answer is that there is always a balance. You don't want the business so fat that incompetence has no repercussions and you don't want the business so thin that only 5% of the franchises are actually making money in any given year. Anyway I apologize for taking this thread way off topic but my response to you Speeds about whether or not Edmonton can afford an NHL franchise is - only if the NHL changes the rules so that they make economic competition amongst ownership a non-determining factor regarding on-ice results. You cannot have the Wal-Mart in St. Albert consistently running loss leader sales to drive the Wal-Mart in Castledowns out of business. You can only do that in sports franchises apparently.

theoil is offline  
Old
01-07-2004, 07:37 AM
  #73
Yanner39
Registered User
 
Yanner39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Ottawa ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,334
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=theoil]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digger12
Can EDM afford an NHL team? Sure.

I consider the models of the Nucks and Sens as ones the Oilers should be trying to emulate, but even with superior trading and drafting those teams still pump around 5 to 8 million more into player salaries.
Here in Ottawa, some say this season will be huge for Eugene Melnyk because fans are waiting to see if he will spend some money to better equip the Sens to make the Stanley Cup. For some reason, Ottawa fans are not happy with their team and they want a trade to happen. We'll see if Melnyk will put more money in the team. I think the Sens have a very good team and can compete for the cup. I just Melnyk to put money in the team to keep it together.

Yanner39 is offline  
Old
01-07-2004, 07:40 AM
  #74
Digger12
Registered User
 
Digger12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Defending the border
Posts: 14,497
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=theoil]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digger12
Can EDM afford an NHL team? Sure.

I consider the models of the Nucks and Sens as ones the Oilers should be trying to emulate, but even with superior trading and drafting those teams still pump around 5 to 8 million more into player salaries.

And this year (and last year) they look like excellent models on the ice but correct me if I a wrong but it seems to me that the Canucks have been for sale for 3-5 years and have lost millions over that time frame and of course the Senators went bankrupt which everybody will tell me was because of excessive debt load etc. as though that debt was accumulated on a whim rather than out of necessity. Doubtful. People who buy assets at 10 cents on the dollar often make things work that the original owner couldn't but such people never actually start things so the business never gets started without somebody going broke and this is a successful business model to sell? I read the first few pages on the CanucksCorner site that Mizral posted a link to on another thread here (too lazy to look it up) between the guy in LA that looked the Kings books and some guy in Vancouver who was trying to argue that why should he care if incompetent owners and management spend more money than they earn? The answer is that there is always a balance. You don't want the business so fat that incompetence has no repercussions and you don't want the business so thin that only 5% of the franchises are actually making money in any given year. Anyway I apologize for taking this thread way off topic but my response to you Speeds about whether or not Edmonton can afford an NHL franchise is - only if the NHL changes the rules so that they make economic competition amongst ownership a non-determining factor regarding on-ice results. You cannot have the Wal-Mart in St. Albert consistently running loss leader sales to drive the Wal-Mart in Castledowns out of business. You can only do that in sports franchises apparently.
Sorry...I was thinking more along the lines of a competitive team than a pure business model. I'm not a businessman.

Digger12 is offline  
Old
01-07-2004, 07:49 AM
  #75
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mizral
Two ways Smith could become a UFA:

#1 - There is a work stoppage for one year, the CBA is redone with the UFA age saying the game. At this point (one year and about 5 or 6 months from now), Smith will be past 31, and out of a contract, thus making him a UFA.
The Oilers aren't going to not offer Smith a contract this summer. As I understand it (from the legal mumbo jumbo), if they offer him at least a qualifying offer, his rights for one season are secure. Seeing as a lockout doesn't constitute a season (a season is league play, not a series of dates that the league usually plays in), The Oilers would still maintain Smith's rights for that last year.

Quote:
#2 - The UFA age is lowered and Smith hasn't signed by the day the CBA drops (most UFA's, if not all, will not be signed before the CBA comes down, mostly due to financial, and in some cases, management, uncertainty.
I am assuming that a condition to either side of a new CBA would be that it gets grandfathered in. Meaning that if a players is signed, or is qualified under the terms of the old CBA, they must fulfill it. If Smith is qualified under the old CBA, he must live up to that standard, as his contract was agreed to under that old standard. It's like if contracts in the new CBA are no longer guaranteed, guys currently signed to deals would be exempt from that.

Quote:
The only way Smith does not become a UFA if there isn't a work stoppage and the UFA age isn't lowered, or he signs an extension between now and the CBA.

Anyhow, even if Smith is a UFA, it doesn't mean the Oilers couldn't resign him. You guys are acting as if free agents simply dissapear into the night. I know this has happened in Edmonton often, but consider that some guys have actually be SIGNED as a UFA. Oates for instance. Also, wasn't Staios picked up as a UFA?
Guys like Staois and Oates were essentially cast aways. There was very little interest in these players aside from the Oilers. This will not be the same for Jason Smith.

dawgbone 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 04:31 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.