View Full Version : What was the point??
Bay Side
August 2nd, 2006, 3:52:16 PM
What the hell was the point of the year lock-out and getting all this work done with roll back of salaries. Now all a player has to do is be a average hockey player and make 2.9 mill., or make 1.9 mill. one season and do great for half a season and get bumped all the way up to 5 mill!! The rate this is going, Salaries will be much worse in 3 years, Compared to pre-CBA!! Any thoughts??
SabresFan220
August 2nd, 2006, 4:15:09 PM
The arbitration system needs to be reworked. They need hockey people making these decisions, not just lawyers. Why isn't Stu Grimson or Ken Dryden doing arbitration (former NHLers that are lawyers now)? I think the new CBA should include an individual salary cap of $5 million, honestly is there a player in the world who needs more money than that? With that rollback the team salary cap could be $35 million and all the teams could afford to spend up to it. Lawyers with little to no hockey knowledge are the ones screwing this system, there needs to be a way to come up with more balanced arbitration rulings. Ryan Malone and JP Dumont are similar players with similar numbers, Buffalo made the playoffs largely without Dumont in the lineup. He contributed in the playoffs, but mostly against Philly, and a game winner against Ottawa. How is Dumont worth twice as much as a younger player with the same numbers? Was the argument that if he had been healthy he might have had 40 goals and 40 assists?
Norwoodsrevenge
August 2nd, 2006, 4:21:59 PM
My thought is pretty simple...if this keeps up, the Sabres are in deep shit
CrazzyLegs10
August 2nd, 2006, 4:30:11 PM
I agree, everyone had 'career' years with new nhl, but it will take a few years to see how the numbers work out and settle down.
Sabres244
August 2nd, 2006, 4:37:39 PM
What the hell was the point of the year lock-out and getting all this work done with roll back of salaries. Now all a player has to do is be a average hockey player and make 2.9 mill., or make 1.9 mill. one season and do great for half a season and get bumped all the way up to 5 mill!! The rate this is going, Salaries will be much worse in 3 years, Compared to pre-CBA!! Any thoughts??
I hear ya, this league is going to be right where it was before the lockout if this crap keeps up
stuuuuuuuuuuu
August 3rd, 2006, 8:03:25 AM
I guess the point was so that the 80 million dollar payroll of the New York Rangers and Detroit Red Wings would be put on an even level with teams like the Sabres. The parity was there last year but its quickly dwindling as the cap increases. I think what's killing teams is the new UFA status. You used to be able to lock a guy up like Briere for a few more years cheap, now he has UFA status as his bargaining chip and we can't afford his salary.
matthew94
August 3rd, 2006, 8:46:55 AM
Guys, the players can only make 54% of the league revenue. Part of their salaries is put into an escrow account. If revenues are down, the escrow money goes back to the owners. I believe the 54% figure is the mid-point of the cap, but almost every team is spending beyond the mid-point, so it's almost certain that the players will never see some of the dollars they're signing up for.
I think the new CBA has worked out great! The gap between the lowest payroll and the smallest shrunk dramatically!
г
August 3rd, 2006, 9:19:03 AM
Before you go off half-cocked, remember the person who is the arbitrator is agreed upon by both parties well before the hearing starts.
I don't think I've seen anybody put forward that the reason two Sabres players have been 'successful' in arbitration is that the Sabres management didn't have a case, either with the evidence presented or through incompetence.
BTW, Ken Dryden is making a run to be Prime Minister of Canada.
committed hero
August 3rd, 2006, 10:37:24 AM
Considering the players got lowballed from the lockout, they're entitled to a bit more - especially if this year's are caused by a statistical bump as teams adjust (which shouldn't increase as much next year, but stabilize). The salary cap increased more than 10% in the offseason, so it should be reasonable to expect players' compensation to increase in turn.
Hockeystud1414
August 3rd, 2006, 11:46:25 AM
What the hell was the point of the year lock-out and getting all this work done with roll back of salaries. Now all a player has to do is be a average hockey player and make 2.9 mill., or make 1.9 mill. one season and do great for half a season and get bumped all the way up to 5 mill!! The rate this is going, Salaries will be much worse in 3 years, Compared to pre-CBA!! Any thoughts??
I have no idea.......we lost a year of hockey for nothing. The arbitration system needs to go.....I think if they take that away then you'll see less money problems in the nhl!
two4trippn
August 3rd, 2006, 11:46:54 AM
Congrats to you Jshramek for starting a thread without a link!
The only thing I see helping the NHL in the near future would be a MUCH more lucrative TV contract. Unfortunately, the folks who enjoy watching poker on ESPN have single handedly ruined that chance. Play cards and watch professional sports on Sports programming specific channels.
CrazzyLegs10
August 3rd, 2006, 11:56:58 AM
Considering the players got lowballed from the lockout, they're entitled to a bit more - especially if this year's are caused by a statistical bump as teams adjust (which shouldn't increase as much next year, but stabilize). The salary cap increased more than 10% in the offseason, so it should be reasonable to expect players' compensation to increase in turn.
a little of an increase? everyone in the league who had a 'decent' year increased almost double what they made pre, not 10%, how much do you think Chara would have made prelockout? not 7.5 a year or whatever ridiculous amt hes making now
Sasquatch
August 3rd, 2006, 12:01:20 PM
We can't spend 3 on JP, that's for sure. I think Danny B will be worth 5, but not yet. We took a gamble with Timmy C, but I believe he'll blow our minds this year and years to come. So far, JP and Briere are our only problems. Briere is worth keeping and seeing what he'll do and deciding if he's worth it, if he is, than make some moves next off-season to free up cap (assuming he really wants to stay here).
Essentially, we don't want to end up locked into contracts with guys who are over-priced. The word is that teams think Briere is over-priced and won't take his salary and we won't let him walk, so we have him for this year. We may have one player over-priced. I'm cool with that.
Salaries around the league will level themselves out, and we need to make sure we're not stuck in some contract we can't get out of (ie:Jersey, soon to be Boston, Chicago, etc.). Darcy knows this. I'm not too worried.
jimmifli
August 3rd, 2006, 12:05:04 PM
The arbitration system needs to be reworked. They need hockey people making these decisions, not just lawyers. Why isn't Stu Grimson or Ken Dryden doing arbitration (former NHLers that are lawyers now)? I think the new CBA should include an individual salary cap of $5 million, honestly is there a player in the world who needs more money than that? With that rollback the team salary cap could be $35 million and all the teams could afford to spend up to it. Lawyers with little to no hockey knowledge are the ones screwing this system, there needs to be a way to come up with more balanced arbitration rulings. Ryan Malone and JP Dumont are similar players with similar numbers, Buffalo made the playoffs largely without Dumont in the lineup. He contributed in the playoffs, but mostly against Philly, and a game winner against Ottawa. How is Dumont worth twice as much as a younger player with the same numbers? Was the argument that if he had been healthy he might have had 40 goals and 40 assists?
Ken Dryden might be busy running for Prime Mininster of Canada.
http://www.kendryden.ca/index.php?lang=en
SabresFan220
August 3rd, 2006, 3:22:08 PM
Yeah, I had heard he was running for prime minister. I was just looking for former players who I knew are now lawyers, in Dryden's case he's now a former lawyer. Grimson is still a lawyer though, and putting hockey minds in charge of ruling in the arbitration process would make more sense than just having a legal mind determine your team's future.
unklechucky
August 4th, 2006, 12:52:30 PM
Congrats to you Jshramek for starting a thread without a link!
The only thing I see helping the NHL in the near future would be a MUCH more lucrative TV contract. Unfortunately, the folks who enjoy watching poker on ESPN have single handedly ruined that chance. Play cards and watch professional sports on Sports programming specific channels.
This has to be the post of the year! Bravo!:n4clapping:
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.