arbitration thought

Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by Brent Burns Beard, Dec 9, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Brent Burns Beard

    Brent Burns Beard DontTouchMyDonskoi!

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    5,137
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    146
    how about changing the rule so that the only comparables a player can use is from his own team. this means small revenue teams will be able to insulate themselves better from payroll choices of the larger revenue teams.

    dr
     
  2. Dave is a killer

    Dave is a killer Dave's a Mess

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2002
    Messages:
    26,469
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    171
    Location:
    Mount Juliet
    Home Page:
    yes; a) I like your idea and b) it still has to be the MLB way of doing it - 2-way arbitration and a limit of 1 or 2 times before said player reaches UFA
     
  3. John Flyers Fan

    John Flyers Fan Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    22,416
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    Not a bad thought but it wouldn't work.

    Jarome Iginla has no "comparables" on the Flames etc. etc.
     
  4. Brent Burns Beard

    Brent Burns Beard DontTouchMyDonskoi!

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    5,137
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    146
    true, but Iginla has never used arbitration either.

    dr
     
  5. John Flyers Fan

    John Flyers Fan Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    22,416
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    Not just players like Iginla have no "comparables".

    Players get compared to others across the league.

    #1 goalies to #1 goalies

    3rd line centers to 3rd line centers

    #1 defenseman to #1 defenseman.

    Teams rarely have more than one of a certain thing.
     
  6. garry1221

    garry1221 Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    2,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Walled Lake, Mi
    Home Page:
    i like DR's idea, but as you say, some teams don't have any comparables, my only suggestion would be that the arbitrator, NOT the player, picks a team w/ a similar payroll and the comparison could be done.... maybe have a 3 mil margin each way as far as team payrolls are concerned, this would possibly give the arbitrator 2 or 3 teams to pick a comparable from
     
  7. me2

    me2 Calling out the crap

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    Messages:
    33,088
    Likes Received:
    1,146
    Trophy Points:
    214
    Location:
    Blasting the bull***

    0% chance it happens. The players wouldn't agree to it. Teams wouldn't care that much. Tampa could have an all star lineup for $15m if they are stingy enough.

    a) Teams would trade impending RFAs to Team Cheapo who then use their low salary to screw the player in arbitration. Team Cheapo then trades that player at screwed over salary.

    b) it creates holdouts and salary wars, .

    c) draft day madness and players tank to not get picked by the penguins (or whoever is cheap and has the #1 pick).

    d) its just gets worse


    The players would be better putting 50% of their wages into a revenue sharing scheme to help pick up the wages of playes on financially weak teams. The players on poor teams would be much happier with that.
     
  8. Tom_Benjamin

    Tom_Benjamin Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    There aren't enough players. It won't work. The player proposal illustrates how their arbitration proposal would work using three examples from last year. It is interesting to look at the comparables used in those three arbitrations.

    Biron's agent submitted Aebischer, Cloutier, Lalime and Dunham as comparables. The team countered with the same four players, plus Tomas Vokoun.

    Ruslan Fedotenko named six players as being comparables. The team named five of the six (Bulis, Halpern, Stefan, LeClerc and Calder) missing only Afinogenov.

    Ruslan Salei threw out seven names while his team countered with four (Gill, McKee Rathje and Warrener) that matched players on Salei's list. (Salei also thought Norstrom, McLaren and Carney should count.)

    That's 18 comparables introduced in all with 14 in common which leads to the first point about arbitration. It is very easy to find the comparables. There is hardly any disagreement.

    The second point is about how big spending teams supposedly drive up salaries in arbitration. Only two of the 18 players (Aebischer and Dunham) came from teams that could be described as big spending teams. Otherwise the comparable salaries were were set by Vancouver, Ottawa, Nashville, Montreal, Washington, Atlanta, Anaheim, Chicago, San Jose, Boston and Buffalo.

    Until a player becomes a free agent his salary is largely determined by teams with smaller payrolls! The reason for this is obvious when you think about it. The big payroll teams have former UFAs in key positions drawing very big salaries. They don't have very many arbitration eligible players and so they don't have very many comparables for arbitration eligible players either.

    Tom
     
  9. speeds

    speeds Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    6,823
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    St.Albert
    Home Page:
    That wouldn't be fair to the players.

    A large portion of the reasoning behind arbitration is that it's not fair to a player for him to be obligated by the CBA to play in a certain city, AND he should be expected to earn less simply because that team isn't willing to pay as much for it's players as another team.

    Arbitration protects players from that by allowing league wide comparables. If there were no arbitration there would be nothing stopping (as an example) MIN from simply saying "we won't pay player A any more than X dollars, and if he doesn't like it, he can sit until age 31." While a lesser player might end up being paid more than that in a different city, say TOR for example.

    That is not a fair set-up for the players if they have no choice (because of the draft or because their RFA rights are owned by some specific team) about where they can play.

    *edit* I still agree with all that I said, but I'm just giving a potential reason why the NHLPA wouldn't negotiate such a system. As far as I know, if such a system were negotiated as part of a CBA (or arbitration dropped completely in a new CBA) it would definitely be allowed to happen. I just don't think the NHLPA would ever let it.
     
  10. Benji Frank

    Benji Frank Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    1,805
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    141
    Home Page:
    Right now, to an extent they're doing simular to that in that player agents generally choose the obsene contracts while owners go with the "smaller market" contracts. I think if they do implement the either/or type system being tossed around (I don't follow anything but CFL & NHL but apparently baseball uses it??) I think you'll see agents more often then not throw out the high contracts and go in using the somewhat realistic contracts ... ie -. if the Flames go in offering Iggy Joe Thornton type money, Iginla's camp might be more inclined to chase somewhere between Bertuzzi/Sundin/Roenick type money instead of aiming for Tkachuk/Guerin/Holik type dollars knowing the arbitrators going to choose one or the other and not somewhere in between.......
     
  11. no13matssundin

    no13matssundin Registered User

    Joined:
    May 16, 2004
    Messages:
    2,870
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    totally off topic, but the CFL rocks!
     
  12. kerrly

    kerrly Registered User

    Joined:
    May 16, 2004
    Messages:
    809
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    64
    Location:
    Regina
    How about fix the system and institute a level playing field, and then arbitration will no longer be as unfair because players will actually be getting paid according to their value and not what rich teams feel like throwing at them. Of course it has to allow the owners to take the players to arbitration without too many stipulations.
     
  13. YellHockey*

    YellHockey* Guest

    You need to learn about the real world.

    In the real world, market value is determined by the rich, not the poor.

    If the owners want a level playing field they can divide all revenues evenly after accepting the players proposal.
     
  14. kerrly

    kerrly Registered User

    Joined:
    May 16, 2004
    Messages:
    809
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    64
    Location:
    Regina
    But in sports market value being determined by the rich sums up every single problem with the system we have in place.

    If anyone needs to learn about the real world its you, and the NHLPA.
     
  15. BLONG7

    BLONG7 Registered User

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2002
    Messages:
    20,241
    Likes Received:
    2,022
    Trophy Points:
    231
    Location:
    Nova Scotia
    Home Page:
    So in the new CBA proposal, can the owners take a guy like Jagr to arbitration because he is not performing up to the level of his ludicrous 11M salary??? Will they then use a comparable down, and say you only got 68 pts Jammy, and so did Mike Ryder and he only made 650K... so...........I can't see the players ever going for something like this, they only use the comparable when it jacks their salary up, not down. :dunno: :dunno:
     

  16. Too limiting. May not be enough comparable players on that team.

    How about this: Comparable players playing on teams that have violated the luxury tax threshold will not be used for arbitration purposes?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"