Lemieux: NHLers missed out on best deal

[arnie]

The mere concept of a "player-owner" is a travesty. If you're a referee and the player you are officiating has the power to fire you, what does that do to the credibility and integrity of the game itself?

Plus, Mario's outrageous salary demands helped bankrupt his team to the point where they simply had to hand over the keys to him. By himself ML is simply one of the worst things that has happened to hockey in the last decade and a big symptom of what is wrong with the game from the top down.
-HckyFght

You are partly right and party wrong. You are right that Lemieux's salary was one of the main reasons that the Pens went bankrupt. But is a bit more complicated. Baldwin signed Lemieux to a contract that paid him about $45 million - not get this - whether he played or not. Lemieux played 2 seasons and promply retired. The team owed him $30 million for hovkey that he never played. That was the real problem. It was Baldwin who signed the ridiculous deal, and a string of other deferred money deal, and Baldwin who is responsible for the mess. He was jock sniffer who just couldn't say no to players.

More recently, however, the Pens problems are due to Lemieux. Look at the history.

1. Mario comes back at a salary of 1.2 million.

2. In the off season they trade Jagr, so they say, they can sign free agents like Lang and Straka.

3. Mario's salary goes to $5 million.

4. The Pens then trade Kovalev, saying that were broke

5. They then try to up Mario's salary to $10 million, until the story became public and fans became infuriated.

Does anybody really believe that these events are unconnected?


So, yes, Mario is at the heart of the Pens financial problems. But he had a lot of help from Baldwin.

 

[bcrt2000]

if it wasn't for mario, they would have become the Portland Penguins 5 years ago.

 

[kdb209]

You are partly right and party wrong. You are right that Lemieux's salary was one of the main reasons that the Pens went bankrupt. But is a bit more complicated. Baldwin signed Lemieux to a contract that paid him about $45 million - not get this - whether he played or not. Lemieux played 2 seasons and promply retired. The team owed him $30 million for hovkey that he never played. That was the real problem. It was Baldwin who signed the ridiculous deal, and a string of other deferred money deal, and Baldwin who is responsible for the mess. He was jock sniffer who just couldn't say no to players.

More recently, however, the Pens problems are due to Lemieux. Look at the history.

1. Mario comes back at a salary of 1.2 million.

2. In the off season they trade Jagr, so they say, they can sign free agents like Lang and Straka.

3. Mario's salary goes to $5 million.

4. The Pens then trade Kovalev, saying that were broke

5. They then try to up Mario's salary to $10 million, until the story became public and fans became infuriated.

Does anybody really believe that these events are unconnected?


So, yes, Mario is at the heart of the Pens financial problems. But he had a lot of help from Baldwin.

You can't blame all of Mario's salary on Mario. He came back at the league avg salary - $1.4M. The PA *****ed and moaned about Mario underpaying himself. They had a point - his below market salary artificially reduced league avg salary which effects things like Group V FA, etc. After negotiations with the PA, his salary was set at $5.25M where it stayed for 3 yrs.

His raise to $10M wasn't an increase in his player salary, but was an increase in his pay package as CEO, and was decided by the rest of the ownership group.

http://post-gazette.com/penguins/20031002penguins1002p1.asp

Lemieux, 37, made $5.25 million as a player in the 2002-03 season and roughly $200,000 for his duties as chairman and chief executive officer of the Penguins.

His deal for the coming season, which begins Oct. 10 for the Penguins, still calls for a salary of $5.25 million as a player, according to the contract filed with the NHL Players Association. But the Penguins' ownership committee decided this summer to boost his pay for off-ice duties to $2.25 million and add $2.5 million in deferred compensation. Lemieux, who is the controlling partner but does not own a majority of the company, does not participate in votes on his pay.

 

[Mess]

Lemieux, 37, made $5.25 million as a player in the 2002-03 season and roughly $200,000 for his duties as chairman and chief executive officer of the Penguins.

His deal for the coming season, which begins Oct. 10 for the Penguins, still calls for a salary of $5.25 million as a player, according to the contract filed with the NHL Players Association. But the Penguins' ownership committee decided this summer to boost his pay for off-ice duties to $2.25 million and add $2.5 million in deferred compensation. Lemieux, who is the controlling partner but does not own a majority of the company, does not participate in votes on his pay.

To Follow suit

But the Wings ownership committee decided this summer to boost Yzerman's pay for off-ice duties to $2.25 million and add $2.5 million in deferred compensation...

But the Avelanche ownership committee decided this summer to boost Forsberg's pay for off-ice duties to $2.25 millionand add $2.5 million in deferred compensation.

But the Leafs ownership committee decided this summer to boost Sundin's pay for off-ice duties to $2.25 million and add $2.5 million in deferred compensation...

But the Flyers ownership committee decided this summer to boost Pronger's pay for off-ice duties to $2.25 million and add $2.5 million in deferred compensation..
Oops !! That may be giving too much away .. This will be announced after July 1st ..

etc ..

 

[SuperUnknown]

To Follow suit

But the Wings ownership committee decided this summer to boost Yzerman's pay for off-ice duties to $2.25 million and add $2.5 million in deferred compensation...

But the Avelanche ownership committee decided this summer to boost Forsberg's pay for off-ice duties to $2.25 millionand add $2.5 million in deferred compensation.

But the Leafs ownership committee decided this summer to boost Sundin's pay for off-ice duties to $2.25 million and add $2.5 million in deferred compensation...

But the Flyers ownership committee decided this summer to boost Pronger's pay for off-ice duties to $2.25 million and add $2.5 million in deferred compensation..
Oops !! That may be giving too much away .. This will be announced after July 1st ..

etc ..

Shouldn't you be happy about all those "loopholes" ( ) you find in advance to the CBA and keep quiet about them so your beloved players can cash in and get more than the cap?

But about your new brilliant idea, how about none of these players own any ownership and that they don't do any office work either (while Lemieux does) or public representation?

 

[Mess]

Shouldn't you be happy about all those "loopholes" you find in advance to the CBA and keep quiet about them so your beloved players can cash in and get more than the cap?

I was kidding ..

However we need these loopholes closed so better post them now so that they can be covered off properly ..

But about your new brilliant idea, how about none of these players own any ownership and that they don't do any office work either (while Lemieux does) or public representation?

PS .. Lemieux will have lots of company in the ownership department once the ink is dry on the new CBA ..

 

[SuperUnknown]

I was kidding ..

However we need these loopholes closed so better post them now so that they can be covered off properly ..

PS .. Lemieux will have lots of company in the ownership department once the ink is dry on the new CBA ..

Then I think we should wait for the final text before shooting right and left.

As long as there is strong enough punishment for going around the salary cap, I don't think anyone will even try to go around it.

 

[MontrealCruiser_83*]

Kovalev's been a 40 goal scorer in Pgh and 20 goal scorer every place else. And you think that he wouldn't go back to the Pens in a heartbeat? Hah.

40 goal scorer with the Pens... sure... but that was before they became a glorified AHL squad.

 

[clefty]

40 goal scorer with the Pens... sure... but that was before they became a glorified AHL squad.

Its not 2003 anymore.

The Penguins are in position to spend money, to attract talent and sign Alexei Kovalev whether you like or not.

But I'm not going to pretend like I know what Kovalev wants to do.

 

[Mess]

Then I think we should wait for the final text before shooting right and left.

As long as there is strong enough punishment for going around the salary cap, I don't think anyone will even try to go around it.

The lure of the Stanley Cup and a Bank account overflowing with $$$ and a restrictive hard cap can make you do desperate things ..

Even if teams get fined .So what

That still will not stop things.IMO.

We will see but my predictions is the the owners turn against Bettman's CBA and try to get a competitive advantage that is why all this legal mumble jumble is taking so long ..

 

[SuperUnknown]

The lure of the Stanley Cup and a Bank account overflowing with $$$ and a restrictive hard cap can make you do desperate things ..

Even if teams get fined .So what

That still will not stop things.IMO.

We will see but my predictions is the the owners turn against Bettman's CBA and try to get a competitive advantage that is why all this legal mumble jumble is taking so long ..

If the penalty is something like five 1st round picks, I doubt anyone will risk it...

Edit: Besides, isn't playoff money going to be shared? That would mean only prestige for winning a cup, not more money.

 

[clefty]

The lure of the Stanley Cup and a Bank account overflowing with $$$ and a restrictive hard cap can make you do desperate things ..

Even if teams get fined .So what

That still will not stop things.IMO.

Teams that exceed a hard salary cap will be more than just fined. I'm talking loss of draft picks and/or points.

 

[MontrealCruiser_83*]

Its not 2003 anymore.

The Penguins are in position to spend money, to attract talent and sign Alexei Kovalev whether you like or not.

But I'm not going to pretend like I know what Kovalev wants to do.

The Pens are still a bottom 5 team whether you like it or not. It's not 2003 but not a whole lot has changed. And as for spending money, I think a bigger priority should be to try and keep the team in Pittsburgh. I don't think you'd care about the talent they attract if they move to Las Vegas six months later.

 

[SuperUnknown]

The Pens are still a bottom 5 team whether you like it or not. It's not 2003 but not a whole lot has changed. And as for spending money, I think a bigger priority should be to try and keep the team in Pittsburgh. I don't think you'd care about the talent they attract if they move to Las Vegas six months later.

I'm from Montreal and I doubt that Kovalev will sign with the Habs. Imo, he will sign with Pittsburgh. Don't worry though, there will be plenty of other players Montreal could be shooting for.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

Yeah but... part of getting support for a new building is putting a competitive, entertaining product on the ice to get the fans back on board. Especially after a ruinous lockout. Which will mean aquiring a few good free agents, among other things.

Do you really thing the Penguins are going to be a bottom five team again? I suppose it's possible... but it makes more sense to spend some money and show the fans in Pittsburgh that they are committed to winning. They are in a good position to do this, and I don't see why they at least won't try.

 

[Jacob]

The mere concept of a "player-owner" is a travesty. If you're a referee and the player you are officiating has the power to fire you, what does that do to the credibility and integrity of the game itself?

Plus, Mario's outrageous salary demands helped bankrupt his team to the point where they simply had to hand over the keys to him. By himself ML is simply one of the worst things that has happened to hockey in the last decade and a big symptom of what is wrong with the game from the top down.
-HckyFght

"Whoa." - Joey Lawrence

 

[MontrealCruiser_83*]

Yeah but... part of getting support for a new building is putting a competitive, entertaining product on the ice to get the fans back on board. Especially after a ruinous lockout. Which will mean aquiring a few good free agents, among other things.

Do you really thing the Penguins are going to be a bottom five team again? I suppose it's possible... but it makes more sense to spend some money and show the fans in Pittsburgh that they are committed to winning. They are in a good position to do this, and I don't see why they at least won't try.

I agree, but with spending money between teams about to become much more "equal", per say, players will base their decision more on the quality of the team rather than the financial aspect. Personally, I don't see guys like Kovalev sitting there and wondering whether or not the year and a half off changed the Pens from rotten to decent. They'll go with what's known, especially since most of these FA's are in their 30's.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

It's an oft-used argument. And I don't entirely disagree with it. But you have to figure, in the end, money will play a big factor on deciding what team to choose. And Pittsburgh will have a decent amount of money to spend. Nothing extravagant, mind you. But enough to snag at least one top-level FA and several other good quality guys, I think.

In any case, money aside, the market for good talent should be sizable. So, if we are unable to aquire one guy we might be looking at, there's always a relatively comparable option B and C to consider. I guess we'll just have to sit back and wait, it should be the craziest off-season in memory. Or at least my memory.

 

[Mess]

If the penalty is something like five 1st round picks, I doubt anyone will risk it...

Edit: Besides, isn't playoff money going to be shared? That would mean only prestige for winning a cup, not more money.

5 first round draft picks for a perfectly legal endorsement deal for a player seen steep ..

You have a link to that or are you making things up ?

 

[Jaded-Fan]

5 first round draft picks for a perfectly legal endorsement deal for a player seen steep ..

You have a link to that or are you making things up ?

Far be it for me to speak for him. But five first round picks was the penalty in that basketball case . . . was it Minnesota with Joe someboady or other. He may have been referring to that.

 

[Bill McNeal]

Far be it for me to speak for him. But five first round picks was the penalty in that basketball case . . . was it Minnesota with Joe someboady or other. He may have been referring to that.

http://www.sportslawnews.com/archive/Articles 2000/TimberwolvesSanction.htm

New York, October 25, 2000 - NBA commissioner David Stern handed down one of the most severe penalties in league history today against the Minnesota Timberwolves. He not only voided Smith's current contract, making him a free agent, but he also voided Smith's last two contracts, thereby stripping him of his "Bird Rights." Stern was not done there! He also fined the team $3.5 million and took away their next five first-round draft picks. Even further, Stern could still suspend owner Glen Taylor and/or vice president of basketball operations Kevin McHale.

Steep.

 

[Crazy_Ike]

Five first round picks and similar punishments is just a "first offense" sort of penalty.

After that you could start seeing games forfeited.

Hard caps aren't things to treat lightly, as much as Messenger wants people to think they can.

 

[PecaFan]

http://www.sportslawnews.com/archive/Articles 2000/TimberwolvesSanction.htm
Steep.

Beyond steep. Totally unfair, actually. I point out again, Minnesota never went over the cap in this case. They never paid out any extra cash on the side to Smith, etc. All they did was come to an agreement, both club and player, that the player would take less money in the first couple of years, in exchange for more at the end of the deal.

Happens *all the time* in sports.

But because of the NBA's wacky rules, they deem that you can't decide up front to take a low contract for three years then get the big money after, no, you have to be a mindless drone, and sign a low contract three consecutive times, then suddenly wake up and realise "HEY! I can now sign a big contract! Wow, isn't that lucky that I decided to take a low contract all those years?"

 

[Mess]

Far be it for me to speak for him. But five first round picks was the penalty in that basketball case . . . was it Minnesota with Joe someboady or other. He may have been referring to that.

Just tossing things out .. I am not a GM attempting them ..

These are the kinds of discussions that I bet the NHL and the lawyers are sitting down and discussing to try to close off all loopholes in the CBA .. I bet the NHL has hired professionals to view the CBA as it is being created to attempt to punch holes into it .. What they find or discover will be closed off then .. That is how these things work .. Bill Gates of Microsoft employs many people whose job it is to try to make software fail to flush out all the bugs in it .. This follows that same thought process with the NHL CBA via loopholes or end-arounds.

That is why it is taking so long. The very wording of a particular item that leads to interpretation could be a problem.

You can only fine a NHL Owner if he has violated a clause in the CBA .. If what he has found in the form of a loophole is not covered then its not punishable by the league ..

It was none other then MR. Hardliner himself Jeremy Jacobs that gave Thornton the bonus clauses in his entry level contract to contributed to today's mess ..

 

[thedjpd]

That means they lost the fight. Doesn't necesarily mean that the deal got a lot worse since February

Ah, but this indicates a change in stance, now doesn't it?

How we callously forget - the reason the $42.5 million cap was offered was because the players did NOT want linkage. At that time, linkage was the devil and this offer was fair.

Now, since a change in position indicates that as revenues go up, so do the player's salaries, they view linkage as a GOOD thing.

If you apply the players' stance on the February deal to this currently, then yes - it got a helluva lot worse.

But now linkage to them is a good thing, so it looks better because it's something they want too.

A change in opinion sure changes perspective, doesn't it?