Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by Dave is a killer, Dec 19, 2004.
So the players will have absoltely no leverage until they're 30 years of age .... arbitration needs to be modified, but tossing it out is just going to lead to alot more holdouts.
I'm for raising the UFA to 35.
Poile might make a good commish!
God knows he can't be any worse than he's been a GM.
as a fan, it was always good when your player filed for arbitration. it meant he would be in the lineup, not sitting out negotiating a deal.
i think maybe every player should goto arbitration would be even better than no arbitration.
turning dunham into Murray, Kloucek and Zidlicky?
Getting Timonen for "Future Considerations?"
Getting a THIRD ROUND PICK for Andy Delmore?
I mean, he didn't acquire any Sean Burkes or Jeff Hacketts..and he didn't toss away a top defensive prospect for a month or two of Mike Comrie...but I agree with most that Poile is one of the more underrated GMs in the league.
You seem to have forgotten that he was a GM before Nashville even existed. Had a bunch of nice teams in Washington, but never did anything that could get them over the hump.
... he also gave up a 3rd round pick to aquire Andy Delmore ...
Andy Delmore that was utilized in a situation which scored him 16 goals and 18 goals, two straight years. That seems worth a third to me. When the league had keyed in on how weak defensively he was and how to stop his ape-with-a-hard-shot MO, he flipped him for what we paid. Poile can hardly be blamed for Washington's woes, if you can call them that. He turned a perennial cellar-dweller into a team that made the playoffs every year. when you look at the record of guys he drafted..everyone from Scott Stevens to Peter Bondra, it looks that much better. Poile does a lot with what he's given to work with.
Bottom line is that he's been a GM for over 20 years and has reached the 3rd round just twice.
Regardins Stevens, he was also the GM that decided ti let Stevens walk and accept the compensation.
And Gonchar and Witt came from the compensatory picks. You can't blame Poile for losing Stevens, either. When a player wants a payday...it's up to the owner to OK it, and the Stevens situation was out of Poile's hands.
Did the owner say he wouldn't match the money, or was it Poile's decsion to decide on the five #1's or Stevens ???
None of his individual moves are of my concern. It comes down to results, and IMO Poile hasn't gotten the job done. He builds nice teams that get bounced early in the playoffs.
Record as the higher seed in playoff series
Record as a lower seed in playoff series
My mistake. Make that one time, and never to the Finals. I forgot he was booted before the Caps made their one Finals run.
Regardless...I don't think you can put a team with so many high-caliber players, a team that..regardless of their lack of a cup...ALWAYS made the playoffs..and be a "bad" GM. His tenure proves it. Bad GMs don't last 15 years, and aren't snatched up immediately for a brand new franchise.
It's not just lack of Cup. He's never even been to a Finals, and just once got his team to a conference finals. His teams had planety of good regular seasons and quite often lost to "lesser" teams come playoff time. At some point the GM is responsible for getting his team over the hump.
If he gets his salary cap, what does he care about arbitration.
Seriously. If the owners get their cap, they may as well drop every other complaint they have.
And it only be fair that you have to sell your hot dogs for a buck until you are 35, then you can do what you want, for who you want.
Honestly, arbitration is just another fault of the owners. The arbitrator gives out his award based on other current NHL contracts that have been handed out to the owners.. If the owners could control themselves it, arbitration would work wonders.
Abolitioning it completely wouldn't work. The players would have ZERO leverage and thats not totally fair when you are dealing with a guy like Brian Burke or someone like him. Its his way or you sit out.
Of course they have leverage. Withholding their services, until they get a deal that's satisfactory to both sides. You know, that "free market" thing, which players say they want.
Arbitration is essentially a third party making one of the sides agree to a deal he didn't really want to.
Arbitration should only come into effect when *both* sides agree to it, when they obviously can't come to an agreement, but both want it solved.
The players will have plenty of leverage. They can look for a job in any other hockey league in the world if the NHL will not pay what they want, just like you and I can look for a different job if our employers will not pay what we want.
#1. In a "free market" a player would be able to offer he services to another team.
#2. Arbitration needs to be changed, but under the NHLPA's proposal that also allows the owners to take a player to arbitration it becomes very fair. I would bump that number up to twice. The change where the arbiter has to pick one of the two figures, and can't name his own price is asl a welcome change.
"Did the owner say he wouldn't match the money, or was it Poile's decsion to decide on the five #1's or Stevens ???"
It was the owner, Abe Pollin.
Bottom line is that the two sports that do not have arbitration allow players to become UFA's very quickly.
NFL - 5 years of service
NBA - 3 or 4 seasons depending upon a few factors
IMO it has to be one or the other. I much prefer arbitration and a high UFA age, than no arbitration and a low UFA age,
High roster turnover is something I believe would be very detrimental to the sport.
This is exactly right.....and his drafting was usually pretty poor. In DC he usually seemed to draft for current needs.....and more often than not it didnt work out....
He did make some good trades (and bad ones)....but in his defense he was often handcuffed by Polin in terms of $$
I think he can build a pretty good team......but not sure if he can do whats needed to push team over the top.......