TSN Insiders Jan. 31

[Birdman]

Total: $8.65 million

Not bad for a guy with a 172-193-48 career mark.

http://www.hockeyzoneplus.com/searc...ies-test.txt&key2=1497&action=searchdbdisplay

He played for the Kings forever and was horrible. He made Hrudey, the greatet fish out of water that ever played, look like a Hall of Famer.

And what do you know, he makes Hrudey look like a commentating God now too.

 

[rwilson99]

Burke really sounds optimistic, and even Healy seems to think that there are some creative options available. That's interesting to me that Healy seems to think that there are opportunities available-he's clearly talking to the NHLPA, and he's been roundly negative up to this point.

There's a rumor (you know where) that the presentation on "The Insider's" was set up by the league to pressure the NHLPA to put the proposal to a vote. You know who puts opening night on March 1st.

If this gentleman is wrong, we will all have better things to worry about. If he's right I think it's appropriate to have a note here marking the occassion. Let's hope.

 

[vanlady]

Holy conspiracy theory! What's next? Michael Lansburg gunned down Kennedy?

Actually TSN is owned by Bell Global Media, one of the owners of the Leafs

 

[Tom_Benjamin]

Wait a second. You are putting stock in what Pronger says. Pronger? Really? Pronger? And you are quoting him?

Yeah, I am. He's losing as much as anybody in this dispute and more than 98% of the players. A cap will hurt him a lot less than it will hurt players at the lower end. If Chris Pronger starts talking about a deal, then a deal might be in the works. If he rejects it out of hand, it is going to be rejected.

It already has been rejected.

Tom

 

[AdvDave]

Whoa, Tom.
Try once more, because the above made no sense whatsoever.

 

[vanlady]

Yeah, I am. He's losing as much as anybody in this dispute and more than 98% of the players. A cap will hurt him a lot less than it will hurt players at the lower end. If Chris Pronger starts talking about a deal, then a deal might be in the works. If he rejects it out of hand, it is going to be rejected.

It already has been rejected.

Tom

I agree with you and here is why.

Steve Brun of the Globe and Mail pointed out that all the numbers being thrown around about a 1.3 million average salary are bogus. After the MLB, NFL and NBA labor troubles, revenues dropped dramatically, it also took years to get that money back.

So based on the average drops and factoring in the NBC TV deal, the reality is the players are looking at a top of 21 million and a bottom of 11 million. After doing a little math here is a projection.

If 18 players on the Canucks are paid 500,000 that would leave 12 million to pay Cloutier, Morrison, Ohlund, Jovo, Naslund and Bertuzzi. If the 12 million is equally split that pays each of them 2 million. That is at least a 33% drop and in Todd Bertuzzis case it is more like 65%. So will Bertuzzi and Naslund stay without further dropping the lower level player salaries to the league minimum. Many of these players including the Sedins could make the same amount in europe. Will they stay?

 

[Tom_Benjamin]

Whoa, Tom.
Try once more, because the above made no sense whatsoever.

And I tried to keep it to one syllable words. It isn't that hard to figure:

1) Unlike the no names at the bottom of the NHL salary list, Pronger has already lost about $6 million to this dispute. No matter what system is eventually agreed to, Pronger walks away from this dispute a very big loser. The longer it goes on, the more he loses. He has a very powerful financial reason to be urging that players take a deal, any deal.

2) He is the captain of the Blues and their player representative. This means he is in the loop. What he - not Mike Commodore - says matters. Until the Chris Prongers of the league agree to a deal, there is no hockey.

3) If you are interested in guessing what is going to happen, listen to Chris Pronger. Do you really think the players on he executive committee or the player reps don't speak for the membership? That they will somehow get overthrown?

Give your head a shake.

Tom

 

[Ice Cream Man]

The hardest thing was having to listen to Healy glorify the Red Wings when they played the Flames in the playoffs last year, right from one CBC broadcast to the next. It was sick. Everything that came out of his mouth was pro-Red Wing, and this was on a Canadian broadcast that typically was made up of Canadian viewership. He didn't have a single good thing to say about the Flames.

He sure shut up when the Flames put the Wings away. Revenge was sweet.

 

[Cully9]

OK. If you believe it's a conspiracy theory, fine.

Now go ahead and present a logical argument why Glen Healy has a job at TSN.

How about this one: he already had commentating gigs on CBC and TSN last year - when games were being played - because he was a semi-coherent ex-player.

 

[YellHockey*]

Actually TSN is owned by Bell Global Media, one of the owners of the Leafs

And the NHL Network is a joint partnership of TSN, Insight Sports and the NHL. And Insight Sports is owned by a consorium that includes the Leafs controlling partner and IMG.

 

[Egil]

Tom, other than your concern over defining revenues and expenses (which I agree is a MAJOR point), why would the players reject, OUT OF HAND, this sort of proposal from the owners?

If the players association leadership is rejecting this out of hand, then yes, the NHL's next step is to make a formal proposal, have the NHLPA reject it, then either publicly demand a vote, or declare impasse. I don't think that is a smart move for the PA, as I truly believe that the ideas in this offer (and the profit sharing is, IMHO, the key) bridge the gap between the owners and the players positions.

 

[Cully9]

And I tried to keep it to one syllable words. It isn't that hard to figure:

1) Unlike the no names at the bottom of the NHL salary list, Pronger has already lost about $6 million to this dispute. No matter what system is eventually agreed to, Pronger walks away from this dispute a very big loser. The longer it goes on, the more he loses. He has a very powerful financial reason to be urging that players take a deal, any deal.

2) He is the captain of the Blues and their player representative. This means he is in the loop. What he - not Mike Commodore - says matters. Until the Chris Prongers of the league agree to a deal, there is no hockey.

3) If you are interested in guessing what is going to happen, listen to Chris Pronger. Do you really think the players on he executive committee or the player reps don't speak for the membership? That they will somehow get overthrown?

Give your head a shake.

Tom

Tom, this glosses over the fact that Chris Pronger's great-great-great grandchildren couldn't spend all the money he's made in the league. It's actually pretty easy to lose $6-million when you've already banked $50-million, wouldn't you say? To that end, Pronger will never be anxious to make a deal because he's reached the stage where money is virtually irrelevant. No mortgages to worry about (that happens when you pay cash for your houses) etc. However, for the lunch bucket guys in the league -- the ones who make under the league median -- there is much more urgency to get a deal done. At some point, it is conceivable that those guys (since they represent half of the league) might consider telling their union not to totally ignore their interests.

 

[AdvDave]

He's losing as much as anybody in this dispute and more than 98% of the players. A cap will hurt him a lot less than it will hurt players at the lower end. Tom

That is what doesn't make sense. He has lost a lot, it will hurt him less. Don't imply I am unintelligent.

 

[vanlady]

Tom, other than your concern over defining revenues and expenses (which I agree is a MAJOR point), why would the players reject, OUT OF HAND, this sort of proposal from the owners?

If the players association leadership is rejecting this out of hand, then yes, the NHL's next step is to make a formal proposal, have the NHLPA reject it, then either publicly demand a vote, or declare impasse. I don't think that is a smart move for the PA, as I truly believe that the ideas in this offer (and the profit sharing is, IMHO, the key) bridge the gap between the owners and the players positions.

Think about it, if the revenues drop the way they did in baseball and basketball, how would you like your paycheque to drop from 2-3 million to 250,000-500,000. Remember the revenue being tossed around were before the NBC deal kicked in. Add to that the drop in attendance, broadcast revenue, merchandising and corporate sponsorship and you could realistically see revenues cut in half, thus the cap is cut in half. If the cap is cut in half it is going to be the low end and middle of the road players that are going to be making league minimum or just above it.

Would you vote for that scenario?

 

[Cully9]

Think about it, if the revenues drop the way they did in baseball and basketball, how would you like your paycheque to drop from 2-3 million to 250,000-500,000. Remember the revenue being tossed around were before the NBC deal kicked in. Add to that the drop in attendance, broadcast revenue, merchandising and corporate sponsorship and you could realistically see revenues cut in half, thus the cap is cut in half. If the cap is cut in half it is going to be the low end and middle of the road players that are going to be making league minimum or just above it.

Would you vote for that scenario?

So the solution is to have the teams lose more money and keep guaranteeing the same contracts for players even if revenues go in half? If league revenues end up cut in half, it's not like the players deserve to earn the same salaries.

 

[vanlady]

So the solution is to have the teams lose more money and keep guaranteeing the same contracts for players even if revenues go in half? If league revenues end up cut in half, it's not like the players deserve to earn the same salaries.

Never said they should make the same money, however it sure blows holes in the idea that the little guys and the middle of the road players will vote for a cap. Let's face it, guys like the Sedin twins and Chubarov are making the same money in europe now, so why vote for a cap where they will have double the expences on the same money?

PS the owners should have thought about the drop in revenues before they locked out the players, sorry no sympathy for them.

 

[Cully9]

You don't think the owners anticipated the drop in revenues? Perhaps they thought the players might see that a drop in revenues would mean less money for them.

In any case, if Artem Chubarov can't be replaced, then surely this fight to keep the league afloat has been for naught.

The reason guys like the Sedins and Chubarov would come over here is that the high end of the NHL pay scale will still be much higher than it is in Europe, even with decreased revenues.

 

[vanlady]

You don't think the owners anticipated the drop in revenues? Perhaps they thought the players might see that a drop in revenues would mean less money for them.

In any case, if Artem Chubarov can't be replaced, then surely this fight to keep the league afloat has been for naught.

The reason guys like the Sedins and Chubarov would come over here is that the high end of the NHL pay scale will still be much higher than it is in Europe, even with decreased revenues.

Do the math, in order for the high end players to make there money, the Sedins and guys like Chubarov will be thrown under the bus by GM's to keep there stars. If these guys suddenly find themselves making the league minimum, they will make more in europe. So the question is why not stay our forever?

 

[Cully9]

Do the math, in order for the high end players to make there money, the Sedins and guys like Chubarov will be thrown under the bus by GM's to keep there stars. If these guys suddenly find themselves making the league minimum, they will make more in europe. So the question is why not stay our forever?

I'm doing the math and I think that if the Sedins aren't going to get more than the minimum, then they should stay in Sweden. However, if they are deemed to be top six forwards on their team, I don't see that meaning league minimum. And, even if in a catastrophic-case scenario they played for the league minimum, they'd still have the opportunity to build up service time in the NHL towards a bigger and better contract in the future. A contract that they wouldn't have a chance at in Europe.

 

[CarlRacki]

You don't think the owners anticipated the drop in revenues? Perhaps they thought the players might see that a drop in revenues would mean less money for them.

In any case, if Artem Chubarov can't be replaced, then surely this fight to keep the league afloat has been for naught.

The reason guys like the Sedins and Chubarov would come over here is that the high end of the NHL pay scale will still be much higher than it is in Europe, even with decreased revenues.

Correct.
The fact remains, and will continue to remain, that players will be able to make significantly more in the NHL than in Europe, cap or no cap. This European fantasy propogated by the pro-PA forces around here is just that - a fantasy.
The simple fact is there is not enough interest in hockey as a professional sport nor the market sizes in Europe to provide players with NHL-level salaries. Only three professional teams in all of Europe averaged more than 10,000 fans per game last year and those fans are paying significantly lower ticket prices than we do here. The top team in the RSL averaged 8,800. The next highest averaged 7,100. None of the others averaged better than 5,500. Does anyone in their right mind believe that will support $40 million payrolls?

 

[Luongownage]

I am honestly sick of Healy saying the same sort of bull crap every week when we hear that there may be negotiations, I honestly can't stand him. He has to be the most biased and ignorant idiot that TSN has ever hired. I am beginning to think that Bettman pulled a few strings and got him on there with the premise in mind that when this lockout rolled around, he would be such a bonehead that it would inspire sympathy and support for the owners. After listening to moderate and insightful commentary provided by Burke and MacKenzie, having to listen to Healy's PA propaganda just makes me hate this whole lockout even more. Trade Healy to Sportsnet for Kyprios (sp?), and we can have one station with good back and forth insight from both sides, and have Healy and Waters whine out rethoric until the 'net finaly realizes what idiots these guys are.

Anyways, just cancel the season already. These negotiations might have done something back in October, but the deadline has passed. No season of any kind in 04-05.

 

[vanlady]

I'm doing the math and I think that if the Sedins aren't going to get more than the minimum, then they should stay in Sweden. However, if they are deemed to be top six forwards on their team, I don't see that meaning league minimum. And, even if in a catastrophic-case scenario they played for the league minimum, they'd still have the opportunity to build up service time in the NHL towards a bigger and better contract in the future. A contract that they wouldn't have a chance at in Europe.

One footnote for you, it took MLB 10 years to recover from there lockout, so what you are saying is that the Sedins who are our second line should play in the NHL for 10 years to get the 1.3 million they are making today.

Remember that if the revenue are cut in half so is the cap. The cap is now 21 million. Take out Bertuzzi, Naslund, Morrison, Cloutier, Jovo and Ohlund's salaries and there isn't much left over. And that is even with Cloutier, Jovo, Ohlund and Morrison taking paycuts to 1 million and Naslund and Bertuzzi making a maximum of 4 million each including bonuses.

 

[Egil]

Think about it, if the revenues drop the way they did in baseball and basketball, how would you like your paycheque to drop from 2-3 million to 250,000-500,000. Remember the revenue being tossed around were before the NBC deal kicked in. Add to that the drop in attendance, broadcast revenue, merchandising and corporate sponsorship and you could realistically see revenues cut in half, thus the cap is cut in half. If the cap is cut in half it is going to be the low end and middle of the road players that are going to be making league minimum or just above it.

Would you vote for that scenario?

Revenues won't drop that drastically, if this season is saved. If it is cancelled, then yes, they will drop significantly. And this drop in revenues from a cancelled season is why the Union will accept what is on the table ATM, as the league isn't going to cave next year either, as salaries would need to be reduced even more than 24% to make things work.

 

[Cully9]

One footnote for you, it took MLB 10 years to recover from there lockout, so what you are saying is that the Sedins who are our second line should play in the NHL for 10 years to get the 1.3 million they are making today.

Remember that if the revenue are cut in half so is the cap. The cap is now 21 million. Take out Bertuzzi, Naslund, Morrison, Cloutier, Jovo and Ohlund's salaries and there isn't much left over. And that is even with Cloutier, Jovo, Ohlund and Morrison taking paycuts to 1 million and Naslund and Bertuzzi making a maximum of 4 million each including bonuses.

It took MLB 10 years to FULLY recover. They didn't spend nine years at their initial post-lockout level.

I'm not disputing that the revenue will go down, in the short term. In the long run, though, there is far more revenue available to players in the NHL than there is in Europe.

Hey, if anyone thinks they'll make more money in Europe, they can go ahead. I'll bet their agent advises against it, though.

 

[vanlady]

Revenues won't drop that drastically, if this season is saved. If it is cancelled, then yes, they will drop significantly. And this drop in revenues from a cancelled season is why the Union will accept what is on the table ATM, as the league isn't going to cave next year either, as salaries would need to be reduced even more than 24% to make things work.

They already have. NHL merchandise revenue has already dropped by 55%. They have already lost 100 million a year from ABC and ESPN. What happens with ticket revenue in the US, not to mention local broadcast rights with FOX taking on Arena Football and reducing NHL airtime in key markets. IMO the league has already lost about 500 million or more, and revenue is falling dramatically as we speak.