WHA - Bid for Crosby

Status
Not open for further replies.

gb701

Registered User
Feb 21, 2003
490
0
Visit site
stockwizard said:
Past results are never indicative of future gain. It would be a risk.

Hockey is ALL about risk - everytime you lace them up. Crosby has been beating odds all his life - that is one of the great things about him. Why not take a shot at getting the gold ring a bit earlier?

Risk management, on the other hand, is why he has an agent - who undoubtedly knows a hell of a lot more about the WHA and what it can offer (and secure) than anyone on this board.
 

gb701

Registered User
Feb 21, 2003
490
0
Visit site
RE-HABS said:
How about playing for the "Love of the Game"? Its not all about money, plus he will make tonnes in endorsements. He will make his money, don't worry.

Hate to break this to you, but have you seen ANYTHING to suggest that there is any young star at Crosby's level stupid enough to give it away for "the love of the game"? :shakehead

You can love the game and make money - and in his case, make a lot of it a lot sooner than others, apparently. If his agent can secure this effectively, I would not be the least bit surprised to see him go for it.
 

Crosbyfan

Registered User
Nov 27, 2003
12,633
2,442
Epsilon said:
By the way, anyone who is saying he doesn't need the money because in a few years he will be making "millions and millions" needs to pay some attention to the CBA negociations. It's clear that the NHLPA is going to sell out the young guys as much as possible (which I am totally in agreement with) and no rookies are going to be making more than a million a year including bonuses (the rumoured offer had a number of 800 000). And there's not going to be a Sidney Crosby exception in the CBA either.

Let's say there's a rookie cap of $800,000. Not exactly peanuts but nothing compared to what Sid could draw in extra revenue. If Sid took the NHL AND the NHLPA to court for restraint of trade would he have a case?
 

stockwizard*

Guest
Crosbyfan said:
Let's say there's a rookie cap of $800,000. Not exactly peanuts but nothing compared to what Sid could draw in extra revenue. If Sid took the NHL AND the NHLPA to court for restraint of trade would he have a case?
I don't know if he would have a case, but I really think Sid just wants to concentrate on playing hockey and not think about lawsuits or worrying about suing anyone.
 

AJ1982

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
1,812
1
New York
Visit site
So to those already bad mouthing the WHA as a joke, what exactly about this WHA is different than the first one that makes it a joke? The old WHA was an upstart league as well yet it managed to make a dent in the history of hockey in North America.
 

degroat*

Guest
Here are Crosby's options:

1. Sign with whoever drafts him in the WHA and risk being injured in the WHA while making $5M. At any point after he is drafted in the NHL next June he'll be able to leave the WHA to play in the NHL and make millions there.

2. Keep playing in the Q making very little and risk being injured in the Q. At any point after he is drafted in the NHL next June he'll be able to leave the WHA to play in the NHL and make millions there.

The point of this?

He risks injury in both scenarios. If he stays in the Q and breaks his neck. He gets nothing except for whatever insurance policy he has on his ability to play hockey. If he plays in the WHA he has a guaranteed $5M on top of that insurance policy.

So, to say that he's not worried about the monetary stuff is complete BS.

If he doesn't go to the WHA it will be for one reason and one reason only... because he wants to win a Memorial Cup.
 

Tuggy

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Nov 26, 2003
48,636
14,893
Saint John
If I WAS Crosby at 17 and I had a choice between ....a) playing juniors, making no money, extremely grueling travel schedule.... or b) playing in the WHA ,making 5 Million dollars, flying to games/staying in nice hotels....

HMMMM it seems pretty easy to me and I don't think this is as crazy as people think. Crosby in Halifax, you never know.....
 

Lard_Lad

Registered User
May 12, 2003
6,678
0
Kelowna
Visit site
AJ1982 said:
So to those already bad mouthing the WHA as a joke, what exactly about this WHA is different than the first one that makes it a joke? The old WHA was an upstart league as well yet it managed to make a dent in the history of hockey in North America.

Let's see...

-the NHL was half the size then that it is now.
-the original WHA was able to tap into the untouched European pool of players.
-the original WHA had a dozen franchises, all of which were announced by November of the year prior to their first season, the new one has 6, announced in June.
-by June of 1972, the original WHA had players and coaches signed, we still haven't seen a single one from the new league.
-the original WHA had knowledgeable hockey people like Bill Hunter involved, while nobody with significant pro hockey management experience is involved with the new one (no, Bobby Hull doesn't count.)
-NHL and minor league salaries at the time were very low, so it wasn't that difficult to compete for good players, while the new league is talking about having several under-20 guys per team and will be paying its lower-end players salaries that are just barely competitive with what European teams can offer.

Other than that stuff, no differences at all. ;)
 

stockwizard*

Guest
Lard_Lad said:
Let's see...

-the NHL was half the size then that it is now.
-the original WHA was able to tap into the untouched European pool of players.
-the original WHA had a dozen franchises, all of which were announced by November of the year prior to their first season, the new one has 6, announced in June.
-by June of 1972, the original WHA had players and coaches signed, we still haven't seen a single one from the new league.
-the original WHA had knowledgeable hockey people like Bill Hunter involved, while nobody with significant pro hockey management experience is involved with the new one (no, Bobby Hull doesn't count.)
-NHL and minor league salaries at the time were very low, so it wasn't that difficult to compete for good players, while the new league is talking about having several under-20 guys per team and will be paying its lower-end players salaries that are just barely competitive with what European teams can offer.

Other than that stuff, no differences at all. ;)
Good Analysis. ;)
The WHA is a dumb idea. Almost as bad as setting up a rival league to compete with the NFL.
No way I can see this happening in time.
 

degroat*

Guest
The WHA's likelihood of failure has very little to do with whether or not a 17 year old would accept a $5M per year salary.
 

LaLaLaprise

lalalaprise -twitter
Feb 28, 2002
8,716
1
Halifax, Nova Scotia
If Sid was to come to Halifax that is 1 less franchise Bobby Hull has to worry about.

Halifax as of now is destined for Failure in my opinion. If they bring Crosby here i can actually see this team selling out most games.
 

Blackshad

Registered User
Oct 12, 2002
2,333
0
jwr38 said:
I think SC would be a fool to join the WHA. He needs time to develop into a top flight player with people his own size. He could easily get hurt in the WHA because there would be too many older players with less skill just going out to head hunt.
*cough* Gretzky *cough*
 

Epsilon

#basta
Oct 26, 2002
48,464
369
South Cackalacky
Crosbyfan said:
Let's say there's a rookie cap of $800,000. Not exactly peanuts but nothing compared to what Sid could draw in extra revenue. If Sid took the NHL AND the NHLPA to court for restraint of trade would he have a case?

Almost certainly not, as the Maurice Clarett case just demonstrated.
 

Crosbyfan

Registered User
Nov 27, 2003
12,633
2,442
Epsilon said:
Almost certainly not, as the Maurice Clarett case just demonstrated.

My post could have been clearer. I meant the rookie part not the age part, so I didn't mean until 2005-2006. Taken to extreme, could the NHLPA and NHL agree that noone gets more than minimum wage the first 3 years? I think they would have a class action suit on their hands. A minority of the players would obviously be being taken advantage of. The rookie cap is the same thing. Only the numbers change.

Looked at another way IF the WHA could pay him 5 million a tear it would cost him 4.9+ million to play in the Q next year and 4.2 million to play in the NHL the year after.

Expensive "registration fees" for a 17/18 year old to play hockey!
 

LaLaLaprise

lalalaprise -twitter
Feb 28, 2002
8,716
1
Halifax, Nova Scotia
Crosbyfan said:
My post could have been clearer. I meant the rookie part not the age part, so I didn't mean until 2005-2006. Taken to extreme, could the NHLPA and NHL agree that noone gets more than minimum wage the first 3 years? I think they would have a class action suit on their hands. A minority of the players would obviously be being taken advantage of. The rookie cap is the same thing. Only the numbers change.

Looked at another way IF the WHA could pay him 5 million a tear it would cost him 4.9+ million to play in the Q next year and 4.2 million to play in the NHL the year after.

Expensive "registration fees" for a 17/18 year old to play hockey!

Do you see people suing their Goverments because the minimum wage to pump gas is too low???
 

Crosbyfan

Registered User
Nov 27, 2003
12,633
2,442
La-La-Laprise said:
Do you see people suing their Goverments because the minimum wage to pump gas is too low???

No, but if they made the "maximum allowable wage" for anyone working in the fuel industry $X dollars/hr, a class action suit would blow them out of the water.
 

AJ1982

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
1,812
1
New York
Visit site
Lard_Lad said:
Let's see...

-the NHL was half the size then that it is now.
-the original WHA was able to tap into the untouched European pool of players.
-the original WHA had a dozen franchises, all of which were announced by November of the year prior to their first season, the new one has 6, announced in June.
-by June of 1972, the original WHA had players and coaches signed, we still haven't seen a single one from the new league.
-the original WHA had knowledgeable hockey people like Bill Hunter involved, while nobody with significant pro hockey management experience is involved with the new one (no, Bobby Hull doesn't count.)
-NHL and minor league salaries at the time were very low, so it wasn't that difficult to compete for good players, while the new league is talking about having several under-20 guys per team and will be paying its lower-end players salaries that are just barely competitive with what European teams can offer.

Other than that stuff, no differences at all. ;)

Size of the NHL doesn't really factor into whether the WHA can succeed or not next year if there is no NHL season next year.

More people then ever in the world are playing hockey, there is more talent out there than ever. Also, if the NHL stops the LHA might be able to lure some nhl talent into the fold. So not having an untapped european resource might not be too much of a problem.

Less teams might make it more likely to succeed than more teams. Many in the NHL feel the league should contract, so more is not always better is it.

Not having players signed is only natural as it seems like the WHA is in a rush to try and capitalize on the looming NHL work stoppage. It may or may not be a problem.

I don't know anything about who is running the WHA and if they have the proper know how or not, no comment there except to say hopefully they have some idea of what they are doing.

If the NHL stops the WHA may not have to gdole out NHL type money. Some players will go to Europe yes, but some might give the WHA a shot, maybe they don't feel like living in Europe and the WHA is the best alternative. Who knows.

My point is that the WHA isn't already a failure, it has a slim chance to succeed at some level, if only for a few years of mediocrity. At least the WHA is making things interesting,
 

Mizral

Registered User
Sep 20, 2002
18,187
2
Earth, MW
Visit site
I don't think anyone doubts the WHA will crash and burn eventually. But still, $5 million dollars a year, what does Crosby care if the league goes kaboom in a year or two? Besides, if it does, he can pocket the $10 mill over 2 years and go play in the NHL.
 

RE-HABS

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
14,885
1
CANADA
AJ1982 said:
So to those already bad mouthing the WHA as a joke, what exactly about this WHA is different than the first one that makes it a joke? The old WHA was an upstart league as well yet it managed to make a dent in the history of hockey in North America.
The original WHA was also a league that folded and at some points had no money to pay their players, what makes that soud like a success?

All the players were ex-NHLers and youngsters who wanted to play Pro like Messier and Gretzky, but that was also a time when there were like 12 - 17 teams making it harder to make the NHL. There are now 30 teams and the league's talent level has dropped and the league is spread thin and should be at 21 teams like in the 80's when hockey was better all around.

Sure players are bigger and stronger and even goalies are way better, but the talent pool is depleted as it is...the WHA is a joke and will flop just like the original.
 

Beatnik

Registered User
Sep 2, 2002
5,699
0
Québec
Visit site
Jay Thompson said:
I don't think anyone doubts the WHA will crash and burn eventually. But still, $5 million dollars a year, what does Crosby care if the league goes kaboom in a year or two? Besides, if it does, he can pocket the $10 mill over 2 years and go play in the NHL.

He's a competitor, i could'nt see him play in a minor league while being available for the NHL. One year in the WHA maybe, but not two.
 

Jag68Sid87

Sullivan gots to go!
Oct 1, 2003
35,575
1,249
Montreal, QC
Epsilon said:
It's clear that the NHLPA is going to sell out the young guys as much as possible (which I am totally in agreement with)

This seems to be the prevailing sentiment among fans, but I don't understand why. Who in 2003-04 EARNED his Millions, Rick Nash or John LeClair???

The rookie cap+ bonuses is not hurting the league. The players that have garnered huge bonuses HAVE in fact earned them by putting up big numbers in the best league in the world. Why would the league want to abolish this, just so that more idiots like Bob Clarke can overspend on veterans for 'services rendered' in the past. I just don't get it.

:shakehead
 

AJ1982

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
1,812
1
New York
Visit site
Interesting.

If the season does not start on time, players certainly have other options. They can play in Europe, or they can play in the newly formed World Hockey Association. The WHA announced Wednesday that its eight franchises will begin play Oct. 29.


The Lightning's Martin St. Louis, who was awarded the Hart Trophy as the league's MVP on Thursday night, said it would be silly for him not to at least consider playing in the WHA.


"Sitting at home or making $5 million, it would be very tempting," St. Louis told The Globe and Mail of Toronto. "Obviously, I have to know where we were at as far as the NHL situation. But to be honest, I really haven't thought about that."


WHA teams will have a $15 million salary cap, but a player such as St. Louis could make as much as $5 million as a team's top player.


Initially, the WHA said that if a player signs a contract, he would have to play the entire season with his WHA club. But on Wednesday, a WHA official said the league will likely change the bylaw to stipulate two players per team would have the option of returning to the NHL if labor problems are resolved during the season.


The new WHA will have franchises in Quebec City, Hamilton, Toronto, Halifax, Detroit, Dallas, Orlando, and Jacksonville, Fla.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=1819930
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->