Jackets swing pair of deals with Edmonton
- Thread starter Ohio Jones
- Start date
MatthewFlames
Registered User
See, I knew you weren't a capitalist! That's a socialistic revision if I ever saw one!!
MatthewFlames
Registered User
MatthewFlames
Registered User
Do these run of posts mean you're back?
Don't believe everything you read in the press.
Plus I really am afraid of Robb doing more than just nailing me in between the eyes with that squash ball this week
So I finally found out why Columbus and Edmonton's deal was so popular and after 30 minutes of reading i think i can put my own opinion in.
I know i'm a last place team therefore i'm scheduled to lose 7.5M but that can be easily resolved when and if i move two of Hejduk, Kaberle, and Brunette.
But for a bottom team with not much money, it's like a game of russian roulette, i basically have to choose my timing of when i'm going to try to make the playoffs and just go for it. With a total team salary of 28M dollars that means there really is nowhere to go but up. My payroll is going to have to drop to 21 mil. just so i don't lose money, if we ever get a cap floor i'll be fired within 24 months. I don't know that much about the significancies of the financial side of sim hockey, but i do know that i traded away several assets for money over the last 2 years to pay the bills and at the end of the year i'll still only be a 3.2M at the end of this year. So how will i ever be able to create a team and sign a couple decent free agents if i will go bankrupt at the first major signing i make? I've finally built for the future but at the rate everything is giong my payroll will have to be around 15M next year just to keep my team operational, and i doubt that will be possible if i want to keep my OV at 70. Something clearly has to be done here
I'm not a GM that ran my team into the ground, I took over a team who was run into the ground and given no help at all, I'm trying not to complain i enjoyed the challenge and i liked taking it on but i had to deal 2nd, and 3rd round picks just to acquire enough players to field a decent team, then i had to trade away a few prospects and players in order to get the money to pay for these players. I don't make big signings, i have a history of taking on players with big salaries but all have been either traded or waived.
If we can't raise the revenue tracker then maybe we can create a system to help the teams at the bottom. A formula that will factor in the teams that are under 30M and give some sort of support. Even if it means giving a one time deal and dishing out 30M to each team, yes the rich get richer, and the people who were reckless with their money will get a temporary reprieve but there are a few of us who have taken over teams in horrible situations helped rebuild them but are never really going to redeem ourselves, about two thrids the HFNHL will be bankrupt by the end of next season, that is not the fault solely of overspending.
I know we want this to be realistic but right now we have 12 teams in position of being bankrupt that's 40% of the league, 4 teams at serious risk (under 5M) and 3 teams at risk (under 10M) all 7 at risk teams will go bankrupt next year along with the 12 that will go this year. Revenue sharing is a great idea and it's helping us be more realistic with the NHL but honestly, there are some NHL teams with hundreds of millions of dollars, our richest team is barely over 63M. There are a few NHL teams that lose close to 100M over 5 years but they are still around becasue there is people still pumping money into the organization. I started wtih 2M, 3 years later trying to be careful i'm at 3M it's a double standard becasue i'll never be that successful untill i can get better players, but i can only get so much better through the draft, so i have a good crop of young NHLer's 2 years from now, but with 2 or 3M who can i really get to play with them? no one.
We want this to be realistic but if the average team's projected balance is under 10M in the NHL wouldn't they request a bailout like some other corperations in the world?
My answer is very simple.
- $300M or $400M bailout for the HFNHL league
Yes the highest team payroll will go up to 93-103M but there is still a cap in place, and if we're really worried about the rich getting reckless with their money there is another solution.
- We could "babysit" the salaries. No one can offer more than 120% of the players NHL salary
This would keep salaries realistic if someone really wanted a player they could still overpay, but this way the rich teams can't offer 5M to a 3M player just becasue they have more money.
Example: Milan Hejduk is likely to hit the open market. Part of his rejection of the offer is that he is aware he can make more on the open market than the 8% increase in Salary that i offered.
Milan Hejduk: NHL Salary: $3,900,000
Max Salary at 120%: $4,680,000
That way teams can overpay for him if they really way to, but it's not a 6M contract someone who needs a forward and has a large amount of money can offer. My only concern with this is over time player agents may exploit this and expect a 120% salary from the NHL, or the player would enter free agency, i would like to think that fair offers will be considered but i've recently made offers of nearly 110% of their NHL salary and been rejected, so i don't want to anger any player agents, because this may make things even worse for me in the future, but usually when you offer a contract 110% a players NHL salary he won't counter offer with and ultimatum of 115% of their NHL contract of they walk off to free agency. Especially during a time where everyone is losing money.
So thats my opinion and my idea, 120% max of NHL contracts, and 300-400 Million Dollar bailout.
I've got more to worry about now with rumours of the Phoenix Coyotes NHL team either moving at the end of the year, or even folding. Hopefully the NHL wouldn't allow the franchise to fold, but if they do so my future and all my work in the HFNHL could go for nothing so that is a new concern I have.
I know i'm a last place team therefore i'm scheduled to lose 7.5M but that can be easily resolved when and if i move two of Hejduk, Kaberle, and Brunette.
But for a bottom team with not much money, it's like a game of russian roulette, i basically have to choose my timing of when i'm going to try to make the playoffs and just go for it. With a total team salary of 28M dollars that means there really is nowhere to go but up. My payroll is going to have to drop to 21 mil. just so i don't lose money, if we ever get a cap floor i'll be fired within 24 months. I don't know that much about the significancies of the financial side of sim hockey, but i do know that i traded away several assets for money over the last 2 years to pay the bills and at the end of the year i'll still only be a 3.2M at the end of this year. So how will i ever be able to create a team and sign a couple decent free agents if i will go bankrupt at the first major signing i make? I've finally built for the future but at the rate everything is giong my payroll will have to be around 15M next year just to keep my team operational, and i doubt that will be possible if i want to keep my OV at 70. Something clearly has to be done here
I'm not a GM that ran my team into the ground, I took over a team who was run into the ground and given no help at all, I'm trying not to complain i enjoyed the challenge and i liked taking it on but i had to deal 2nd, and 3rd round picks just to acquire enough players to field a decent team, then i had to trade away a few prospects and players in order to get the money to pay for these players. I don't make big signings, i have a history of taking on players with big salaries but all have been either traded or waived.
If we can't raise the revenue tracker then maybe we can create a system to help the teams at the bottom. A formula that will factor in the teams that are under 30M and give some sort of support. Even if it means giving a one time deal and dishing out 30M to each team, yes the rich get richer, and the people who were reckless with their money will get a temporary reprieve but there are a few of us who have taken over teams in horrible situations helped rebuild them but are never really going to redeem ourselves, about two thrids the HFNHL will be bankrupt by the end of next season, that is not the fault solely of overspending.
I know we want this to be realistic but right now we have 12 teams in position of being bankrupt that's 40% of the league, 4 teams at serious risk (under 5M) and 3 teams at risk (under 10M) all 7 at risk teams will go bankrupt next year along with the 12 that will go this year. Revenue sharing is a great idea and it's helping us be more realistic with the NHL but honestly, there are some NHL teams with hundreds of millions of dollars, our richest team is barely over 63M. There are a few NHL teams that lose close to 100M over 5 years but they are still around becasue there is people still pumping money into the organization. I started wtih 2M, 3 years later trying to be careful i'm at 3M it's a double standard becasue i'll never be that successful untill i can get better players, but i can only get so much better through the draft, so i have a good crop of young NHLer's 2 years from now, but with 2 or 3M who can i really get to play with them? no one.
We want this to be realistic but if the average team's projected balance is under 10M in the NHL wouldn't they request a bailout like some other corperations in the world?
My answer is very simple.
- $300M or $400M bailout for the HFNHL league
Yes the highest team payroll will go up to 93-103M but there is still a cap in place, and if we're really worried about the rich getting reckless with their money there is another solution.
- We could "babysit" the salaries. No one can offer more than 120% of the players NHL salary
This would keep salaries realistic if someone really wanted a player they could still overpay, but this way the rich teams can't offer 5M to a 3M player just becasue they have more money.
Example: Milan Hejduk is likely to hit the open market. Part of his rejection of the offer is that he is aware he can make more on the open market than the 8% increase in Salary that i offered.
Milan Hejduk: NHL Salary: $3,900,000
Max Salary at 120%: $4,680,000
That way teams can overpay for him if they really way to, but it's not a 6M contract someone who needs a forward and has a large amount of money can offer. My only concern with this is over time player agents may exploit this and expect a 120% salary from the NHL, or the player would enter free agency, i would like to think that fair offers will be considered but i've recently made offers of nearly 110% of their NHL salary and been rejected, so i don't want to anger any player agents, because this may make things even worse for me in the future, but usually when you offer a contract 110% a players NHL salary he won't counter offer with and ultimatum of 115% of their NHL contract of they walk off to free agency. Especially during a time where everyone is losing money.
So thats my opinion and my idea, 120% max of NHL contracts, and 300-400 Million Dollar bailout.
I've got more to worry about now with rumours of the Phoenix Coyotes NHL team either moving at the end of the year, or even folding. Hopefully the NHL wouldn't allow the franchise to fold, but if they do so my future and all my work in the HFNHL could go for nothing so that is a new concern I have.
Yeah, contraction, hadn't really thought of that impact on the HFNHL.
There would be no pressing concern, as we could certainly continue with one more team than the NHL for an indefinite period IMO, but if a GM or two were turfed, it certainly would open up the opportunity to contract down to match the NHL at some point in time.
If a few teams in the NHL disappeared, then the biggest issue might be that there are about 40-50 less NHL quality rated players to spread around the HFNHL, given we simply have more spots to fill.
There would be no pressing concern, as we could certainly continue with one more team than the NHL for an indefinite period IMO, but if a GM or two were turfed, it certainly would open up the opportunity to contract down to match the NHL at some point in time.
If a few teams in the NHL disappeared, then the biggest issue might be that there are about 40-50 less NHL quality rated players to spread around the HFNHL, given we simply have more spots to fill.
Ohio Jones
Game on...
Ironically, the CBJ/EDM deal was not a financial one, but it came at a tie when other forces were moving to push this issue to a head. So I guess we'll wear it.
Some good thoughts here, Ryan, and I agree, you and other GMs coming into cash-strapped situations should absolutely have been given a helping hand at the outset - or even retroactively. It was much discussed by the admin at the time; I'm not sure why it never happened.
As o your suggestion of the bailout package followed by capping salaries against their NHL counterparts, I think you'll find that there are only a relative handful of players in the HFNHL earning substantially more than their NHL counterparts. The issue is not teams overspending vs the NHL, but teams overspending vs the revenues they can expect to receive in the HFNHL:
- Our cap parallels the NHL (albeit a year behind), and evidence in both real and sim worlds suggests the cap acts as a magnet both for team spending and for player salaries.
- Our salaries parallel the NHL; not only do we have the "auto-resign" rule for players extending contracts at their NHL level, but NHL salaries are the comparisonwhen negotiating.
- Our revenues average out at approximately $40 million (I've seen it said; I'm not sure I believe it's even that high this year).
So the discrpancy is between the expense side and the revenue side of the equation. The simplistic answer is to say: "GMs shouldn't spend beyond their means", but you've correctly pointed out hte fallacy of that argument The sim is geared to generate (disproportionately?) high revenue for successful teams and losses for unsuccessful teams, so that team swho are struggling will inevitably find their bank balance eroded away until - like you - by the time they have the young affordable talent to compete, they will be unable to afford the talent necessary to support those young players and ice a competitive team.
If it were as simple as cutting salaries, then team swith low payrolls would make money. But they don't: the best they can hope for is that they limit their losses somewhat.
So the fundamental challenge facing the admin team is to provide some revenue structure that does not disproportionately punish poorer teams, and that mimics NHL revenues in a way that gives GMs the financial wherewithal to pay NHL salaries for players.
This solution only needs to be in place for the remainder of this season, to allow for the possible shift to a new simulator, which might be more successful at simulating financial performance going forward. So far, I believe Drew's is the only suggestion I've seen that reconciles expenses with revenues in a projectable, sustainable way, but I'm open to other ideas. What I do know is that a one-time cash infusion will not resolve the underying issue, it will only defer it for a season or two (though I would stil be in favour of a bailout to GMs such as yourself who took over teams that were in a bad way financially).
I do find it interesting, though, how closely this all parallels the real world, where as many as 6 or 7 NHL teams are in real danger of backruptcy because their revenues are not keeping pace with the amount of money they have to spend in order to cover payroll costs. Any of Phoenix (obviously), Nashville, Florida, Tampa, Atlanta and Carolina are facing real financial crises (or would be if not, in the case of Carolina, for the deep pockets of their owner). You could probably add another 2 or 3 teams that are approaching dangerous times - Minnesota and Columbus among them. In fact, I've heard it estimated that only a third of NHL teams actually make a profit in any given season.
So, as has been pointed out elsewhere in this thread, our current circumstances may actually represent the greatest degree of realism yet achieved by our simulation, for which we can all be proud.
There's two ways of adjusting the revenue=payroll equation, the first way is the method Drew subscribed which involves reducing payroll, the second way is to make revenues in line with NHL payrolls. I've always been a firm believer of fixing the second part of the equation, since adjusting the first part you loose realism and you complicate free agent singings.... I know there's the simple formula of reduce payrolls by a % but how does that % fluctuate year to year with increasing or decreasing salary caps and there will be an imbalance in contracts if a player signing occurs on a reduced cap year vs an increased cap year. There's probably a way to get around this (I'm pretty sure Drew will respond to this
) however it just seems complicated to me.The other way is adjusting revenue to match NHL salaries... this can be done using tools like the 900M rebalance (Hasnain idea from last year) or even by calculating the total NHL payroll at the end of the year and adjusting HFNHL revenues. To me this feels simpler and easier...
BTW, the other big problem is the large disparity between winning team revenue and poor team revenue... the league revenue might add up evenly at the end of the year but we still need to make sure that revenue is distributed evenly... too much one way and the poor teams get screwed, too much the other way there becomes no point in winning. That's why doing mid-season cash injections is very risky. The HFNHL isn't a capatalist system, it's a closed loop simulated financial system, susceptable to systemic flaws not present in free-market capatilism because we make the rules.
...but again all this is just one AGM's opinion ... so floating disembodied, puck eating, annonymous Sean Avery head please don't get offended.
While I do enjoy the Oilers brief spot at the top of the Western Conference being drawn out with this break, I'm wondering if we can get an update as to what's going on. Is the league shut down until a solution to all this is agreed upon? Can any info be shared in regards to what's being considered and when a decision might be made?
