New CBA bad for players?

Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by AM, Jul 10, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
View Users: View Users
  1. AM

    AM Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2004
    Messages:
    5,350
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    96
    Not a chance.

    This is the opportunity they've all been saying they've been waiting for.

    An actual chance at competing for the cup each year, and not just if you're on 4-5 teams fat wallet fat head teams either!

    Cheer up lads its a brave new world. The prize is afoot and youre not hobbled by the almighty buck anymore.

    Game on.
     
  2. 50 Mission Cap

    50 Mission Cap Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2002
    Messages:
    1,069
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Pembroke, Ontario
    Home Page:
    Small market teams were always able to compete under the old system. Just look at Calgary, Tampa Bay and Anaheim. Heck you can shoot down the fat wallet argument by looking at the Rangers. Money never guaranteed success, just like a lack of it never guaranteed medocrity. Anyone who thinks that just because there is now a cap that all of a sudden Atlanta will be a Cup contender is just plain nuts.

    In fact, the big market clubs may be in an even better position now. If a player is only going to get offered 1 million from every team then his decision will be more impacted by how much he will be able to make off of personal endorsements. The larger markets will offer more of an incentive in that regard.

    Finally, a number of small market teams couldn't turn a profit with a payroll that is already under the proposed cap, will not be able to turn a profit any greater just because the Rangers won't be spending as much.
     
  3. Tra La La

    Tra La La Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2003
    Messages:
    4,707
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Buffalo, New York
    Plus If Revenue goes up so does the Cap. If Revenue were at 03-04 level the Cap would be 45 Million.

    Free agency will come sooner, year by year.

    There will be Revenue Sharing.


    It's not a bad deal.
     
  4. Crazy_Ike

    Crazy_Ike Cookin' with fire.

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2005
    Messages:
    9,081
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Fluke runs like Calgary and Anaheim based on hot goaltending and a whole pile of clutching and grabbing aren't "competing", not to mention you neglected to point out that under the old system Calgary couldn't have afforded to keep Iginla and Tampa had several players to resign and could only choose one or two. And you sort of left out the vast majority of the OTHER small market teams that DIDN'T compete while other, bigger market teams were contenders year after year.

    But it was an entertaining fallacious argument nonetheless.

    :D

    This deal will be good for the players in the long run, since having a healthy league can only help its workers. Thank goodness the forces of sanity have won this fight.
     
  5. Resolute

    Resolute Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    Messages:
    4,125
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    AB
    How many times did the Flames, Lightning and Ducks make the playoffs under the last CBA?

    How many times did the Leafs, Red Wings and Flyers make the playoffs in the same stretch?

    You are right that money neve guaranteed success. As the Rangers show, gross incompetence can defeat any amount of money. Similaraly, a small market team can have some success. However, in the long run - and this is painfully obvious - teams with more money were more likely to be successful. Outside of the Devils first two cups, every cup champion under the last CBA was a high spender. That alone says something.


    Nice spin, but doubtful. Other than the elite players, endorsement money is minimal at best. And even then, Jarome Iginla has had no more difficulty gaining endorsements in a small market than Mats Sundin did in a large market.
     
  6. Pepper

    Pepper Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2004
    Messages:
    14,543
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    126
    <sigh>

    FACT is that until last year, EVERY Stanley Cup during the previous CBA were won by teams with top15 payrolls, 90% of the Cups were won by top10 payroll teams and 75% were won by top5 payroll teams.

    Numbers don't lie, statistically you had 0% chances of winning the SC if you didn't have top15 budget.

    So amount of money used CLEARLY affects your on-ice performance.
     
  7. Boltsfan2029

    Boltsfan2029 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2002
    Messages:
    6,264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Paralegal
    Location:
    In deleted threads
    Not to nitpick, but prior to the lockout Tampa Bay had every player signed with the exception of Marty St. Louis, and had the budget to get him back in the fold. Not sure about Calgary's situation, but we weren't in the "could only choose one or two" category.
     
  8. Crazy_Ike

    Crazy_Ike Cookin' with fire.

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2005
    Messages:
    9,081
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    St. Louis is quite the "exception"...
     
  9. Boltsfan2029

    Boltsfan2029 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2002
    Messages:
    6,264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Paralegal
    Location:
    In deleted threads
    Point being?
     
  10. StevenintheATL

    StevenintheATL Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2004
    Messages:
    2,747
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Coffee Route Sales
    Location:
    The ATL!
    Actually it's bad for the players because the new deal will be worse than the deal the NHL offered before the drop dead date for the 2004-2005 season. Had they not been so boneheaded, they wouldn't be getting the shaft that they will be getting thanks to Bob......
     
  11. Trizent

    Trizent Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    Messages:
    1,967
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    96
    Location:
    Oil Country
    I love it when people list Calgary as the poster child for the fact that small markets could compete in old system because of their run. They neglect the fact that Calgary missed the playoffs for 7 straight years. Lost tons of money during that time and only made a few million 03-04 even with all those playoff dates. IE, without the extra 12 playoff dates with inflated ticket prices, they don't make money yet again.
     
  12. Crazy_Ike

    Crazy_Ike Cookin' with fire.

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2005
    Messages:
    9,081
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The point is it doesn't invalidate what I said by pointing out Tampa could resign everyone but the league MVP, it's just semantics. I know you said "nitpick" but I am still pointing that out.
     
  13. sakicisstupid

    sakicisstupid Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2002
    Messages:
    3,885
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    141
    Home Page:
    How do y'all feel that the profits large market teams will make will go towards scouting, player developnment etc...you're forcing the big market teams to become intelligent rather than waste that money on overpaid veterans. I think we'll see less parity now due to the lack of revenue sharing.

    I also noticed the salary average and team payrolls will strongly parallel the league's financial make-up in the years 1998-2000. In 1999 for instance, Colorado's payroll was 41 M. The champs (Stars) in '99 invested 39 M into their payroll. Both were only 9-10 M over the league average despite having star-studded rosters and being dominant teams in the western conference. Both teams also developed their respective rosters through drafting and shrewd moves off free agency or trades. Both teams did much better when they moved to two of the biggest sports markets in North America!

    I don't think this CBA changes much of anything except that it allows the small market teams to potentially make a profit and remain viable.
     
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2005
  14. matthew94

    matthew94 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    617
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    pastor
    Location:
    WNY
    Home Page:
    I think they'll grow to like the greater sense of 'ownership' they'll have

    The more entertaining they are, the more money they'll make. That's always been the case to a degree, but now it'll be official.

    Just look at the NBA cap, it keeps going up every year. Same with the NFL.
     
  15. Crazy_Ike

    Crazy_Ike Cookin' with fire.

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2005
    Messages:
    9,081
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That's part of the reason why this couldn't have been settled when the CBA was open to be renegotiated. The evidence for the tailspin back in 1998-2000 wasn't nearly as obvious, and the new teams weren't as stable. Though the situation was inevitably going out of control with the lack of drag effects, only people really close to the scene would have been seeing it that early, and there was still some forlorn hope it could be salvaged some other way, like, perhaps, an NHLPA that would have negotiated *before* September 2004...
     
  16. X0ssbar

    X0ssbar Guest

    If they consider a 54% stake in a 2 billion dollar business bad then to each his own.

    IMO, I would consider this a very successfull negotiation for the players. They now own a majority stake in the league, have equal say in how the game is played and have reduced UFA status by four years (if reports are true) among other things.

    I think as time goes on the players will look back and see that the deal they got, although not the free spending system they had, is still a pretty darn good one and will be in the best interests of the league as a whole. Now as the league prospers, so does everyone involved.

    After this thing is signed, sealed and delivered the players and owners must realize that its them against every other entertainment option out there. Its easy to tear something down - rebuilding however, is a far greater challenge. They must work together.
     
  17. Boltsfan2029

    Boltsfan2029 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2002
    Messages:
    6,264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Paralegal
    Location:
    In deleted threads
    Actually, I was responding to your allegation that "Tampa had several players to resign and could only choose one or two." That is simply incorrect. We only had one player to sign and we did not have to choose between or only "one or two." If you want to use examples of teams having trouble signing their players, it would simply be better be correct in those examples.

    Also, please be aware that it wasn't a matter of "could" resign everyone but Marty. As I stated, we had more than sufficient budget to get it done, there were no problems with negotiations when the lockout began and a moratorium was placed on all signings. There is no question it could and would have been done.
     
  18. Crazy_Ike

    Crazy_Ike Cookin' with fire.

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2005
    Messages:
    9,081
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You're still immersed in semantics. It wasn't just a question of right then, but also Tampa's ability to sign its players in the future, when LeCavalier and Richards and others needed new contracts.
     
  19. Resolute

    Resolute Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    Messages:
    4,125
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    AB
    Correct me if I am wrong, but didnt Tampa's payroll jump from $34 million in 03-04 to - I think - $42 or $44 million for 04-05? This for a team that claimed 18,000 fans a game and needed to simply make the finals to break even? Salary escelation would have rapidly lead to the breakup of the Lightning. Under the last CBA, I would have bet that 04-05 would have been the Lightning's last hurrah. Three years and out, thanks to the last CBA.

    Of course, the Lightning would have done far more in that 3 year stretch than the overwhelming majority of small market teams did in that situation, which is definitely to their credit.
     
  20. Boltsfan2029

    Boltsfan2029 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2002
    Messages:
    6,264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Paralegal
    Location:
    In deleted threads
    Hard to say. We have extremely wealthy, stable ownership. The last season played our budget was any amount we wanted it to be, as long as any loss was kept to less than $10M. So, it would appear that as long as our GM could keep the losses "down," the wallet would have remained open.

    That said, eventually we probably would have had some problems, but to say that last year would have been our "last hurrah" is probably stretching it a bit.
     
  21. Boltsfan2029

    Boltsfan2029 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2002
    Messages:
    6,264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Paralegal
    Location:
    In deleted threads
    Well, everything in your sentence was past tense, and you said Tampa had several players to sign. Readers can only interpret what you actually say.
     
  22. Resolute

    Resolute Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    Messages:
    4,125
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    AB
    Tampa needed to make the Finals to break even last year. Their payroll increased by over $10 million for 04-05. Given the Lightning already claimed attendance at 18,000 for 03-04, there isnt much reason to believe it would have gone higher. Since the chances of Tampa going back to the finals werent good (they never are, just ask the Red Wings), the probability of Tampa losing a lot of money in 04-05 were very high. Couple that with salaries continuing to rise, and the 05-06 Lightning would have had to dump at least one of Khabibulin, St. Louis and Richards, and probably another would follow not too long afterward.

    That is, however, all an alternate reality though.
     
  23. Boltsfan2029

    Boltsfan2029 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2002
    Messages:
    6,264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Paralegal
    Location:
    In deleted threads
    I'm not positive, but I believe we needed to make the Finals last year to make a profit, not break even. However, as you say, it's a moot point now. As I told you, our GM had a blank check for payroll and I don't think that 04-05 would have been catastrophic, or our "last hurrah." Attendance was sure to rise, considering we were packing over 19,000-20,000 into the building during the playoffs and close to 23,000 in the finals. Season ticket sales were headed up, retention was over 93% in spite of the lockout. We'll never know because the terrain is totally different now, but since attendance had increased steadily even when we were languishing in last or close to last place, it simply stood to reason it would continue to go up.

    I'm amused when I hear large market teams' fans complain about how much the lockout hurt their teams -- it couldn't have come at a worse time for the Bolts.
     
  24. FanSince2014

    FanSince2014 What'd He Say?

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    Messages:
    3,082
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    129
    Home Page:
    I agree that the new CBA is not going to be a bad deal for the players for the reasons already stated.

    It only looks like a bad deal right now because the Roenicks of the NHL world are only thinking short term and how much they can make next year.

    In time, both parties will be happy.

    They should all be happy now, GD it. I'm sick of considering whining millionaires contentment level.
     
  25. GSC2k2*

    GSC2k2* Guest

    IIRC, one year recently the NBA cap went down. Check here:

    http://www.insidehoops.com/nba-salary-cap.shtml
     
    Last edited by moderator : Jul 10, 2005
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"