OT: Players are overpaid

[Darth Vladar]

The closest the Flames have ever come to signing a $10M player in their team history was Iggy, and his back to back $7M contracts would only have been worth about $9-10M per year after adjusting for inflation, but this is during a period when he is a league MVP, leading the Flames to the Cup final and averaging 40 goals a year. You'll have to excuse my reticence to back the truck up for Johnny and Chucky. I don't care what the "market" is, I want to see my team win and want to root for players who want to win, like any fan of the game would. I don't want to watch the ice capades, and I don't give two shits about what any player does on their own time. I just want to see them do the job they are privileged to have, and are paid so well with public funding to do, to the absolute best of their ability.

 

[Bounces R Way]

Players are overpaid CFHF is underlaid

 

[TheHudlinator]

DEVIL'S ADVOCATE POST



Except everyone focuses only when owners when they make money, but cast a blind eye when the owners are losing significantly more money than making over a long term. "They can take it". The NHL lost how much money again this season alone? Many other owners were barely breaking even, but some orgs were definitely in the black.

There are a handful of ultra rich that are rich off government handouts, but not all of them are.

Not to mention, platform owners make the most money. That's why Apple, Google, Facebook, Microsoft are ahead and also have the cash flow to buy out the popular applications out there. The NHL owners are the platform. The players are the pieces that go on top. That's why the funds first go to support the platform (owners) first before players.

I don't disagree with you. I'm playing devil's advocate.

I'm just saying a point is far stronger if it takes into account arguments on both sides before concluding. Ignoring opposing arguments before concluding leads to a weak point.



But players generally have no possibility to incur a loss from regular operations. This is a regular risk for all NHL org owners.



True, but at what point do you have to consider that a consumer refusing to understand and comprehend something they can realistically understand and comprehend with a little bit of work s being negligent? That's how you get mass crazies with pseudo science and conspiracy stuff. Categorical lines are blending at an unprecedented rate.

If we are confused at some of the special treatment towards athletes, I'd parallel that to religion (past and present). In our modern culture, things like sports and politics have taken the space where religion used to. IMO, the concessions religion used to receive for the common good are now concessions given to sports and politics for the common good.



I get where you're coming from, but I think the semantic confusion should be on the word "fair" and not "value".

Look at what is requested to bring things to "fair". Think how easily people pay a premium for something that is popular and whether they think it's "fair" or if they got "scammed". Look how dramatic people are these days. It's basically all in or nothing. The middle ground barely exists now.

Value has always suppose to have been a subjective concept. Not all people derive value from the exact same thing. But fairness was supposed to have an air of objectivity to it. Yes, fair is what two people determine is fair, but at the same time, two people essentially must agree it's fair. Few people truly agree on or understand value. They just take it at "face value". They don't care about value, just accessibility.

My understanding is the players did take a huge hit during the pandemic, they got their contracts paid but to make up for the lost revenue they owe the owners 100's of millions of dollars which is why even with the new TV deals the cap isn't expected to increase for as many as 4 or 5 years. So players that need a new contract during that time will lose significant money by not having a higher cap as the union pays off its debt, and all players are paying big escrow payments to repay the owners. Sure the owners lost year 1 but over the next 5 years they get made whole again from the players and they can use last year as a tax write off for them.

Not to mention if we are taking about the money lost from average people the owners asking for 100's of millions of public money to build their stadiums that they then own 100% of is a far bigger impact on society then say Eichel being over paid a few million on his deal.

 

[Darth Vladar]

My understanding is the players did take a huge hit during the pandemic, they got their contracts paid but to make up for the lost revenue they owe the owners 100's of millions of dollars which is why even with the new TV deals the cap isn't expected to increase for as many as 4 or 5 years. So players that need a new contract during that time will lose significant money by not having a higher cap as the union pays off its debt, and all players are paying big escrow payments to repay the owners. Sure the owners lost year 1 but over the next 5 years they get made whole again from the players and they can use last year as a tax write off for them.

Not to mention if we are taking about the money lost from average people the owners asking for 100's of millions of public money to build their stadiums that they then own 100% of is a far bigger impact on society then say Eichel being over paid a few million on his deal.

I don't see how the public should be on the hook for any of it, personally. All it would take for any sports league to go under is for its fans to wake up to the idea that there might be better value out there for their entertainment dollar if all they are doing is contributing to an athlete's fortune just to watch them phone it in every night, and the broader cultural implications thereof.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

The closest the Flames have ever come to signing a $10M player in their team history was Iggy, and his back to back $7M contracts would only have been worth about $9-10M per year after adjusting for inflation, but this is during a period when he is a league MVP, leading the Flames to the Cup final and averaging 40 goals a year. You'll have to excuse my reticence to back the truck up for Johnny and Chucky. I don't care what the "market" is, I want to see my team win and want to root for players who want to win, like any fan of the game would. I don't want to watch the ice capades, and I don't give two shits about what any player does on their own time. I just want to see them do the job they are privileged to have, and are paid so well with public funding to do, to the absolute best of their ability.

So you want to see your team win but don't want your team to pay for elite talent that helps them win?

If I were you, I'd be less concerned about paying Johnny Gaudreau $9M and more concerned about paying guys like Brouwer, Neal, and Zadorov.

Also not sure you understand what public funding is. By your usage of it, every job is funded by the public. We'll just add it to the growing list of things you don't understand.

 

[Darth Vladar]

So you want to see your team win but don't want your team to pay for elite talent that helps them win?

If I were you, I'd be less concerned about paying Johnny Gaudreau $9M and more concerned about paying guys like Brouwer, Neal, and Zadorov.

Also not sure you understand what public funding is. By your usage of it, every job is funded by the public. We'll just add it to the growing list of things you don't understand.

As I've mentioned in multiple posts, there is zero correlation between throwing money at players and actually winning. In the last 20 years, only two players who were in the top 5 in salary went on to win the cup: Peter Forsberg in '01 and Crosby in '09 and '16, arguably two of the best players in the history of the game.

Who's "we'll"? Are you not speaking on your own behalf? I meant public funding in the sense that the revenue generated by a sports league is more akin to a fundraising effort than an actual business providing a product or service per se. You don't walk into a store and pay for something without taking it with you.

 

[DFF]

Not compared to other sports

but if you are into that communist stuff, I guess they are and the hot dog guys need a raise

 

[Darth Vladar]

I love how people just throw around the word "communism" as if they have a clue what it's like to actually be oppressed, lol

 

[TheHudlinator]

I love how people just throw around the word "communism" as if they have a clue what it's like to actually be oppressed, lol

I've been told getting a shot in the arm to go to the pub is pretty big oppression.

 

[Darth Vladar]

I've been told getting a shot in the arm to go to the pub is pretty big oppression.

Probably wasn't a cool pub anyways lol

 

[TheHudlinator]

Probably wasn't a cool pub anyways lol

Nah it is, I got my shot

 

[Darth Vladar]

Nah it is, I got my shot

Those who do always feel compelled to say so lmao

 

[TheHudlinator]

Those who do always feel compelled to say so lmao

Hoping the rest catch up if they hear enough positive reinforcement

 

[Darth Vladar]

Hoping the rest catch up if they hear enough positive reinforcement

You spelled extortion wrong lmao

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

As I've mentioned in multiple posts, there is zero correlation between throwing money at players and actually winning. In the last 20 years, only two players who were in the top 5 in salary went on to win the cup: Peter Forsberg in '01 and Crosby in '09 and '16, arguably two of the best players in the history of the game.

Who's "we'll"? Are you not speaking on your own behalf? I meant public funding in the sense that the revenue generated by a sports league is more akin to a fundraising effort than an actual business providing a product or service per se. You don't walk into a store and pay for something without taking it with you.

Since when is $9M a top 5 salary in the league?

I'm just going to ignore your asinine point about public funding. Hockey players are no more "publicly funded" than video game developers.

 

[Darth Vladar]

Since when is $9M a top 5 salary in the league?

I'm just going to ignore your asinine point about public funding. Hockey players are no more "publicly funded" than video game developers.

Or you could just ignore all of it.

 

[I Hate Blake Coleman]

Twitch streamers are overpaid

They get like $2 per sub, and a subscription costs like $8 CAD. Bezos is leeching off the work of these mfers.

 

[Volica]

I love how people just throw around the word "communism" as if they have a clue what it's like to actually be oppressed, lol

My parents both fled communism in the 70's/80's.

Although, it's mostly just confused with Socialism because people are mostly stupid.

 

[Volica]

Since when is $9M a top 5 salary in the league?

I'm just going to ignore your asinine point about public funding. Hockey players are no more "publicly funded" than video game developers.

Are no more "publicly funded" than Movies, TV, Entertainment, Literature, and the list goes on and on.
This is basic supply and demand, it's crazy that people have a hard time grasping these things.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Are no more "publicly funded" than Movies, TV, Entertainment, Literature, and the list goes on and on.
This is basic supply and demand, it's crazy that people have a hard time grasping these things.

I refuse to believe people can be that stupid.

I just think people will believe anything to help justify to themselves that their beliefs come from a place of righteousness instead of jealousy.

 

[Fig]

People go to a theatre hoping to experience something new for $20 and two hours of their time. Films cost millions of dollars to produce, and no two are quite the same. Actors are put through every conceivable emotion and often perform difficult physical feats, hoping to do so convincingly enough to move an audience, be it to laughter, tears, or whatever else, and their career depends on their success in that endeavor, because if they don't perform well, they may never be hired again. In some cases their earnings are directly tied to the box office figures.

For another $20 you can buy not just an artifact of the experience, but the experience itself, to be replayed and enjoyed as many times as you wish. Sure some film stars still make obscene amounts of money, but there is a certain reciprocity with that brand of entertainment that you don't really get with modern pro sports despite film stars and athletes making about the same on average. Like I said, it's simply custom now. Hockey is pretty much the same product it's been for the past century plus, people trying to put a piece of rubber in a net; the only difference now is that they get paid millions of dollars to do it. It's not even just about how much an athlete makes, it's that they make that much regardless of whether or not they even achieve the task they are being paid to do.

Maybe that's part of the reason I root for the the Flames, the hope that they might prove to the rest of the league that you don't need $10M players to win a Stanley Cup. I'd kill for a re-match with Tampa in the Finals this year.

Umm... how is this different for sports? Sure, there's repeating parameters (ie: A series), but each play out is going to be different than the one before. Each experience is new. The experience of in person vs from a distance is quite substantial.

Players earning are also supposed to be somewhat based on the earnings as well. That's what the salary cap is if I'm not mistaken.

My understanding is the players did take a huge hit during the pandemic, they got their contracts paid but to make up for the lost revenue they owe the owners 100's of millions of dollars which is why even with the new TV deals the cap isn't expected to increase for as many as 4 or 5 years. So players that need a new contract during that time will lose significant money by not having a higher cap as the union pays off its debt, and all players are paying big escrow payments to repay the owners. Sure the owners lost year 1 but over the next 5 years they get made whole again from the players and they can use last year as a tax write off for them.

Not to mention if we are taking about the money lost from average people the owners asking for 100's of millions of public money to build their stadiums that they then own 100% of is a far bigger impact on society then say Eichel being over paid a few million on his deal.

Semantics (but a very important distinction in terms of taxation), the players did not take a huge hit. They did have to agree to certain deferrals to help with timing differences for cash flow for the owners though. Cap increase is future earnings. This is akin to people given salary freezes. You did not lose anything. A clock work pay raise that was expected was cancelled to help get through the rough times.

What I am alluding to is based on employee vs contractor and PSB stuff. A player as far as I know cannot end up with more work expenses than income. They cannot end up in the red (personal spending is completely different) as in, their net earnings in a year cannot be lower than zero. A business can easily go in the red (end up with net losses) where there are more expenses than income.

I have not sure what you're trying to get at for the tax write off. Are you talking about a loss carry forward or a loss carry back? Because that's not exactly how taxation works. I could bore you with the differences between T1/T2/T3 returns and the fundamental rule differences between ITA/CPA handbook/BCA and even Canada/US... but just trust that I understand what I am talking about and that it is a discussion that makes university courses almost seem like a cake walk in comparison. You're also blending different things together. The public funds for the arena situation is separate from the wages paid to the players situation. I've always hated the crap that the put out there about how the arena would be funded. I could basically write a multi page paper on the f*** ups of communication on the concept of "timing difference" (an accounting concept) alone. This ignoring all the other completely horrific methods of communication that is creating deep confusion to all individuals layman and professionals alone on the subject. A huge portion of

If your point is that the rich line their pockets, fine. I do not disagree that the ultra rich on occasion unfairly line their pockets in ways that are unfair. I agree with you. But your tax and public money concepts are off and as a professional in that field, I just felt the need to straighten things out a little bit.

 

[DCDM]

You spelled extortion wrong lmao

 

[Pirate King Luffy]

You spelled extortion wrong lmao

 

[BobColesNasalCavity]

I've been told getting a shot in the arm to go to the pub is pretty big oppression.

 

[InfinityIggy]

I don't see how the public should be on the hook for any of it, personally. All it would take for any sports league to go under is for its fans to wake up to the idea that there might be better value out there for their entertainment dollar if all they are doing is contributing to an athlete's fortune just to watch them phone it in every night, and the broader cultural implications thereof.

I agree, the sports-fan proletariat needs to rise up and seize the means of entertainment from the bourgeoisie-athlete class.