I'm genuinely curious. What could the NHLPA even do if, say, a guy like Stamkos or Ovechkin took a 1 year $1M deal to go to a heavily stacked favorite?
Why can't a superstar team exist or is it all about money?
- Thread starter illpucks
- Start date
I'm genuinely curious. What could the NHLPA even do if, say, a guy like Stamkos or Ovechkin took a 1 year $1M deal to go to a heavily stacked favorite?
He's still being paid by the Rangers, though. That $2M is just being stacked on his 6 or so mil the Rangers are cutting him. Richards is/will be one of the highest paid NHL players this season.
Sens Rule
Registered User
- Sep 22, 2005
- 21,251
- 74
See.... Salaries are about status and pride. That is the ultimate measurement of value. Like Kovalchuk wanted the $100 million contract because it is the biggest.... Not just because more $$$$$$.
And being unionized... It isn't like the other players would want Toews and Kane to have resigned for $6 million per to win more Cups. And they can't really come put and say.... We left $4 million each a year on the table so we can have a winning team. Union hates it. Saad would not be impressed if he gets $3.5 cuz Toews and Kane took $6.... Of Toews/Kane take $10.... Saad can get 5.5/6.
Anyway it does happen. Crosby took $8.7.... Coulda had whatever he wanted.
Pride matters with $$$. Alfie went to Detroit largely ot is said that the Sens insulted him with a low ball offer. $3.5 vs $5.5 million. The $1.2 million take home difference wasn't the point.... I think. It is pride and recognition.
But also money talks. If the weekly lottery jackot is $10 million it sells far less tickets then if the jackpot was $25 million. Though the difference to the change in lifestyle of the winner is not that much.... People like lotsa money..... Everyone that gets rich... Doesn't retire.
Sens Rule
Registered User
- Sep 22, 2005
- 21,251
- 74
I meant the NHLPA itself. Like sanctions, exclusion from future voting... etc.
And please. I really doubt a player would be subjected to cheapshots by his peers because he signed a sweetheart deal.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned agents. They obviously want their cut to be bigger, so they probably get on players to ask for more. Really though, the players need to watch out for their own interests and I don't begrudge them one bit, especially if they haven't had a big contract yet. The career is too short and it behooves them to get what they can before they get hurt, regress, etc.
BayStreetBully
Registered User
And what happens when your team takes that extra $8 million you gave up and doesn't spend to the cap? Or if they sign a plug like David Clarkson for 5x5? You won't feel cheated?
Acallabeth
Post approved by Ovechkin
I can almost imagine that. "Hey ref, it's his own fault! He should have got a bigger contract!".
Because there's life after hockey, where an extra $4-6M would be helpful, plus the risk of a career-threatening injury while on a short term deal...
Man Bear Pig
Registered User
I think their families would still be set for life if say, they signed for $20 million vs $30 million or more. Athletes and agents are all greedy, we don't need to sugarcoat it. I'd be the same way and so would everyone else here. That doesn't mean there isn't a drive to be the best and win the cup, that's obviously important, just not as important as money to 99% of players.
People seem to be overrating the power of the NHLPA. It is run by the players themselves. Seems like a lot of people lack knowledge on Unions. Unions are run by their members.....People on here know nothing about Unions. It's sad really.
Last edited:
MLSE
Registered User
There is a term money isn't everything but I think on a bigger scale of things the more correct term is hockey isn't everything.
Try your hardest when you play but dont skimp out on being paid right.
Unless on the flip side of things you believe that your long term financials will benefit from being a champion of champions, although winning isn't guaranteed.
Try your hardest when you play but dont skimp out on being paid right.
Unless on the flip side of things you believe that your long term financials will benefit from being a champion of champions, although winning isn't guaranteed.
Butcher
Registered User
- Dec 7, 2013
- 1,076
- 0
With the players total salaries tied to NHL revenue, the NHLPA no longer has reason for grievance against players who sign undervalued deals. The NHLPA would probably rather have players sign undervalued contracts as it would mean less escrow.
The comments in regards to the NHLPA and unions have missed the different implications taking a lower salary under the uncapped system and the current CBA would effect NHL player salaries.
The comments in regards to the NHLPA and unions have missed the different implications taking a lower salary under the uncapped system and the current CBA would effect NHL player salaries.
No, because I had to sign the contract. I had to agree to it.
People need to realize that money isn't important to everyone. I'd be doing what I love and making millions doing it. Why not help the team I'm on by freeing up cap space to make the team better?
Vamos Rafa
Registered User
NBA superstars can afford to take massive paycuts because they can get a **** load of money from endorsement deals. NHL players don't have that luxury.
