arturo7
Well-Known Member
wankers all
emjay said:I, also, was optimistic when I heard the league's latest offer.
To quibble over a few percentage points of their 7-figure salaries is ridiculous. In fact, there should actually be a not-insignificant portion of players who actually stand to lose more in the long run by only making strike pay for the year (EVEN IF they manage to keep it at 57%, which they won't), rather than accepting a few percentage points less. Granted, the more highly-paid players would at first glance be the players in this group, so it might not initially seem to really matter all that much. But salary is only one half of the equation, the other half being the number of years left in a player's career. And the lower-salaried grinders tend to have much shorter careers than the highly-paid superstars, so in actuality I'd imagine that the *least* paid players are actually the *most* affected by this.
Of course, while there are undoubtedly SOME number of players who will end up overall making less by missing the year, the size and composition of this group as described is largely conjecture. But it would be interesting to see an actual, in-depth, statistical analysis, and it could maybe possibly even provide somewhat of a reality check for a chunk of the players. And a reality check is exactly what these ******** need - they're screwing over a lot of people (and not even really the owners!) by bitching about a few percentage points when many of them will regardless make more in a year than most people make in a lifetime. They really have to get their heads out of their asses.
For a bit of perspective, Stamkos went to my high school, a freshman while I was in my senior year. The kid worked hard to get where he is. But so did dozens (if not hundreds) of the other kids that were in the same building that year, and it's unlikely that even a single one of them is making even a tenth of what he is. That's not to knock on Stamkos specifically, as he's a pretty down to earth guy (a total geek, really). I'm just pointing out how these players should really be counting their blessings rather than throwing this whole collective entitlement-tantrum.
Lumpy16 said:I agree with most of your points. But I have to say the owners locked the players out, so it's the owners screwing people.
Lumpy16 said:No kidding, I would be pissed if I was Parise. Well I would be happy cause I no longer play or the stupid ass devils. But you sign a huge contract and 2 months later they want to cut it in half. That's stupid
paulster2626 said:What? Nobody suggested to cut any contract on half. Have you been listening to the Fehr conference calls?
Lumpy16 said:My bad I didn't mean cut it in half. But they are talking about cutting contracts.
I thought that the league's latest offer included little, if any real "roll back" in salary? Mind you, I didn't read every single letter of the offer. Whatever, it's balls any way you cut it. bless taking sides really, this $hit's serious. I like watching NHL games.
So Parise might make $80M instead of $90M. To play hockey. Until he's 40. I'm sorry but I cannot feel sorry for this man.
The NHL's latest offer had concessions from the players on everything, and no real incentive for them to use it to bargain with. But they're still going to lose this battle.
I do think they're closer than we think though. There's a deal to be had, and there's still time to get it done. If this goes past the Oct 25 deadline though, then I'm going to really worry. But eventually it'll get fixed. I would LOVE to see empty arenas in the 'iffy' markets afterwards though - this would all but guarantee this crap doesn't happen again.
Staight and to the point. The nhlpa lost a lot of support in the past couple days. This guy makes sense
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/335159
Kind of a meandering article.
Goofynewfie said:Staight and to the point. The nhlpa lost a lot of support in the past couple days. This guy makes sense
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/335159
dudius said:"pay people what they'll take and if they won't take it don't pay it and if they want to go elsewhere they can". The reason the "free market" isn't working is because it isn't a really free market.
To me it seemed like a blog post by someone who doesn't exactly believe in capitalism. Personally, I think it's stupid to complain about how a hockey player can make so much. If he is "deemed worthy", he'll be paid that much. And if he doesn't really bring that much value to the team, then he got off easy and the team owner got the short end of the stick. Rather than trying to say "pay him less and pay others more", it should be "pay people what they'll take and if they won't take it don't pay it and if they want to go elsewhere they can". The reason the "free market" isn't working is because it isn't a really free market.
dudius said:To me it seemed like a blog post by someone who doesn't exactly believe in capitalism. Personally, I think it's stupid to complain about how a hockey player can make so much. If he is "deemed worthy", he'll be paid that much. And if he doesn't really bring that much value to the team, then he got off easy and the team owner got the short end of the stick. Rather than trying to say "pay him less and pay others more", it should be "pay people what they'll take and if they won't take it don't pay it and if they want to go elsewhere they can". The reason the "free market" isn't working is because it isn't a really free market.
Flycal6 said:That guy's a commie. And probably hypocritical. I doubt he take a smaller salary than he could have and gives the proceeds to other suckier writers.
The owners own the businesses and take the risks. They should be able to pay whatever, or as little, salary they can get someone to accept. But they signed those guys to contracts, no matter how ridiculous, and they should have to honor them. I work on contract, and if my boss one day said forget the contract, you actually get 24% less than we agreed to, I would find a new job as soon as I could.
It is free and the players are doing just that right now...players aren't getting their contracts and what they want, so a lockout is in place, and guess what...some of the players are playing in other leagues around the world, making more than lockout pay.
To me that seems like the logical middle ground.
The NHL rejected the player's offer to new talks without any preconditions. It's going to be a long winter.
arturo7 said:bring on the scabs
Or just pay a ****ton less money for tickets to see the same (would-be scab) players in a league that isn't on strike.
MeatyPortion said:Done with the NHL for good.
Does that mean you'll come over and we can learn to make Meth?
Done with the NHL for good.
I am going to the Griffins on the 9th. Cheap crappy beer and crappy hot dogs for even more fun.
I tried convincing the wife to go to the Griffins on Friday. We could have stopped there on the way down to her mom's house to stay the night then a 15 minutes drive to the kid's dorm for the football game on Sat.
Ken and Mickey will be calling the game on Friday, and FSD will be showing the game.
Griffins are just about as cheap as Ferris tickets and they have the beer and everything. It's actually a HELL of a deal over NHL prices.
Enter your email address to join: