Vanflyer Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 (edited) Part of me still feels like he his contract a bit to high, but it looks like he his finally getting on how to be wearing the "C" and and showing it on the ice. I am not sure I get the "too high" part. As FC pointed out, he plays in all situations and is deft at them all. Just to put it into perspective: Kessler: 8MPerry: 8.25MGetzlaf: 8.25MCrosby: 8.75MMalkin: 8.75MOvechkin: 9.5M Out of that list, who do you want on your team? All great players, but I am not sure any of them are any better than G (not withstanding Crosby). On the C thing, I will also disagree. I think G is a great leader (much better than Richards was). I like that he does not mince his words and I hearing the other players speak of him, it is clearly evident he is the leader in the locker room (of course with Timmo). Edited March 17, 2014 by radoran split from a Giroux thread Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pilldoc Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 I am not sure I get the "too high" part. As FC pointed out, he plays in all situations and is deft at them all. Just to put it into perspective: Kessler: 8MPerry: 8.25MGetzlaf: 8.25MCrosby: 8.75MMalkin: 8.75MOvechkin: 9.5M Out of that list, who do you want on your team? All great players, but I am not sure any of them are any better than G (not withstanding Crosby). On the C thing, I will also disagree. I think G is a great leader (much better than Richards was). I like that he does not mince his words and I hearing the other players speak of him, it is clearly evident he is the leader in the locker room (of course with Timmo). On the salary part, did not know what the others were making, so maybe I am wrong there. As far as wearing the "C" comment, either you did not get what i was saying or I did not make it clear enough. If that is the case ..my bad. What I was trying to say is that last year he looked tentative and unsure of himself (just my perception only). This year after the horrid start, I agree he has elevated himself both on the ice and in the locker room. I was actually praising him this year. Sorry if i did not make that clear enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 I am not sure I get the "too high" part. As FC pointed out, he plays in all situations and is deft at them all. Just to put it into perspective: Kessler: 8MPerry: 8.25MGetzlaf: 8.25MCrosby: 8.75MMalkin: 8.75MOvechkin: 9.5M Out of that list, who do you want on your team? All great players, but I am not sure any of them are any better than G (not withstanding Crosby). On the C thing, I will also disagree. I think G is a great leader (much better than Richards was). I like that he does not mince his words and I hearing the other players speak of him, it is clearly evident he is the leader in the locker room (of course with Timmo). He's definately a more complete player than Kessel, Perry, Malkin or Ovechkin. Being a center makes him more important than any of them other than Malkin. Malkin may have an edge in ability to take over a game...he's also one of the easiest superstars to get off his game I've ever seen. And of course he just plain doesn't show up half the time. When you put those numbers up, his contract seems fair. Like I said, I just don't agree with paying them that much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Like I said, I just don't agree with paying them that much. It sounds like you don't believe hockey players should be paid that much. What, in your eyes, is fair? How should salaries be arrived at? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 @brelic In comparison to football, basketball, and baseball players they are underpaid. I just don't think guys who play a game for a living should get paid 8,9,10 million a year. It's ridiculous. I don't know what's fair...I can pull a number out of a hat...I just don't think a Claude Giroux, as great as he is, is worth over $8 million dollars a year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 I just don't think guys who play a game for a living should get paid 8,9,10 million a year. It sounds like you are of the opinion that when people play a game, there is a limit to how much money they should be making. There might be a difference between how you and I see hockey as a "game", and the NHL. Would you agree that the NHL is not a game but a business? In that sense, it would seem that they're not playing a game the way you and I think of it. They're 'employees' in a $3 billion industry. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 It sounds like you are of the opinion that when people play a game, there is a limit to how much money they should be making. There might be a difference between how you and I see hockey as a "game", and the NHL.Would you agree that the NHL is not a game but a business? In that sense, it would seem that they're not playing a game the way you and I think of it. They're 'employees' in a $3 billion industry. you know, for lack of a better term - "this" One might argue that we shouldn't be paying $210 for ice row seats and, while I imagine few of us do, that's the going rate at the Big Bank Building. Cheapest seats in the place? Last row, upper level - $42. And those are STH prices. Players have fought hard to get their "fair" share of the revenue the NHL brings in. It's hard to begrudge them that. But when it comes down to it, it's the fans who are willing to pay that money and the sponsors who want access to those fans and the cable (and broadcast) companies who want to give their sponsors access to the fans at home's eyeballs that are the driving force in determining player salaries. Without revenue, there's no $8M player. "The game" exists in lots of places - college, juniors, minor leagues, mites, etc. You can watch "the game" many, many places. To watch the game performed at the highest level that's the going rate. The genie is out of the bottle. No sense trying to put it back in - the bottle doesn't even exist any more. "Since Saturday" Wayne Simmonds has as many points - and two more goals - than Giroux. And will be making less than half as much next season. Aren't stats fun? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 It sounds like you are of the opinion that when people play a game, there is a limit to how much money they should be making. There might be a difference between how you and I see hockey as a "game", and the NHL.Would you agree that the NHL is not a game but a business? In that sense, it would seem that they're not playing a game the way you and I think of it. They're 'employees' in a $3 billion industry. I used to go to Leaf games fairly often. I never missed the Flyers in town. But with players wages going into the stratosphere I mentioned, I just can't justify paying that amount for less than 3 hours of entertainment. I'll pay 20 bucks and watch junior. Maybe if i didn't live close to the worlds most expensive NHL tickets I might feel differently. Sure it's a business...and they're employees. They're still playing a game. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 I used to go to Leaf games fairly often. I never missed the Flyers in town. But with players wages going into the stratosphere I mentioned, I just can't justify paying that amount for less than 3 hours of entertainment. I'll pay 20 bucks and watch junior. Maybe if i didn't live close to the worlds most expensive NHL tickets I might feel differently. Sure it's a business...and they're employees. They're still playing a game. w.out the game of hockey there is no business. It is the chicken or the egg conundrum. I think, based on revenues, the players are making very good money and when you compare it to other sports I have no problem with it. The unfortunate part is where real fans are priced out of the games. In todays world you have a bunch of suits going to the games b/c they are the ones that can afford a ticket. The average joe is simply priced out of the games for the most part. I love the game but will not spend that amount of cash on season tickets or multpile games a year. No matter how you look at it all major professional sports players make too much money. In context, I dont think anyone should be making 25M a year to throw a baseball but that discussion has been over for a long time. It is only going to get worse... As FC stated: in the end they are still playing a game. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 w.out the game of hockey there is no business. It is the chicken or the egg conundrum. I think, based on revenues, the players are making very good money and when you compare it to other sports I have no problem with it. The unfortunate part is where real fans are priced out of the games. In todays world you have a bunch of suits going to the games b/c they are the ones that can afford a ticket. The average joe is simply priced out of the games for the most part. I love the game but will not spend that amount of cash on season tickets or multpile games a year. No matter how you look at it all major professional sports players make too much money. In context, I dont think anyone should be making 25M a year to throw a baseball but that discussion has been over for a long time. It is only going to get worse... As FC stated: in the end they are still playing a game. The sad part is that a lot of the suits don't even buy the tickets...they're given to them. It's why a lot of them don't really care there's a game going on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 The sad part is that a lot of the suits don't even buy the tickets...they're given to them. It's why a lot of them don't really care there's a game going on. Ugh.... that is worse. It is what it is I guess... I will enjoy the games in the comfort of my home w/ cold beer and a big screen TV w/ surround sound... lol! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 flyercanuck, on 17 Mar 2014 - 11:23 AM, said:But with players wages going into the stratosphere I mentioned, I just can't justify paying that amount for less than 3 hours of entertainment. I'll pay 20 bucks and watch junior. Maybe if i didn't live close to the worlds most expensive NHL tickets I might feel differently.Ok, I think I understand you now. You're annoyed that the cost of a hockey ticket makes you think twice about going to a game. I hear ya. I sometimes wish I were closer to an NHL town again, but I also know that I would probably find other (better?) ways of spending my entertainment dollars. I lived in Vancouver for 3 years and went to a handful of games. When I lived in Ottawa, I worked for the Senators for a number of years, so games were free for me. But when that stopped, I didn't set foot there again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 @brelic Ya, I'm not paying the players salaries personally...but as a fan they certainly effect my choosing not to go to the games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evilmonkey Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Ugh.... that is worse. It is what it is I guess... I will enjoy the games in the comfort of my home w/ cold beer and a big screen TV w/ surround sound... lol!im the same way thought it is a very nice treat when my work gives me great tickets to a leaf game and being in the arena atmosphere. I i personally would never pay the $200+ per ticket my work gives me to go see a game its crazy.....at least in toronto it is a buddy of mine moved out to Calgary and he was a big flames fan he laughed at how awesome tickets were there this one bar i think he said it was like $50-$60 you get a pitcher of beer a pound of wings a ticket to the game and a ride there from the bar and a ride back to the bar.....now thats awesome, im sure the seats wern't the greatest but still Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted March 18, 2014 Author Share Posted March 18, 2014 Sorry if i did not make that clear enough. No worries. I am as dense as they come. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted March 18, 2014 Author Share Posted March 18, 2014 Like I said, I just don't agree with paying them that much. I agree. Yet when you see baseball players getting contracts for 25M a year, it puts it into perspective. Granted they play a ton of games, but to make that money to stand around and watch grass grow half the time is appalling to me (particularly the ones that make Byfuglien look svelte). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted March 18, 2014 Share Posted March 18, 2014 I agree. Yet when you see baseball players getting contracts for 25M a year, it puts it into perspective. Granted they play a ton of games, but to make that money to stand around and watch grass grow half the time is appalling to me (particularly the ones that make Byfuglien look svelte). I notice that both you and @flyercanuck don't agree with paying players that much. Out of curiosity, with whom are you disagreeing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyerrod Posted March 18, 2014 Share Posted March 18, 2014 Even with the struggling Canadian dollar, revenues are expected to exceed 3.6 billion dollars. Revenue sharing means that the weaker canadian dollar gets them a larger slice of the revenue to compensate any short fall. So the bottom line is the owners and the players are both getting rich, it's just that after the last CBA, the Owners are keeping a larger percent to sqaubble amongst themselves about. One other thought i had the other day was what is done about teams like Buffalo who the last time I looked at capgeek was somewhere around 33 million for payroll? I am pretty certain that is below the cap floor...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted March 18, 2014 Share Posted March 18, 2014 Even with the struggling Canadian dollar, revenues are expected to exceed 3.6 billion dollars. Revenue sharing means that the weaker canadian dollar gets them a larger slice of the revenue to compensate any short fall. So the bottom line is the owners and the players are both getting rich, it's just that after the last CBA, the Owners are keeping a larger percent to sqaubble amongst themselves about. One other thought i had the other day was what is done about teams like Buffalo who the last time I looked at capgeek was somewhere around 33 million for payroll? I am pretty certain that is below the cap floor...... CapGeek has Buffalo at $57.2M They've buried players (Klesla (still counts) and Kaleta) and retained salary (Vanek, Miller, Pominville(!?)). They've also dressed a almost-team record 42 guys this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyerrod Posted March 18, 2014 Share Posted March 18, 2014 (edited) They've buried players (Klesla (still counts) and Kaleta) and retained salary (Vanek, Miller, Pominville(!?)).How the heck is that ALLOWED if the players have been traded? Does that mean they absorb the cost for another team keeping that team's cap hit lower and thus maintain being above the cap floor themselves? Edited March 18, 2014 by flyerrod Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted March 18, 2014 Share Posted March 18, 2014 How the heck is that ALLOWED if the players have been traded? Does that mean they absorb the cost for another team keeping that team's cap hit lower and thus maintain being above the cap floor themselves? It's a "feature" of the new CBA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted March 18, 2014 Author Share Posted March 18, 2014 I notice that both you and @flyercanuck don't agree with paying players that much. Out of curiosity, with whom are you disagreeing? FC and I are not in agreement (well sort of). His point was that Simmonds, Read and Giroux's contracts were all in favor of the club. I argued back that all three were market value. But we both derailed the topic on the astounding money that the players get paid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted March 18, 2014 Author Share Posted March 18, 2014 Even with the struggling Canadian dollar, I am not sure I get this. The Canadian dollar has been strong for a long time now. If your talking GNP / imports / exports perhaps (as the dollar goes up, the economy is impacted- particularly on goods). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brelic Posted March 18, 2014 Share Posted March 18, 2014 I am not sure I get this. The Canadian dollar has been strong for a long time now. If your talking GNP / imports / exports perhaps (as the dollar goes up, the economy is impacted- particularly on goods). The Canadian dollar is worth about $0.90US at the moment compared to being basically at par for the past few years. Hockey players get paid in $US regardless of where they play, so when our dollar goes down 10%, that's a big hit to the bottom line of Canadian squads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyerrod Posted March 18, 2014 Share Posted March 18, 2014 The Canadian dollar is worth about $0.90US at the moment compared to being basically at par for the past few years. Hockey players get paid in $US regardless of where they play, so when our dollar goes down 10%, that's a big hit to the bottom line of Canadian squads.Except for they get a larger percentage of the revenue to cover that unless I have that wrong. I remember that being part of the CBA. IMO that is a good thing that will ultimately help keep the teams in Canada. I don't know that I like teams being able to pick and choose which teams they will help(by keeping back salary) on a trade to maintain the cap floor for themselves and keep another team who might be over the limit except for this generous move..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.