The Continuing Chronicles Of Jay Feaster's Incompetence

[Plubby]

You're the one being a condescending ass, Sean. Just because we disagree on this "players are greedy" point, doesn't mean i'm being an ass. I've raised my points calmly without the need to attack you as a person...Unless you were really that offended by the whole Bayless thing.

That list of values is cute, but the CBA issue is about splitting revenues, not values. So your 232 million dollar player comment, like your previous post #297, is cute yet not really germane to any point I made. LA were 11th not 10th, at 101 million. I believe that's about how much Kovalchuk's contract was, and two players have signed a contract for more than that amount (Weber and Ovechkin).

Okay, I found three players. You said we could have a discussion once I did but I daresay you're just going to talk down to me again because you've had nothing pertinent to add in regards to my point I initially made - and if I may borrow your analogy from earlier - i'll just see more about the owners' monopoly on apple juice to explain why the players have a problem with their allotment of oranges. Sure it's all damning fruit-based statistics and it doesn't paint the owners out to be nice people but it's something very much next to the problem.

It's also not helping any sort of adult-like discussion when you address me as if I think that the players should take the league's first offer and that Bettman has been in the right all along. All I've been saying these last few posts is that the players are hypocritical and also being greedy. Never that the owners are not displaying greed as well, and especially not that the owners are right.

[Toe]

You guys both suck. Both of you are not mentioning the Toronto Maple Leafs enough.

[SeanDMan]

You are denser than a black hole aren't you.

[SeanDMan]

[Plubby]

And you maintain this lockout is the player's fault.

I did not say that. I quite pointedly said in my last post that I have not said that. You quoted me saying that I have not said that and replied with everything in it was wrong. No it wasn't. You are wrong here, point-blank. This statement is false, what you claim did not happen.

(For the fourth time). I said I feel the players are being hypocritical when they call the owners greedy. That's all I ever said in the first post, and it's all i've ever maintained throughout. You've given me a lot of information as to why the players don't make as much money as the owners (and they damn-well better not make even close to as much!) and that is all well and fair enough. You haven't addressed, at all, why that single statement I made was wrong. The closest I can get to any think directly to this was from your Forbes list, where I can draw the conclusion that relative to the value of a club, a player can't be considered greedy in this scenario.

Okay, we'll take this slowly. Do you think what i've bolded is wrong?

[caucasianheat]

This is a gross oversimplification of the issue. To say that, by talking about the complexities of why they don't agree is SPIN, is just you being stupid, and I'm sorry, but you are being stupid. If you don't understand what's going on then that's fine but please shut up instead of saying "HEY I'M PLUBBY AND HERE IS HOW WRONG I AM" as if you actually do. There's nothing wrong with not being that smart Plubby and honestly you should probably be used to it by now, so I dunno why you're all indignant all of a sudden. :\

However, it is a 472 page document and it doesn't have any pop-out colored drawings or scratch and sniff panels like the books you normally read.

(and I know you have trouble with reading things that have actual words, but if you try I bet you can make it through a few pages)

EVERYTHING YOU HAVE SAID HAS BEEN WRONG.

He did say you would talk down to him more.

I like it better when this is one of the few threads where people don't talk to each other like absolute garbage, so let's make that a new goal. In the spirit of the CBA theme, we'll call it "good faith" discourse!

[SeanDMan]

I've never addressed whether I think the players are greedy or not. I think it's ancillary to the real issues of the lockout.

[Plubby]

I couldn't agree more, I was just saying I felt they were greedy (and of course the other half of it where I thought your orange analogy went too far). So why are you so angry at me?

[SeanDMan]

You accused me of being hyperbolic and spinning, ignored every single fact, quote, and statistic I brought into the thread, and then continued to say "the players are greedy" when that had nothing to do with anything I was saying. You proceeded to misunderstand, misread, or ignore everything I said in response to your non-response and at that point I just got frustrated because you just kept providing the same irrelevant response.

[Plubby]

So you still think that your orange analogy was accurate, and that it was not hyperbolic at all?

[SeanDMan]

It's an analogy, it's going to be slightly hyperbolic. But it's relevant to my point.

The players are signing contracts that say they can get a certain percentage of revenue. But, there are 25 pages of exceptions and definitions limiting what percentage of hockey related revenues can be truly considered to be the result of hockey. In addition to that, not only are their paychecks not based on actual money, but they're also delivered with escrow deductions in the event that the performance of the industry is not as strong as it was projected to be.

You never directly answered my question in that post, by the way. How long would you work there? Let's say you signed a contract that said you got paid 10 of something. However, they later came back to you and said that since they do business outside of their normal channels, they said the eligible revenue wasn't quite what they'd figured it would be, so you'd be getting 9 instead, oh, and since they couldn't predict how the future would fare for them, they'd actually only be paying you 7, and you could maybe get that 2 back if everything works out okay.

So tell me, Plubby, would you work there for 5 years?

[Plubby]

I'm fine with the escrow. I actually have a not-dissimiliar situation in my current job.

...Also, if you're talking oranges (as per your analogy) isn't the situation that my contract would 10 oranges (well 8 and maybe 2 later) but that if a farm harvests 1000 oranges then the players are supposed to have 570 split up amongst them but the owners are claiming that only (say) 700-800 of the 1000 oranges are eligible to be split? I'm yet to read anything that says that the amount a player receives is reduced because of HRR, simply that it theoretically reduces the total pool of money that the players could receive.

...But by all means if you have something then please link me, I'd love to read it.

[SeanDMan]

As I said, exclusions, maximum percentages, and exceptions are all denoted under the section HRR, which is 25 pages, from the 2005 NHL CBA. I linked it above. That is numbers already being excluded and doesn't include the proposed changes to HRR the owners want for a 2013 CBA, which I also posted previously.

[Plubby]

So if I sign for 10, where is the 1 going to? I get the 2 is escrow, but what is the 1?

[SeanDMan]

It's from the removed HRR. You sign a contract that says you get fifty percent of twenty. That's ten. But the owners point to the fine print in the aforementioned section of the CBA and say that twenty is actually eighteen, so you really only get nine. That's why the concept and definition of hockey related revenue much more important than simply the split of revenue.

[Cactus Drags]

I don't really get the whole escrow thing, but this thread's helping a bit, cheers.

[Ruki]

I like hockey

Thinking of checking out a few Hitmen games this year. $20 for seats in the 200s? $30 for lower bowl? Yes please!

[TGWL]

I don't really get the whole escrow thing, but this thread's helping a bit, cheers.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/understanding-the-nhls-escrow-system/article4565780/

And in case there's no season, checks will still be handed out.

Example: last season players had 8.5 % from players salaries withheld.

"Players get paid 13 times during the season, so Tampa Bay Lightning centre Vincent Lecavalier, who makes $10 million, will lose $769,000 gross per paycheque. He’ll get about $850,000 back from escrow."

[Mountainous Cleavage]

NEW YORK -- The National Hockey League announced today the cancellation of the 2012-13 regular-season schedule through October 24. A total of 82 regular-season games were scheduled for Oct. 11 through Oct. 24.

The cancellation was necessary because of the absence of a Collective Bargaining Agreement between the NHL Players' Association and the NHL.

- http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=642785

And so it truely begins..

[Ruki]

Honestly? I'm expecting the season to be completely toast. Just let the Leafs draft 1st overall (we are the only team to not make the playoffs since the last lockout ) and look ahead to the 2013-2014 season.