Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

TOMapleLaughs

Henrik Sedin and Kevin Bieksa Speak Out Against Owners: "Mind-Boggling."

58 posts in this topic

"I think from Day 1, this has fallen into what we really thought was going to happen," Sedin told the paper. "I don't know if they [owners] think they're dealing with kids or that we're stupid or think the fans are stupid. It's a little mind-boggling when you see what's coming out of their side. I want to hear a change, that they're actually going to give us something in return for the things we've given them.

"I doubt that may happen tomorrow [Tuesday] but it's a start. It's good to see that there are new owners coming into the meeting, but the bad thing is there are still some of the tight group that has been there since Day 1. That's a concern."

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just read the article on TSN.ca. Surprised to see Hank's comments but I would not read too much into it. Everyone is frustrated. These guys want to play hockey and both sides have legitimate concerns.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tsn originally put it up as Daniel im pretty sure.

Anyways, all of this is so talked out its insane. Regardless of how this lock out turns out, there wont be another one for a very , very long time.

This one was just bone dead stupid. They should have made the 50% deal last year while they were still playing.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tsn originally put it up as Daniel im pretty sure.

Anyways, all of this is so talked out its insane. Regardless of how this lock out turns out, there wont be another one for a very , very long time.

This one was just bone dead stupid. They should have made the 50% deal last year while they were still playing.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The owners aren't going to move unless they get everything they want. Power and money, that's all this is. It's sad to see the NHL owners stoop to this low of a level.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Isn't that just it though? The owners OWN the teams. It's the OWNER'S money, and it's the OWNERS that essentially keep people employed. Obviously they want their best interests looked after. You would have to be absolutely crazy to not want that if you've invested several hundred million dollars into your business. I don't understand why this is so hard for people to understand. If YOU were an owner, you'd be doing the exact same thing.
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tsn originally put it up as Daniel im pretty sure.

Anyways, all of this is so talked out its insane. Regardless of how this lock out turns out, there wont be another one for a very , very long time.

This one was just bone dead stupid. They should have made the 50% deal last year while they were still playing.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't that just it though? The owners OWN the teams. It's the OWNER'S money, and it's the OWNERS that essentially keep people employed.

Obviously they want their best interests looked after. You would have to be absolutely crazy to not want that if you've invested several hundred million dollars into your business.

I don't understand why this is so hard for people to understand. If YOU were an owner, you'd be doing the exact same thing.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only difference is players come out and make it seem as if they just want to play hockey and will settle for anything and will graciously accept it. Owners can say the same things the players are.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is interesting to analyze this lockout with a perspective on the recently released Forbes Magazine valuation of teams. Looking at the rankings by Forbes you can see that of the 30 teams in the NHL, 13 of those teams lost money last year! Those teams were:

1) San Jose Sharks= -0.9 million

2) Washington Capitals= -1.0 million

3) Nashville Predators= -3.4 million

4) Minnesota Wild= -3.9 million

5) Carolina Hurricanes= -9.4 million

6) St. Louis Blues= -10.0 million

7) Buffalo Sabres= -10.4 million

8) Anaheim Ducks= -10.8 million

9) Florida Panthers= -12.0 million

10) Tampa Bay Lightning= -13.1 million

11) New York Islanders= -16.0 million

12) Columbus Blue Jackets= -18.7 million

13) Phoenix Coyotes= -20.6 million

The other 17 teams all made a profit.

1) Los Angeles Kings= 1.8 million

2) New Jersey Devils= 2.8 million

3) Dallas Stars= 3.0 million

4) Colorado Avalanche= 4.5 million

5) Pittsburgh Penguins= 9.1 million

6) Philadelphia Flyers= 10.9 million

7) Calgary Flames= 11.0 million

8) Winnipeg Jets= 13.3 million

9) Boston Bruins= 14.2 million

10) Ottawa Senators= 14.5 million

11) Edmonton Oilers= 16.2 million

12) Chicago Blackhawks= 20.5 million

13) Detroit Red Wings= 20.8 million

14) Vancouver Canucks= 30.4 million

15) Montreal Canadiens= 51.6 million

16) New York Rangers= 74.0 million

17) Toronto Maple Leafs= 81.9 million

Of those 17 teams I would say only two of them (The New Jersey Devils and Dallas Stars) are in a precarious financial situation despite the profits. So basically at the end of the day you have half the league doing well and the other half not doing so well.

The players solution to this problem (for the most part) is to drastically increase revenue sharing among the teams. While I can see the need to share some of the revenue that the wealthy teams generate due to the existance of the money losing teams (i.e. ticket sales from those games) I don't think the owners should have to share more than that. The reason being is because sharing more money than that is utilizing resources inefficiently IMO.

The owners solution is to cut labor costs as a percentage. I don't have a problem with this as in both the NBA and NFL the owners get a higher percentage and as well in most hockey league in Europe (With the exception of the KHL) the players are paid less. This is not me bashing on the players I'm simply arguing they should get what the market dictates. In fact, keeping in tune with this idea is the fact that on contracting issues (Such as UFA age and Contract term) I support the players position that the UFA age should be lower and that players should be allowed to sign for as long as they and their owners agree to as long as the bogus years are eliminated.

So to summarize I believe the following ar compromises the owners and players have to make:

Owners:

1) Compromise on Revenue Sharing

2) Compromise on Contracting Issues

3) Compromise on Make Whole

Players:

1) Compromise on the Revenue Percentage Share they get

2) Compromise the length of the CBA (Usually the PA comes out with proposals that are shorter in length rather than longer)

3) Compromise on Salary Cap Floor (Not Sure if owners have asked about lowering it but I would think some of the poorer teams want this)

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're going to read into this it's Hank and Bieksa venting a bit of frustration over a lost season, not lamenting lost wages. As much as the Canucks have become negative poster boys for the NHL, these responses are well thought out, fair and measured. There's no griping about money, no bad talking the union and overall nothing that will result in any member of the team being thought less of by his peers.

To cry about spilled milk (money) at this point is disgusting, and pandering to the media is just embarrassing but what Henrik and Bieksa are saying is true. The argument people keep using is the players are the product so the owners make the rules, but how would you feel if your office job rolled back your pay because they didn't want to fulfill their previously stated financial obligation to you? The owners are hiding behind the Bettman scapegoat while the players are the ones taking the hit to the reputation, and for guys like the Sedins there aren't many years left.

It's understandable that the NHL wants to set a mandate for future contracts, but with the current contracts already in place the expectation that they should be honored is still a valid opinion. What he's saying is, regardless of who's present at the meeting the owners and Bettman share a common goal and that the only progress made has been for the owners to step out of the shadows and take a bit of the spotlight in all this.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is interesting to analyze this lockout with a perspective on the recently released Forbes Magazine valuation of teams. Looking at the rankings by Forbes you can see that of the 30 teams in the NHL, 13 of those teams lost money last year! Those teams were:

1) San Jose Sharks= -0.9 million

2) Washington Capitals= -1.0 million

3) Nashville Predators= -3.4 million

4) Minnesota Wild= -3.9 million

5) Carolina Hurricanes= -9.4 million

6) St. Louis Blues= -10.0 million

7) Buffalo Sabres= -10.4 million

8) Anaheim Ducks= -10.8 million

9) Florida Panthers= -12.0 million

10) Tampa Bay Lightning= -13.1 million

11) New York Islanders= -16.0 million

12) Columbus Blue Jackets= -18.7 million

13) Phoenix Coyotes= -20.6 million

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All owners want to maximize profits.

The reality though is that the majority of the owners continue to make retarded, greedy mistakes.

Then they want the players (the main targets) and the fans (not as much) to pay for their mistakes.

The Great owners maximize profits, while still keeping players and fans happy, or at least, "ok".

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally... Been waiting for some of the Canucks to say something. lol Would be very interested to hear what Kes has to say on the subject.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Henrik Sedin never fails to comman my utmost respect.

And really - a person who opens his own wallet wide and gives back the way that he does has every right to speak out as he has.

Not a single person in the NHL I'd rather have representing the home team.

Alleged losses:

1) San Jose Sharks= -0.9 million

2) Washington Capitals= -1.0 million

3) Nashville Predators= -3.4 million

4) Minnesota Wild= -3.9 million

5) Carolina Hurricanes= -9.4 million

6) St. Louis Blues= -10.0 million

7) Buffalo Sabres= -10.4 million

8) Anaheim Ducks= -10.8 million

9) Florida Panthers= -12.0 million

10) Tampa Bay Lightning= -13.1 million

11) New York Islanders= -16.0 million

12) Columbus Blue Jackets= -18.7 million

13) Phoenix Coyotes= -20.6 million

Forbes valuations:

1) San Jose Sharks= 223 million

2) Washington Capitals= 250 million

3) Nashville Predators= 167 million

4) Minnesota Wild= 218 million

5) Carolina Hurricanes= 162 million

6) St. Louis Blues= 130 million

7) Buffalo Sabres= 175 million

8) Anaheim Ducks= 192 million

9) Florida Panthers= 170 million

10) Tampa Bay Lightning= 174 million

11) New York Islanders= 155 million

12) Columbus Blue Jackets= 145 million

13) Phoenix Coyotes= 134 million

100 hundred million, 200 hundred million dollars... for money "losing" ventures...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.