Fire Luke Richardson

[Mrfenn92]

Rod the bod new head coach of the Chicago Blackhawks

 

[JaegerDice]

Rod the bod new head coach of the Chicago Blackhawks

If Brindamour is available, just back the brinks truck up for him.

You’ll have to, cause teams like the Leafs and Rangers will be happy to if they bounce early.

 

[JaegerDice]

It's goofy the Canes are even playing games with a very good coach. Just f***ing pay the man.

Ultimately, I think they will.

The owner is a businessman. He wants to get the best deal possible. At the end of the day, Rod will give his walk-away number, and they’ll pay it.

For all the perceived ‘drama’ over his contract, all reports are that Rod likes the situation in Carolina, including his boss(es), and wants to stay.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

Ultimately, I think they will.

The owner is a businessman. He wants to get the best deal possible. At the end of the day, Rod will give his walk-away number, and they’ll pay it.

For all the perceived ‘drama’ over his contract, all reports are that Rod likes the situation in Carolina, including his boss(es), and wants to stay.

It's a terrible way to do business in a league that's got a basis of mutual cooperation. Like why the f*** would anyone take a team friendly deal for a guy that's gonna haggle with my coach about an issue that doesn't effect the salary cap?

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

Vegas is cut throat and runs their team like a business. The difference is they do that to win. Carolina is haggling over Nickels. f*** that.

 

[JaegerDice]

It's a terrible way to do business in a league that's got a basis of mutual cooperation. Like why the f*** would anyone take a team friendly deal for a guy that's gonna haggle with my coach about an issue that doesn't effect the salary cap?

By that logic, every coach should be paid 10 million dollars a year cause there’s no cap.

Every contract signed is an attempt to measure and predict impact, whether there’s a cap or not.

Carolina has an internal calculus of how much their coach impacts their success, vs the players, the scouts, the analytics guys, etc.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

By that logic, every coach should be paid 10 million dollars a year cause there’s no cap.

Every contract signed is an attempt to measure and predict impact, whether there’s a cap or not.

Every coach isn't Rod Brindamour. You're making a jump that isn't based on any logic.

 

[JaegerDice]

Every coach isn't Rod Brindamour. You're making a jump that isn't based on any logic.

How much of Carolina’s success do you credit Brindamor with vs every other input?

How much of Vegas’ success do you credit Cassidy with vs every other input?

Are Vegas paying Cassidy 10 million a year just cause they can and he won? Or are they paying him around 5 million like just about every other coveted coach?

If you swapped Brindamor and Cassidy last season, does the success of their teams change?

Brindamor is a great coach that will get paid, but if you have an organizational philosophy of paying for value and never above, you’re not gonna start making exceptions cause ‘f*** it, we have the money and there’s no cap’

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

How much of Carolina’s success do you credit Brindamor with?

How much of Vegas’ success do you credit Cassidy with?

Cassidy has a history of getting a lot out of nothing goalies. He's a good coach and he's paid well for it.

Brindamour is a fantastic coach that should have one of the safest jobs in the league and he's having to make a stink over money because the owner has a history of being a cheap skate. He wants to be paid his due and he should be. This was an issue a few years ago because Dundon didn't want to pay assistant coaches.

I can't think of another coach other than Trotz in recent memory that delivered really good results and had such a public negotiation play out. It's a bad look.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

So many edits it's like KBS is back.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

Brindamour went from a league low 600k to 1.8 million. I don't think he's asking for the moon. Dundon is making this a problem. If he was offering market rate this isn't being talked about.

 

[JaegerDice]

Cassidy has a history of getting a lot out of nothing goalies. He's a good coach and he's paid well for it.

Brindamour is a fantastic coach that should have one of the safest jobs in the league and he's having to make a stink over money because the owner has a history of being a cheap skate. He wants to be paid his due and he should be. This was an issue a few years ago because Dundon didn't want to pay assistant coaches.

I can't think of another coach other than Trotz in recent memory that delivered really good results and had such a public negotiation play out. It's a bad look.

We accept Brindamor is a fantastic coach based on his work for a single team, even though that team has never won a game after the 2nd round under his watch.

Is it crazy that the organization he works for has a clear idea of how much he contributes to their success vs all the people responsible for scouting, drafting, developing, trading, etc?

I’d ask this for any team. Shouldn't they have an internal appraisal of how much the coach they’re paying is actually contributing?

As far as assistant coaches, how much is an assistant coach worth? How much are they paid on average, and how many wins do they provide?

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

We accept Brindamor is a fantastic coach based on his work for a single team, even though that team has never won a game after the 2nd round under his watch.

Is it crazy that the organization he works for has a clear idea of how much he contributes to their success vs all the people responsible for scouting, drafting, developing, trading, etc?

As far as assistant coaches, how much is an assistant coach worth? How much are they paid on average, and how many wins do they provide?

His results yea that's usually what you go by? Like you're advocating for a leaner meaner business model and that absolutely sucks for everyone that isn't a billionaire. Pro sports teams should be billionaire play things not for profit strip mining companies.

I didn't like Rocky when he was crying poor but he was a good owner because he paid everyone and he spent on the shit people didn't see. Panik talked about it after becoming a Blackhawk.

 

[WarriorofTime]

I dunno if Wirtz cried poor so much as said the Blackhawks were in the red while winning Cups, which may or may not be true and is probably more an accounting thing than anything else, especially with how the Blackhawks and Bulls owning the United Center 50/50 factors into tying revenue to Blackhawks.

Wirtz first revealed that the team was not profitable in private. “It’s going to take four (or) five years before we can actually get back in the black,” Wirtz said at an April 19 forum at the Economic Club of Chicago, according to a transcript. “And right now we’re still supporting the Blackhawks with our other Wirtz organizations.”

In a follow-up interview this week, Wirtz said that the Blackhawks ran out of cash several times last season. Each time, he received a memo, known as an internal capital call, in which the team requested money from Wirtz Corp., the Blackhawks’ parent company, to cover operating expenses. And at the end of the season, Wirtz said he double-checked that the playoffs did not cover those losses; the franchise remained in the red, the team’s accountant told him.

“We have multiple businesses and obviously we want every one to stand on its own,” Wirtz said. “And what you don’t want to do is manage one business from the profit of the other one.”

Compared with professional basketball, baseball and football, the economics of hockey are difficult.

The league operates under a 2005 revenue-sharing agreement. The way it works is that the teams that rake in the most income, generally regardless of expenses, subsidize the teams that generate the least.

A drawback is that it disqualified the Blackhawks, because of the size of the Chicago market, from receiving revenue sharing dollars.

The primary benefit is that it capped players’ salaries -- an owner’s largest expense.

“The collective bargaining agreement has been a major help, but by no means did it create a league where all teams were going to be profitable from that point forward, or even most of them, quite frankly,” said Marc Ganis, president of SportsCorp, a Chicago-based sports consulting firm.

Under the agreement, the more the Blackhawks earn, the more they have to share.

For instance, the Blackhawks keep ticket revenue from their regular-season home games. But for every playoff home game last season, the Hawks had to give the NHL at least 50 percent of what their gate receipts would have been at a regular-season United Center sellout.

And gate receipts are everything in hockey. Ticket sales typically account for up to half of a team’s income.

“You can technically lose money during the playoffs if you don’t raise your ticket prices” for them, Wirtz said.

 

[JaegerDice]

His results yea that's usually what you go by? Like you're advocating for a leaner meaner business model and that absolutely sucks for everyone that isn't a billionaire. Pro sports teams should be billionaire play things not for profit strip mining companies.

I didn't like Rocky when he was crying poor but he was a good owner because he paid everyone and he spent on the shit people didn't see. Panik talked about it after becoming a Blackhawk.

Right, but you say ‘his results’ like the team's success is solely the providence of the coach's genius, when we all know that's not the case.

How many Jack Adams award winners were out of work within a year or two? Should they have been paid based on 'results', or would the teams have been better off measuring exactly how much impact these heroes actually had on their team's success?

I don't have a problem with a team saying 'yeah, this is how things have been done forever, but what if we could be smarter about it'. Especially a team in a market that needs to be smart about how they spend their money.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

I dunno if Wirtz cried poor so much as said the Blackhawks were in the red while winning Cups, which may or may not be true and is probably more an accounting thing than anything else, especially with how the Blackhawks and Bulls owning the United Center 50/50 factors into tying revenue to Blackhawks.

If you honestly believe the Blackhawks were losing money while winning Cups we're never going to agree on the subject.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

Right, but you say ‘his results’ like the team's success is solely the providence of the coach's genius, when we all know that's not the case.

How many Jack Adams award winners were out of work within a year or two? Should they have been paid based on 'results', or would the teams have been better off measuring exactly how much impact these heroes actually had on their team's success?

I don't have a problem with a team saying 'yeah, this is how things have been done forever, but what if we could be smarter about it'. Especially a team in a market that needs to be smart about how they spend their money.

I'll side with millionaires over billionaires every single time. How much of the Canes success do you attribute to Rod? What do you think he should be asking for?

 

[BHawk21]

Do we know what Dundon is offering? Is that public knowledge?

 

[JaegerDice]

I'll side with millionaires over billionaires every single time. How much of the Canes success do you attribute to Rod? What do you think he should be asking for?

Depends entirely on the team.

For an example close to Blackhawks fans' hearts, I'll provide an example.

In the summer of 2015, the Leafs made Mike Babcock the highest-paid coach in history.

Forgetting what we know now about Q being a complete scumbag, in the summer of 2015, if Babcock had come to the Blackhawks and said, 'pay me 6 million dollars and I'll be your coach' would you have said yes if you were in charge of the Blackhawks? Was Babcock, great coach that he was, worth that 1.5 million increase over your current coach?

Of course not. The value to the Blackhawks was not there, as they already had a coach who had reached great success with the Blackhawks roster.

The fact that the Blackhawks would scoff at paying that money did not change the fact that Toronto, Buffalo, Detroit, and probably others were all willing to pay Babcock a certain number. Their calculus was different based on the perceived or projected value to their team. The fact that Q had achieved greater success than Babcock since 2010 at a lower number did not change the internal calculus of the teams looking for Babcock's services in 2015, nor did the teams falling all over themselves change the Blackhawks calculus regarding Q vs Babcock.

Similarly, I think the Blackhawks would have good reason to pay Brindamor more than Carolina. Their roster is weak enough that a good coach would have a greater impact on the result than a team like Carolina, where the quality of the roster and the performance of their most important players has a greater impact than motivation or Xs and Os.

Carolina has an internal calculus of how much impact and value Brindamor has on their team success. They have a dollar amount attached to that measured value.

I think Brindamor is one of the best coaches in the league. It's up to him if he wants to make less money in a good situation or more money in a different situation.

I think he chooses Carolina for roughly 4 million.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

Depends entirely on the team.

For an example close to Blackhawks fans' hearts, I'll provide an example.

In the summer of 2015, the Leafs made Mike Babcock the highest-paid coach in history.

Forgetting what we know now about Q being a complete scumbag, in the summer of 2015, if Babcock had come to the Blackhawks and said, 'pay me 6 million dollars and I'll be your coach' would you have said yes if you were in charge of the Blackhawks? Was Babcock, great coach that he was, worth that 1.5 million increase over your current coach?

Of course not. The value to the Blackhawks was not there, as they already had a coach who had reached great success with the Blackhawks roster.

The fact that the Blackhawks would scoff at paying that money did not change the fact that Toronto, Buffalo, Detroit, and probably others were all willing to pay Babcock a certain number. Their calculus was different based on the perceived or projected value to their team. The fact that Q had achieved greater success than Babcock since 2010 at a lower number did not change the internal calculus of the teams looking for Babcock's services in 2015, nor did the teams falling all over themselves change the Blackhawks calculus regarding Q vs Babcock.

Similarly, I think the Blackhawks would have good reason to pay Brindamor more than Carolina. Their roster is weak enough that a good coach would have a greater impact on the result than a team like Carolina, where the quality of the roster and the performance of their most important players has a greater impact than motivation or Xs and Os.

Carolina has an internal calculus of how much impact and value Brindamor has on their team success. They have a dollar amount attached to that measured value.

I think Brindamor is one of the best coaches in the league. It's up to him if he wants to make less money in a good situation or more money in a different situation.

I think he chooses Carolina for roughly 4 million.

I'd be upset with my team owner if they opted for a solution that gave eighty percent of the value for half the cost when the cost has nothing to do with the salary cap.

You were saying ten million. I think Rod comes in around five. That's about right based on market value. No idea on what assistant coaches make. If you're paying a premium for a really good coach you should be paying a premium for his guys.

 

[WarriorofTime]

If you honestly believe the Blackhawks were losing money while winning Cups we're never going to agree on the subject.

Did you have access to the books?

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

Did you have access to the books?

No. If you're winning Cups and losing money teams wouldn't cost a billion plus.

 

[JaegerDice]

I'd be upset with my team owner if they opted for a solution that gave eighty percent of the value for half the cost when the cost has nothing to do with the salary cap.

You were saying ten million. I think Rod comes in around five. That's about right based on market value. No idea on what assistant coaches make. If you're paying a premium for a really good coach you should be paying a premium for his guys.

This answer amounts to 'team do good, pay everybody involved what they ask for regardless of measurable impact'

There has to be more nuance than that.

No. If you're winning Cups and losing money teams wouldn't cost a billion plus.

Sports teams increase in value over time regardless of success 'on the field'. That's why they're such a popular investment among billionaires along with real estate.

 

[WarriorofTime]

No. If you're winning Cups and losing money teams wouldn't cost a billion plus.

Sports franchises aren’t solely valued on P&L. The prestige, closed off system and demand amongst billionaires play a big role as well. Ryan Smith didn’t pay $1.2 billion to relocate the Coyotes because they’re raking in cash hand over fist.

 

[kmwtrucks]

Did you have access to the books?

united Center joint venture was making money by leasing the UC to bulls and Blackhawks at fairly high rate since it did not have any public money and also got all the parking. all the suite Reveune and there are alot of suites at UC and all the other events. Blackhawks lost 10 mil but UCJV made wirtz 30 mil.