People are not Ready for the Massive Cap Increases

[TS Quint]

Lol, good post. No ability to reply.

Move on little boy.

I don’t have the time or crayons to reply to everything you said that was wrong and not cited. But you just stay here all day talking from ignorance.

 

[Ace]

I base my opinion on watching the games. Do you

No.

Because it isn’t 1986 and proven metrics exist to eliminate personal bias and not understanding what you're looking at.

My grandma thought that Doug Flutie was the best player in the NFL. Because she watched the games, you see.

You can have a wrong opinion on this…and you do….but your inability to see where that flaw comes from and then parading the flaw as a badge of honor is certainly a choice.

 

[Golden_Jet]

I base my opinion on watching the games. Do you?

No the poster strictly relies on numbers and nothing else, which is obviously wrong. Doesn’t use a combo of eye test and numbers.
Also if using eye test, live viewing is by far the preferred method.

 

[SirSamofHouseBennett]

It's nice to see the new PA boss actually being proactive and not like Fehr who was just looking for a reason to strike.

When was the last time the players were on strike? All the recent labour disruptions were owner lockouts.

Facts matter.

 

[SirSamofHouseBennett]

Fair enough. I would just like to see more flexibility for teams when players are no longer meeting the performance the team initially paid for (sans injury). I mean, I get the PA would start a riot over such a statement but I lean toward equality and fairness when it comes to contracts. If I don't meet the requirements of my clients' contracts, I would be in breach and could lose the contract or get sued. An athlete does well for a year, gets the big deal, and pulls the rug out from the team making roster moves difficult? Nah, that bothers me. Campbell, Jarry, Marleau, Murray, Clarkson, etc are all situations I wish the teams had more flexibility.

So what about fairness when a player is significantly underpaid or is your fairness only a 1 way street?

Guaranteed contracts cut both ways but some fans only want the upside guaranteed for owners.

 

[SEALBound]

So what about fairness when a player is significantly underpaid or is your fairness only a 1 way street?

Guaranteed contracts cut both ways but some fans only want the upside guaranteed for owners.

Totally agree, which is why I supported the owners position in 2013 of 5 year max lengths. I would also implement an "option" year at the end where an player can opt out a year early or the team can terminate a year early.

You're right though, it does cut both ways. Some players opt for the security though and that's their decision. But shortening max lengths and adding the option year would work towards balancing "fairness" if there are major discrepancies in pay vs performance. I would tend to believe that there are more circumstances of bad value contracts vs woefully undervalued contracts though.

Some examples: I bet the Penguins would opt out of the final year on Kevin Hayes and I bet Sam Bennett would have opted out of the last year of his undervalued contract.

There are about to be a ton of "value" contracts though, especially in three years. I feel bad for the players that opted for team friendly, long-term deals.

 

[Crazy Cizikas]

No the poster strictly relies on numbers and nothing else, which is obviously wrong. Doesn’t use a combo of eye test and numbers.
Also if using eye test, live viewing is by far the preferred method.

I lost my patience for stat watchers when my brother, who is a stat watcher, complained about a slump of Jordan Herbal. He complained about Eberle without even bothering to watch him or learning his name. He just went by what he read on paper (or screen, I guess).

 

[eojsmada]

When was the last time the players were on strike? All the recent labour disruptions were owner lockouts.

Facts matter.

Takes two to tango in any negotiation and when a labor dispute forces one into ceasing operations for any period of time, both sides are at fault. Fehr was never one to really start sitting down with the owners until the year that the CBA was ending. Fehr was fairly animus towards the owners and yes that was his style. So even if he didn't strike, he most certainly pushed the owners into a work stoppage.

As is evidenced under Marty Walsh, you can actually have discussions at any time and resolve disputes. And this era of "peace" was certainly not because of anything that Fehr did. It's because Fehr isn't there.

It's a de fide strike when Fehr is involved. Because he loves to antagonize owners to the point that the shutter doors and say, "See!! They're locking us out!", when in fact he exacerbated the issue to force that situation. He did it in baseball and they still haven't fully recovered from his past shenanigans.