Confirmed Signing with Link: [PHI] Jordan Weal (1 year, 650k)

[Mad Brills*]

Click to read more...

 

[1865]

He's got a little something, i'd like to see him get a chance this year. Top player for the Phantoms otherwise.

 

[Mad Brills*]

Oh, and 21/24 of arb cases left.

 

[Kamiccolo]

I remember him being pretty highly touted by Kings fans.

 

[Ollie Weeks]

The insane ones, perhaps.

 

[Yog S'loth]

I remember him being pretty highly touted by Kings fans.

"Highly hoped about" maybe.

 

[Maurice of Orange]

Ok deal for the Flyers getting Weal at 650k at 1 year. Didn't think Weal was worth anything over 700k.
Jordan Weal has 1 year to prove his worth with the Flyers, or in the AHL with the Phantoms.
Weal would be better served by starting the season with the Phantoms especially since the flyers signed Roman Lyubimov to a 1 year 2-way ELC.

 

[Leafs87]

Still quite the salary even in the AHL

 

[Maurice of Orange]

Still quite the salary even in the AHL

Weal's AHL salary is 200k that's if he gets sent down to the AHL

 

[Leafs87]

Weal's AHL salary is 200k that's if he gets sent down to the AHL

Yeah most people making 200k are generally considered very well off

 

[Hivemind]

Yeah most people making 200k are generally considered very well off

Most people also have careers longer than ~10-15 years.

 

[Stranger Danger]

Most people also have careers longer than ~10-15 years.

So, 200 k for a year for 10 years.... thats not well off?

 

[wesott11]

So, 200 k for a year for 10 years.... thats not well off?

id say well off means he wouldn't have to find another career after his hockey career is over. That's good money but nowhere near comfortable retirement level.

 

[TheCLAM]

So, 200 k for a year for 10 years.... thats not well off?

There's also a certain standard of living with being an athlete. It's good, but he's far from rich lol

 

[Hivemind]

So, 200 k for a year for 10 years.... thats not well off?

An AHL player won't make $200K for all 10 of those years. Even if they did, that's not enough money to retire a family on.

 

[CloutierForVezina]

An AHL player won't make $200K for all 10 of those years. Even if they did, that's not enough money to retire a family on.

200k for 10 years is like making 50k a year for 40 years*, which is certainly enough to retire a family on.

*Yes, technically the tax doesn't work out quite the same, it would be closer to ~40-45k for 40 years depending on retirement fund contributions, but you also get the chance to invest your money and have returns compounded and you get to avoid paying much in terms of mortgage interest. Pros and cons.

 

[wesott11]

200k for 10 years is like making 50k a year for 40 years*, which is certainly enough to retire a family on.

*Yes, technically the tax doesn't work out quite the same, it would be closer to ~40-45k for 40 years depending on retirement fund contributions, but you also get the chance to invest your money and have returns compounded and you get to avoid paying much in terms of mortgage interest. Pros and cons.

Also depends on where he lives/where he plans to retire. 50k a year where I live will get you squat. But either way, if high end AHL players save/invest wise during their hockey career they get a great jump towards a great retirement.

 

[Hivemind]

200k for 10 years is like making 50k a year for 40 years*, which is certainly enough to retire a family on.

*Yes, technically the tax doesn't work out quite the same, it would be closer to ~40-45k for 40 years depending on retirement fund contributions, but you also get the chance to invest your money and have returns compounded and you get to avoid paying much in terms of mortgage interest. Pros and cons.

Not even close to true. In your scenario, you have income for 40 years. Assuming you enter the workforce at age 20, that means you don't need to start using your retirement funds until age 60. You only have to live off your retirement funds for about 20 years or so, and you shouldn't have to pay for your kids during that span.

In the AHL player scenario, they have to start living off their retirement funds at age 30. They have to live off of them for about 50 years, including a decent chunk of that while they have kids under their roof.

 

[Panda Bear]

Sounds like dying alone by age forty is the way to go if you want to live comfortably after retiring from the AHL.

 

[voxel]

I remember him being pretty highly touted by Kings fans.

Another of a long line of undersized busts by them - Brandon Kozun, George 'Bud' Holloway, Oscar Moller, Justin Azevedo. It's fine where they were picked but the hype/hope was overly optimistic.

I feel the same way about the overagers the Leafs just picked.

 

[hototogisu]

Another of a long line of undersized busts by them - Brandon Kozun, George 'Bud' Holloway, Oscar Moller, Justin Azevedo. It's fine where they were picked but the hype/hope was overly optimistic.

I feel the same way about the overagers the Leafs just picked.

Holloway is 6', 200 lbs...not really "undersized".

 

[CloutierForVezina]

Not even close to true. In your scenario, you have income for 40 years.

Uh... what? How does this matter in terms of raw $?

$10 a day, every day for a week is the same amount of money as $70 on Sunday. It may take a lot more self control and restraint to not blow that $70 immediately, but it doesn't change the amount of money, which is my point.

Assuming you enter the workforce at age 20, that means you don't need to start using your retirement funds until age 60. You only have to live off your retirement funds for about 20 years or so, and you shouldn't have to pay for your kids during that span.

It's irrelevant when you get the money. The salaried worker at 50k/year for 40 years ends up with the same amount of money in his account as the 200k/year for 10 year AHL player*.

*Again, ignoring tax differences and ignoring the potential for massive compounded investment returns.

 

[rajuabju]

I remember him being pretty highly touted by Kings fans.

For where he was picked, definitely.

But at his size, its tougher to transition from the AHL to NHL. And in the Kings grinding system, he definitely was not the right fit.

 

[Rebels57]

With the Flyers sending a slew of players to the World Cup, Weal will get a chance to prove himself in preseason. If he doesn't produce, he will end up in the AHL with what should be a very good Phantoms squad.

 

[Hivemind]

Uh... what? How does this matter in terms of raw $?

$10 a day, every day for a week is the same amount of money as $70 on Sunday. It may take a lot more self control and restraint to not blow that $70 immediately, but it doesn't change the amount of money, which is my point.



It's irrelevant when you get the money. The salaried worker at 50k/year for 40 years ends up with the same amount of money in his account as the 200k/year for 10 year AHL player*.

*Again, ignoring tax differences and ignoring the potential for massive compounded investment returns.

Let me spell this out again for you.

In your scenario (40 year career), your retirement savings only have to pay for about 20 years of retirement (say, ages 65-85).
In the AHL player scenario, retirement savings have to pay for about 50 years of retirement (say, ages 35-85).

The raw amount you need to save for a 20 year retirement is LESS than the raw amount you need to save for a 50 year retirement. That should be painfully obvious to anyone.