The fish rots from the head down...

[True Blue]

Sather will walk out the door when Sather decides to walk out the door....and not one second earlier.

Pretty much as I fear.

 

[TheTakedown]

I don't understand this logic at all. The further you advance in the playoffs, the more games you play, the more playoff revenue. That should make Dolan want a team that plays all the way to the finals, not a round or two.

good point. I fear the issue is that Dolan wants the revenue NOW, and not later, so he prefers to sneak into the playoffs every year for a guaranteed 2 games of Playoff revenue...

Then again, listen to how silly I sound... 2 games... 2 guaranteed playoff games... If he built a good team, they could play up to 4 in each round... and if he got the SCF, those 2 games would would make up for several years of "2 games" single playoff rounds

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

good point. I fear the issue is that Dolan wants the revenue NOW, and not later, so he prefers to sneak into the playoffs every year for a guaranteed 2 games of Playoff revenue...

Then again, listen to how silly I sound... 2 games... 2 guaranteed playoff games... If he built a good team, they could play up to 4 in each round... and if he got the SCF, those 2 games would would make up for several years of "2 games" single playoff rounds

While not being privy to the #'s, I am going to guess that Dolan's playoff revenue over the past 8 years doesn't far outpace the multi-tens of millions of dollars Sather has thrown away by paying players to not play.

 

[Drewbackatu*]

While not being privy to the #'s, I am going to guess that Dolan's playoff revenue over the past 8 years doesn't far outpace the multi-tens of millions of dollars Sather has thrown away by paying players to not play.

That would be an interesting comparison.

 

[Tawnos]

While not being privy to the #'s, I am going to guess that Dolan's playoff revenue over the past 8 years doesn't far outpace the multi-tens of millions of dollars Sather has thrown away by paying players to not play.

The Rangers generate around $1.5m-$2m in revenue per playoff game. Let's just use the lower estimate for fun.

32 home playoff games in Sathers tenure. $48m in revenue.

$3.33m for Drury. $8.33m for Redden. It will be $18m for Richards. Not sure what Holiks buyout was. Not including him, $29.7m in buyouts. $48m outpaces that by a lot.

Then again, you also have Reddens time in Hartford, which we paid $13m for.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

The Rangers generate around $1.5m-$2m in revenue per playoff game. Let's just use the lower estimate for fun.

32 home playoff games in Sathers tenure. $48m in revenue.

$3.33m for Drury. $3.33m for Redden. It will be $18m for Richards. Not sure what Holiks buyout was. Not including him, $24.7m in buyouts. $48m outpaces that by a lot.

Then again, you also have Reddens time in Hartford, which we paid $13m for.

Yes, was also incorporating players that were paid millions just to play in Hartford. Redden is the biggest example, but there have been plenty of others.

Dolan is not much of a pragmatist. I would venture to guess hes not fully aware of the Richards hammer that will be coming down.

 

[Tawnos]

Yes, was also incorporating players that were paid millions just to play in Hartford. Redden is the biggest example, but there have been plenty of others.
Dolan is not much of a pragmatist. I would venture to guess hes not fully aware of the Richards hammer that will be coming down.

Personally, I don't include any of the other ones. Every team has 1 way contracts for borderline type players that end up in the minors. That's just part of running a hockey team in this era. The only one I might consider adding would be Todd White. Guys like Rissmiller, etc don't really count.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

The Rangers generate around $1.5m-$2m in revenue per playoff game. Let's just use the lower estimate for fun.

32 home playoff games in Sathers tenure. $48m in revenue.

$3.33m for Drury. $8.33m for Redden. It will be $18m for Richards. Not sure what Holiks buyout was. Not including him, $29.7m in buyouts. $48m outpaces that by a lot.

Then again, you also have Reddens time in Hartford, which we paid $13m for.

The $48M is not what they clear after factoring in all of the other variable costs associated with keeping MSG operational for those games.

 

[Jersey Girl]

The Rangers generate around $1.5m-$2m in revenue per playoff game. Let's just use the lower estimate for fun.

32 home playoff games in Sathers tenure. $48m in revenue.

$3.33m for Drury. $8.33m for Redden. It will be $18m for Richards. Not sure what Holiks buyout was. Not including him, $29.7m in buyouts. $48m outpaces that by a lot.

Then again, you also have Reddens time in Hartford, which we paid $13m for.

Also you have to consider that $1.5m in revenue per playoff game is just that...revenue. There are costs to open and run the Garden for a night that would go against the revenue. Nobody has any idea what that is, but if I would have to guess it would be somewhere between $100,000 - $500,000.

 

[McRanger]

I don't understand this logic at all. The further you advance in the playoffs, the more games you play, the more playoff revenue. That should make Dolan want a team that plays all the way to the finals, not a round or two.

Since the lockout only Pittsburgh, Boston and Philly have played more east playoff games than the Rangers. In the west Detroit, SJ and Chicago have played more games. Anaheim has played one more game. Vancouver has played the same amount.

The Rangers have played more playoff games than NJ, Washington, Ottawa, Montreal, Los Angeles, Buffalo, Nashville, Carolina, Dallas, Tampa, Phoenix, Calgary, Colorado, Edmonton, St. Louis, Minnesota, Islanders, Toronto, Florida, Atlanta/Winnepeg, and Columbus.

The Rangers have played the same amount of playoff games as St. Louis, Minnesota, the Islanders, Toronto, Florida, Atlanta/Winnipeg and Columbus combined.

Sather may be the devil, but he is making money for Dolan.

 

[Jersey Girl]

Since the lockout only Pittsburgh, Boston and Philly have played more east playoff games than the Rangers. In the west Detroit, SJ and Chicago have played more games. Anaheim has played one more game. Vancouver has played the same amount.

The Rangers have played more playoff games than NJ, Washington, Ottawa, Montreal, Los Angeles, Buffalo, Nashville, Carolina, Dallas, Tampa, Phoenix, Calgary, Colorado, Edmonton, St. Louis, Minnesota, Islanders, Toronto, Florida, Atlanta/Winnepeg, and Columbus.

The Rangers have played the same amount of playoff games as St. Louis, Minnesota, the Islanders, Toronto, Florida, Atlanta/Winnipeg and Columbus combined.

Sather may be the devil, but he is making money for Dolan.

I don't disagree with anything you said....except perhaps the last line

As someone just pointed out, the 'dead' money Sather has cost Dolan with stupid contracts and the resulting buyouts is in the ballpark of all the money Dolan has made on playoff games during Sather's tenure here.

 

[Tawnos]

The $48M is not what they clear after factoring in all of the other variable costs associated with keeping MSG operational for those games.

Also you have to consider that $1.5m in revenue per playoff game is just that...revenue. There are costs to open and run the Garden for a night that would go against the revenue. Nobody has any idea what that is, but if I would have to guess it would be somewhere between $100,000 - $500,000.

That was supposed to be earnings, not revenue. The team earns about $2m in ticket revenue alone for each playoff game.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Personally, I don't include any of the other ones. Every team has 1 way contracts for borderline type players that end up in the minors. That's just part of running a hockey team in this era. The only one I might consider adding would be Todd White. Guys like Rissmiller, etc don't really count.

Fine. The greater point here, I think, is that the amount of playoff revenue generated isn't enough to overlook Sather's other massive financial blunders.

Dolan seems drawn to guys who portray themselves as big shots (i.e. Sather and Isiah Thomas). Meanwhile, Glen Grunwald, gets the ax after fielding the best Knicks team in almost 15 years. Theres no rhyme or reason to why Sather has kept his job -- it certainly doesnt have much to do with playoff revenue.

 

[McRanger]

1.5 to 2 million is low. They probably surpass 2 million just on ticket sales. When you factor in concessions and the arena/tv advertising money they make and take out operating costs they are probably closer to 3 million. Dolan also gets money for airing away playoff games.

I would be surprised if the Rangers didn't generate over $100 million since the lockout in playoff revenue.

There are likely not many teams that have made more.

 

[Tawnos]

1.5 to 2 million is low. They probably surpass 2 million just on ticket sales. When you factor in concessions and the arena/tv advertising money they make and take out operating costs they are probably closer to 3 million. Dolan also gets money for airing away playoff games.
I would be surprised if the Rangers didn't generate over $100 million since the lockout in playoff revenue.
There are likely not many teams that have made more.

The team has to pay the NHL around $500k for their operations during each playoff game. That's in addition to arena operations. As I said, the $1.5m-$2m was intended to be earnings, rather than revenue.

 

[Tawnos]

Fine. The greater point here, I think, is that the amount of playoff revenue generated isn't enough to overlook Sather's other massive financial blunders.

Dolan seems drawn to guys who portray themselves as big shots (i.e. Sather and Isiah Thomas). Meanwhile, Glen Grunwald, gets the ax after fielding the best Knicks team in almost 15 years. Theres no rhyme or reason to why Sather has kept his job -- it certainly doesnt have much to do with playoff revenue.

I agree that playoff revenue alone isn't enough. However, the team has been massively successful financially since the lockout. Remember that Sather isn't just the GM, he's also the President... and that comes with other responsibilities that include generating revenue from the team. From a financial perspective, Sather has been downright phenomenal running the Rangers ship over the last 8 years, financial hits from bad personnel decisions or not.

 

[McRanger]

I don't disagree with anything you said....except perhaps the last line

As someone just pointed out, the 'dead' money Sather has cost Dolan with stupid contracts and the resulting buyouts is in the ballpark of all the money Dolan has made on playoff games during Sather's tenure here.

He has burnt a ton of money on idiotic signings.

But the team has made a ton of money besides that. Just looking at playoff revenue alone they've probably doubled whatever money they've wasted.

Having a team that makes the playoffs means higher ticket prices during the regular season as well, plus higher "real" attendance which increases concessions and merchandise sales and increases ad revenue from the arena and television.

Thats not to say a better GM couldn't make more. But Dolan is a bottom line guy and I am pretty sure his bottom line is being met.

First step in ditching Sather is having that change. IMO anyway.

The team has to pay the NHL around $500k for their operations during each playoff game. That's in addition to arena operations. As I said, the $1.5m-$2m was intended to be earnings, rather than revenue.

I actually meant earnings, or more specifically EBT.

Yeah the NHL takes a nice chop out of the ticket sales. Operating costs are probably more than covered by concessions and merchandise sales. I couldn't even guess at what they make off arena advertising and promotions but I would guess they are pretty solid. Are you counting TV money as well?

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

Since the lockout only Pittsburgh, Boston and Philly have played more east playoff games than the Rangers. In the west Detroit, SJ and Chicago have played more games. Anaheim has played one more game. Vancouver has played the same amount.

The Rangers have played more playoff games than NJ, Washington, Ottawa, Montreal, Los Angeles, Buffalo, Nashville, Carolina, Dallas, Tampa, Phoenix, Calgary, Colorado, Edmonton, St. Louis, Minnesota, Islanders, Toronto, Florida, Atlanta/Winnepeg, and Columbus.

The Rangers have played the same amount of playoff games as St. Louis, Minnesota, the Islanders, Toronto, Florida, Atlanta/Winnipeg and Columbus combined.

Sather may be the devil, but he is making money for Dolan.

Just to continue to expand on this RE playoff revenue vs success:


I ran the numbers last year before the playoffs (so it does not include 2013).

Rangers were 9th in league in post lockout playoff games played at 56. They made the playoffs 6 of 7 seasons. 4 other teams did this (NJD, PIT, PHI, and NSH). 2 teams (DET and SJ) went 7 for 7. Stemming from their ability to get in, they are tied for 10th in post lockout playoff wins, and tied for 10th with 6 series won.

Unfortunately, when you factor in number of appearances these stats (not shockingly) look less rosy. With an average of 9.3 games played or appearance, the Rangers rank 19th. Their winning % at 0.446 puts them at 18th. Again not shocking, but it is obvious that getting to the dance has been the org's top goal.

I did a basic weighted average of a team's chance to make the POs and their winning % in the POs to come up with a "success factor" or basic likelihood of winning a Cup. Obviously there are way more variables than this. Weighted it 80% to win % and 20% towards playoff make rate - since winning matters way more than the opportunity of getting in.

Using this the Rangers ranked 8th in my "success factor". Really buoyed by the number of times there has been an opportunity for "anything to happen".

There have been 7 unique Cup winners from 2006-2012. Of the top 7 of my success rank, 4 have actually win the Cup - DET (#1 rank), PIT (2), ANA (5), and BOS (6). Of the other 3 Cup winners, 2 would absolutely be higher in the "success rank" if we were looking at the last few seasons and discounting their rebuilding years - CHI and LAK. The last Cup winner, CAR is the only team to lead credibility to the "anything can happen" theory as they have only made the POs twice but have gone relatively deep each time.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

That was supposed to be earnings, not revenue. The team earns about $2m in ticket revenue alone for each playoff game.

Gotcha. I have never actually thought about the actual numbers. Just make sure you are building in confetti/streamer costs. Could be a boatload.

 

[McRanger]

Just to continue to expand on this RE playoff revenue vs success:


I ran the numbers last year before the playoffs (so it does not include 2013).

Rangers were 9th in league in post lockout playoff games played at 56. They made the playoffs 6 of 7 seasons. 4 other teams did this (NJD, PIT, PHI, and NSH). 2 teams (DET and SJ) went 7 for 7. Stemming from their ability to get in, they are tied for 10th in post lockout playoff wins, and tied for 10th with 6 series won.

Unfortunately, when you factor in number of appearances these stats (not shockingly) look less rosy. With an average of 9.3 games played or appearance, the Rangers rank 19th. Their winning % at 0.446 puts them at 18th. Again not shocking, but it is obvious that getting to the dance has been the org's top goal.

I did a basic weighted average of a team's chance to make the POs and their winning % in the POs to come up with a "success factor" or basic likelihood of winning a Cup. Obviously there are way more variables than this. Weighted it 80% to win % and 20% towards playoff make rate - since winning matters way more than the opportunity of getting in.

Using this the Rangers ranked 8th in my "success factor". Really buoyed by the number of times there has been an opportunity for "anything to happen".

There have been 7 unique Cup winners from 2006-2012. Of the top 7 of my success rank, 4 have actually win the Cup - DET (#1 rank), PIT (2), ANA (5), and BOS (6). Of the other 3 Cup winners, 2 would absolutely be higher in the "success rank" if we were looking at the last few seasons and discounting their rebuilding years - CHI and LAK. The last Cup winner, CAR is the only team to lead credibility to the "anything can happen" theory as they have only made the POs twice but have gone relatively deep each time.

Don't mistake what I wrote for some "I am happy with the teams successes" post.

I was simply talking about money.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

Don't mistake what I wrote for some "I am happy with the teams successes" post.

I was simply talking about money.

No I hear you. To your point if anything when you look at the actual stats it is clear that the Rangers are doing well at getting in and playing games by keeping most matchups close - aka bringing in revenue.

Not surprising. But not encouraging that management has the stones to do what it takes to do what we all want which is compete for a Cup.

 

[Tawnos]

No I hear you. To your point if anything when you look at the actual stats it is clear that the Rangers are doing well at getting in and playing games by keeping most matchups close - aka bringing in revenue.
Not surprising. But not encouraging that management has the stones to do what it takes to do what we all want which is compete for a Cup.

The reality of the matter is that, despite our overall feeling of rooting for an inept organization that comes from the post-WWII, pre-expansion teams, the fact is that the Rangers have been a very successful organization since the late-60s. Only one team wins the Cup every year and we've only won one in that span and we've had one awful stretch. If you take out the Dark Years, the Rangers have missed the playoffs 5 times in the other 38 years and made it beyond the 1st round in 20 seasons. Even 12 times in 45 years is a pretty good success rate. 3 Cup Finals. 7 more times where they were only one round from the finals (3 2nd round appearances in the 70s when there were only 3 rounds). This team today has it's issues, but the org as a whole has been pretty good, for the most part.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

I agree that playoff revenue alone isn't enough. However, the team has been massively successful financially since the lockout. Remember that Sather isn't just the GM, he's also the President... and that comes with other responsibilities that include generating revenue from the team. From a financial perspective, Sather has been downright phenomenal running the Rangers ship over the last 8 years, financial hits from bad personnel decisions or not.

Do the Rangers make money because of Glen Sather? Or do they make money because they are an 87 year old institution with a very loyal fanbase within one of the biggest cities of the world?

The only thing Dolan has proven is that he can hire a guy who hasnt had his hand on the pulse of the NHL in 25 years, and still make oodles of money. If he wasn't handed the keys to the Garden thanks to Daddy, he might actually possess the drive to hire a better GM, which would make him even more money.

 

[Jersey Girl]

Do the Rangers make money because of Glen Sather? Or do they make money because they are an 87 year old institution with a very loyal fanbase within one of the biggest cities of the world?

Great point.

If the team can be financially successful with Sather in charge, imagine how successful they would be with a competent GM. A GM who can field an actual annual Stanley Cup contender, who does not have to constantly go to Dolan to ask him to fund tens of millions of dollars in writeoffs for stupid signings that need to be rectified to field a decent team under the salary cap.

 

[Joe11]

Do the Rangers make money because of Glen Sather? Or do they make money because they are an 87 year old institution with a very loyal fanbase within one of the biggest cities of the world?

The only thing Dolan has proven is that he can hire a guy who hasnt had his hand on the pulse of the NHL in 25 years, and still make oodles of money. If he wasn't handed the keys to the Garden thanks to Daddy, he might actually possess the drive to hire a better GM, which would make him even more money.

Agree, and from what I've read about Dolan, the profit is insignificant to him, compared to the money cow that is Cablevision. He was given the Knicks & Rangers by his father as a toy, and to keep him away from the big money makers.