Krys Barch-Hammered

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Krys Barch-Hammered

    Not much else to add other than Barch should give up on trying to write a novel on Twitter.

    http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/29/devils-barch-tweets-lockout-rant-takes-aim-at-nhl-owners/

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from RichHillOntario. Show RichHillOntario's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Not much else to add other than Barch should give up on trying to write a novel on Twitter.

    http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/29/devils-barch-tweets-lockout-rant-takes-aim-at-nhl-owners/

    [/QUOTE]


    True dez.  Impassioned and perhaps lubricated words from a guy making the league's minimum.  His perspective might be a lot different from those earing upwards of $1 million.  Still, I wouldn't mind that minimum. 

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    We're supposed to feel sorry for the half to 3/4ths who have to work for the next 50 years?

     

    Boo hoo hoo.  Yeah, the owners want 20% of your paychecks.  Instead of making $1.5M over the next two years, you'll make $1.2M.  How will you ever survive?  I mean, you sure do earn that money.  Your career high of four goals is almost as impressive as your career low of zero goals the following year.

    Skating Clowns complaining about money is as reasonable as low income people complaining about taxes.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from RichHillOntario. Show RichHillOntario's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    We're supposed to feel sorry for the half to 3/4ths who have to work for the next 50 years?

     

    Boo hoo hoo.  Yeah, the owners want 20% of your paychecks.  Instead of making $1.5M over the next two years, you'll make $1.2M.  How will you ever survive?  I mean, you sure do earn that money.  Your career high of four goals is almost as impressive as your career low of zero goals the following year.

    Skating Clowns complaining about money is as reasonable as low income people complaining about taxes.

    [/QUOTE]

    Agreed NAS.  I'm not decrying their earning power but you state exactly the reason why I'm struggling to empathize with players even in the lower end of the NHL's wage scale such as Barch never mind the guys pulling down money upwards of between $2 million and say $6 million.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bisson1. Show Bisson1's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    Aw. Shawn Thornton's punching bag only get's 750k a year. Poor dude.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from BadHabitude. Show BadHabitude's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    Say what you will about the skating stooge, and yes we are talking about income levels that most of us get no where near, but going from 750k a year to 600k a year (20% rollback) has got to affect him much more that a player earning even 1.5 mil a year getting rolled back to 1.2 mil a year.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bisson1. Show Bisson1's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    In response to BadHabitude's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Say what you will about the skating stooge, and yes we are talking about income levels that most of us get no where near, but going from 750k a year to 600k a year (20% rollback) has got to affect him much more that a player earning even 1.5 mil a year getting rolled back to 1.2 mil a year.

    [/QUOTE]


    That is true. These guys have a lot of money so they live in expensive homes, own expensive stuff... losing that much money probably has an effect on them. That being said, I still can't feel too bad for them.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from NeelyOrrBourque. Show NeelyOrrBourque's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    Here is when I start leaning on the owners side. When you have a player who complains about the owner making his money. As Barch, or anyone else who's either a superstar, or a borderline player. They've worked hard to get to where they are. I don't think anyone disputes that. However, have the owners not worked their tails off with an education to help them get where they are? How many owners just own a hockey team? I can't think of one. Down playing what the owners have done with their lives & complainng that they may have 4 or 5 homes is beyond belly aching! 

    Not one owner made these players to decide to play hockey for a living. That was the players choice. Look at Ken Dryden. He loved the game, but he also had the intelligence to stop playing at the hi-light of his career & further educate himself. I don't agree with the owners of wanting to continue to take from the players, because the owners, GM's or whoever can't come up with a way to make every team profitable. The players are there to play. Not be the guinea pigs of a "new way of doing things", because the owners don't like the system they fought for & they made the players pay for it the last time. Now, they're doing it again. And telling the players that it's either their way or no way AGAIN! 

    Having said that. The players are the ones who also need to realize that they're one of maybe 1-2% of the worlds population that get to make a fantastic living doing something that they're good at & love to do. And they can do it without an education. They can't continue to expect to make more money as an employee than an employer who's hired them.  I can't believe they don't see the injustice in that. (maybe that's lack of education). I think that if the player's got the owners to write down a # where most teams were profitable thru HRR. And if they hit that mark the players then can get more than 50%. This refusing to budge, because they gave in last time is beyond ridiculous. 

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from BadHabitude. Show BadHabitude's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    A popular myth is that a lof of wealthy people "earned" their money, the truth is that very few them, *VERY* few of them do.  They were born into it.  If not born directly into a lot of money, then connected with the means of sending them to the best schools & etc.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    I think Barch is looking at it this way. Right now  he has no check, when he does get one, it could be 20% lighter..Also, how much longer will he be in the NHL? A lost check to him means alot.

    He's also thinking, and this is the main reason for his tweet: It's a Saturday evening in the fall, what the heck am I doing home with 2 kids and a pregnant wife, I should be on the road and out with the boys..oh well, pour some more.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    I would have been fine with his statement if he stuck to the topic of "I should be playing hockey right now", but instead he had to throw in the billion statement.

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    when looking at this issue, many prefer to frame their opinion from an article like the one introduced on this thread.

    every day, we seem to be getting further, not closer to the root issue.  of course they're all spoiled brats...of course it's billionaires vs millionaires.  yes, skating clowns are hardly hurting,...yes, most NHLers don't have PHD's, and no...business owners aren't entitled to make boatloads of money, unless they're smart business owners.

    all of that stuff is irrelevant.

    If there are 30 Mcdonalds in America, and McDonalds as a whole, is doing incredibly well, should the employee pay scale be based only on the ones that operate poorly?  Isn't that an overly simplificated problem?

    how much anyone makes on either side, just confuses the issue. 

    In this case, we already have a cap.  in other capped sports leagues, the number is close to 50%.  If the accounting procedure is the same, pretty hard to argue hockey "deserves " to be more than that.  Problem is, if that's agreed to, we'll still have the same problem overall in 5 years.  there will still be money losers, and we'll probably see another lock out.  Merely cutting salaries isn't the answer.

      

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    I love the part where he says  starting a bottle of Porte   I really felt bad for him there.

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    He seems to show some resentment towards the really good players as well...You know, the ones he's paid to "protect', and the main reason he is in the NHL as well.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    In response to Bisson1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BadHabitude's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Say what you will about the skating stooge, and yes we are talking about income levels that most of us get no where near, but going from 750k a year to 600k a year (20% rollback) has got to affect him much more that a player earning even 1.5 mil a year getting rolled back to 1.2 mil a year.

    [/QUOTE]


    That is true. These guys have a lot of money so they live in expensive homes, own expensive stuff... losing that much money probably has an effect on them. That being said, I still can't feel too bad for them.

    [/QUOTE]


     “We make a lot of money, but we spend a lot of money too.” - Patrick Ewing.

    Still the benchmark for empathy-killing statements by professional athletes.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    Public perception and understanding problems begin when you compare the NHL to McDonald's.  NHL players are not treated like McDonald's staff.  McDonald's pays the lowest wage it can - typically minimum wage - because if you don't like it, you are welcome to go work elsewhere.  If you wanted the NHL to be like McDonald's, you'd be advocating for the NHL to say sayonara to any player who didn't accept a unilaterally imposed pay scale and bring up the next man in line who's willing to take $1.2M instead of $1.5.  In fact, they do do this for about 20% of their rosters, and some years, some teams are doing this with 50% of the roster - letting guys walk because a rookie on an ELC with a $1M salary can do the job or a manageable facsimilie of the job.

    You'd be better to compare the NHL to auto makers dealing with strong unions. 

    I'm also not convinced this is about guaranteed profitability or imposing conditions based on the weakest franchises being profitable.  I think it's more that all of the franchises have to be viable, and viable means making enough above operating expenses to at least service debts.  Viable also means they have to have the tools to be able to compete on the ice, which they can't do even if they draft perfectly if they lose players as RFAs or UFAs or just to budget constraints.  The best management won't make you competitive if the system works against you. 

    As for markets...who foots the bill to move franchises from a failed locale or a place where the tax payers refuse to pay for privately owned infrastructure?  The owners.  And who knows whether Portland, Seattle, Quebec, Hamilton, Saskatoon, Kansas City, or Tuktoyaktuk would be competitive financially?  KC and Quebec have previously gassed teams, and the Pacific NW, while strong markets for the WHL, might balk at the 500% increase in price to see an NHL game.  Keeping those weak 5-10 teams alive and viable means keeping 100-250 NHL jobs and makes the market for player services more competitive, which keeps salaries rising.  In other words, they have a huge interest in viability.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from skater68. Show skater68's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    We're supposed to feel sorry for the half to 3/4ths who have to work for the next 50 years?

     

    Boo hoo hoo.  Yeah, the owners want 20% of your paychecks.  Instead of making $1.5M over the next two years, you'll make $1.2M.  How will you ever survive?  I mean, you sure do earn that money.  Your career high of four goals is almost as impressive as your career low of zero goals the following year.

    Skating Clowns complaining about money is as reasonable as low income people complaining about taxes.

    [/QUOTE]


     

    The only people complaing are the super rich

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Public perception and understanding problems begin when you compare the NHL to McDonald's.  NHL players are not treated like McDonald's staff.  McDonald's pays the lowest wage it can - typically minimum wage - because if you don't like it, you are welcome to go work elsewhere.  If you wanted the NHL to be like McDonald's, you'd be advocating for the NHL to say sayonara to any player who didn't accept a unilaterally imposed pay scale and bring up the next man in line who's willing to take $1.2M instead of $1.5.  In fact, they do do this for about 20% of their rosters, and some years, some teams are doing this with 50% of the roster - letting guys walk because a rookie on an ELC with a $1M salary can do the job or a manageable facsimilie of the job.

    You'd be better to compare the NHL to auto makers dealing with strong unions. 

    I'm also not convinced this is about guaranteed profitability or imposing conditions based on the weakest franchises being profitable.  I think it's more that all of the franchises have to be viable, and viable means making enough above operating expenses to at least service debts.  Viable also means they have to have the tools to be able to compete on the ice, which they can't do even if they draft perfectly if they lose players as RFAs or UFAs or just to budget constraints.  The best management won't make you competitive if the system works against you. 

    As for markets...who foots the bill to move franchises from a failed locale or a place where the tax payers refuse to pay for privately owned infrastructure?  The owners.  And who knows whether Portland, Seattle, Quebec, Hamilton, Saskatoon, Kansas City, or Tuktoyaktuk would be competitive financially?  KC and Quebec have previously gassed teams, and the Pacific NW, while strong markets for the WHL, might balk at the 500% increase in price to see an NHL game.  Keeping those weak 5-10 teams alive and viable means keeping 100-250 NHL jobs and makes the market for player services more competitive, which keeps salaries rising.  In other words, they have a huge interest in viability.

    [/QUOTE]


    This is the reason that I'm afraid we won't have a season afterall. Can someone have the players understand or buy in to this ?

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Bisson1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BadHabitude's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Say what you will about the skating stooge, and yes we are talking about income levels that most of us get no where near, but going from 750k a year to 600k a year (20% rollback) has got to affect him much more that a player earning even 1.5 mil a year getting rolled back to 1.2 mil a year.

    [/QUOTE]


    That is true. These guys have a lot of money so they live in expensive homes, own expensive stuff... losing that much money probably has an effect on them. That being said, I still can't feel too bad for them.

    [/QUOTE]


     â€œWe make a lot of money, but we spend a lot of money too.” - Patrick Ewing.

    Still the benchmark for empathy-killing statements by professional athletes.

    [/QUOTE]


    Don't forget Ty Law -- "We all gotta eat".

     

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Don't forget Ty Law -- "We all gotta eat".

    [/QUOTE]


    Oo, and Sprewell's "I've got my family to feed!" on why he turned down 3yrs/$7M per.

    I am now moving this to a new thread...

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    In response to stevegm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    If there are 30 Mcdonalds in America, and McDonalds as a whole, is doing incredibly well, should the employee pay scale be based only on the ones that operate poorly?  Isn't that an overly simplificated problem?

    [/QUOTE]

    The employee scale should be based upon what the company decides, regardless of profit or loss.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    Not comparing the NHL to McDonalds.  Just looking at 2 business models and pointing out the fact that the McDonalds owners can't simply cut payroll(minimum wage legislation) to guarantee a better bottom line.  They have to look to other area's to make their business successful.  In fact just about any business category we can think of...doesn't "expect" the luxury of merely cutting salaries as the roadmap to the fiscal promised land.

    Anyway, I do realize that the mention of McDonalds in such a galvanized situation is probably feeding a fire rather than containing it..., 

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Bisson1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BadHabitude's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Say what you will about the skating stooge, and yes we are talking about income levels that most of us get no where near, but going from 750k a year to 600k a year (20% rollback) has got to affect him much more that a player earning even 1.5 mil a year getting rolled back to 1.2 mil a year.

    [/QUOTE]


    That is true. These guys have a lot of money so they live in expensive homes, own expensive stuff... losing that much money probably has an effect on them. That being said, I still can't feel too bad for them.

    [/QUOTE]


     â€œWe make a lot of money, but we spend a lot of money too.” - Patrick Ewing.

    Still the benchmark for empathy-killing statements by professional athletes.

    [/QUOTE]


    Don't forget Ty Law -- "We all gotta eat".

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Lawyer Milloy stating how Super Bowls didnt feed his family.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

    In response to stevegm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Not comparing the NHL to McDonalds.  Just looking at 2 business models and pointing out the fact that the McDonalds owners can't simply cut payroll(minimum wage legislation) to guarantee a better bottom line.  They have to look to other area's to make their business successful.  In fact just about any business category we can think of...doesn't "expect" the luxury of merely cutting salaries as the roadmap to the fiscal promised land.

    Anyway, I do realize that the mention of McDonalds in such a galvanized situation is probably feeding a fire rather than containing it..., 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Instead of it being the minimum wage cashiers or fry cooks, let's say it's management.  McD's doesn't need to give them raises of X% when the company has a good year.  If it has a bad year or two, it would be understandable if they cut management's salary.

    If the managers didn't like it, they could quit and go work somewhere else.

    I've worked for a company that struggled.  I took a pay cut.  I had always considered myself overpaid to begin with, so I lived well below my means in just such anticipation.

    Any NHL player that complains about losing 20% of their check is a spoiled brat.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: Krys Barch-Hammered

     

     

    As for markets...who foots the bill to move franchises from a failed locale or a place where the tax payers refuse to pay for privately owned infrastructure?  The owners.  And who knows whether Portland, Seattle, Quebec, Hamilton, Saskatoon, Kansas City, or Tuktoyaktuk would be competitive financially?  KC and Quebec have previously gassed teams, and the Pacific NW, while strong markets for the WHL, might balk at the 500% increase in price to see an NHL game.  Keeping those weak 5-10 teams alive and viable means keeping 100-250 NHL jobs and makes the market for player services more competitive, which keeps salaries rising.  In other words, they have a huge interest in viability.

    Nice excerpt of logic Book.  The players must realize the hazardous route of expansion by Mr. Bettman created the need for more players and a larger union.  As I say often "twin bedmates of disaster" in that both (owners and NHLPA) need to keep the lesser teams afloat especially in the deep south of the United States.  As for cities for expansion, go where there are hockey fans.  Hamilton (NYC has three teams so Toronto can have three me thinks), Quebec (was a failure primarily due to the weak Canadian dollar, not now! the Maine beaches are full of French Canadians),  I will let others speak of Seattle?  Anywho, the players like Barch are just not cutting the emotional compassioon in my heart, oh my goodness get over it.  Many out of college have huge payments and no job opportunities!  I need to go further and just say "victims of Bernie Madoff!  

    Shall I say it again, the players should not have their contracts rolled back, and the owners should be the only ones who divide the revenues.  So 50/50% is spot on for a compromise.  

    Lastly Book, the market place like the auto industry unions are not a factor in those industries after the Tarp bailouts, now unions in Boston and NYC are strong and viable.  Even so unions in the USA are what 10% of the working population, not a huge factor overall.   Certainly those union workers are not paid $600k for being a "skating body guard".  So Krys Barch needs to pick up some heavy emotional reading on how the rest of society is dealing with the financial "recession".  

    Per usual nice posting Book!

     

Share