Mark Recchi Logic

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

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

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

    The players in their 30s at the ends of their careers won't get this money back later.

    [/QUOTE]


    Any chance they'd get rollback cash returned at a later date and if not, why is it any different to you? Cash is cash.

    [/QUOTE]


    Yes, money is money.  Temmu Selanne was slated to earn $4.5M this season.  Roll it back 20% and he's at $3.6M.  Cancel the season and he's at $0M.

    He won't be getting that at a later date.

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

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

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

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

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

    The players in their 30s at the ends of their careers won't get this money back later.

    [/QUOTE]


    Any chance they'd get rollback cash returned at a later date and if not, why is it any different to you? Cash is cash.

    [/QUOTE]


    Yes, money is money.  Temmu Selanne was slated to earn $4.5M this season.  Roll it back 20% and he's at $3.6M.  Cancel the season and he's at $0M.

    He won't be getting that at a later date.

    [/QUOTE]


    Selanne can easily make that amount tax free in the KHL if he chose to. What's your point? I'm not sure where you guys are coming up with this zero number. They aren't banned from earning elsewhere. Remember a couple posts back where you mentioned that people are welcome to choose the avenue of working somewhere else if you don't fold to the company terms?

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

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

    Dez,

    Your latest reponse does not follow our conversation at all.  Please don't think I'm ignoring you, but I am 100% ignoring that KHL post simply because it's unrelated.

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

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

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

    Dez,

    Your latest reponse does not follow our conversation at all.  Please don't think I'm ignoring you, but I am 100% ignoring that KHL post simply because it's unrelated.

    [/QUOTE]


    It's entirely related as you brought up the point that you were given a similar choice at your job, work for less or work elsewhere. Selanne has the exact same choice so I'm not sure why you keep saying he will make "zero and never get it back". The point is that if Selanne decides to make zero, that's his choice to make. He's not banned from earning money elsewhere.

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

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

    Ok I will only interject here with one statement, opps edited to many, heheh.  Singling out a player as an example does not prove the larger point that 22% of the season is caput as of December 1st.  Yes older players lose money, but younger players who play three years as a career do as well, what is the average length of a NHL career anyway... my guess 5 years.  So age does not mater in the argument.  The fact is the players are linking themselves to diminishing revenues in a NHL shorten or no season at all.  Corporations do not invest in businesses that have loyal fans, the invest in marketing.  The marketing is the key, if in fact the season is canceled it will take years to build up sponsership.  The players suffer under any revenue dispersment in that world.  The CBA deal now would be a reverse circa 2004 with the NHLPA.  On the other hand it is a negative economic world!  So Recchi is speaking the truth, sign and deal.  Once the economic circumstances are more stable then use the poker face negoitations.  The poker hand held by the players is a folding one.  Lose once again, so sign and move on.  The only aspect of my remark that makes me just ill is the SOBs gave these palyers contracts knowingly the hard stance that was to be taken by the owners of the NHL in this CBA process.  Now that is like expalining the ugly baby to your beautiful  wife.  

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

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

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

    Dez,

    Your latest reponse does not follow our conversation at all.  Please don't think I'm ignoring you, but I am 100% ignoring that KHL post simply because it's unrelated.

    [/QUOTE]


    It's entirely related as you brought up the point that you were given a similar choice at your job, work for less or work elsewhere. Selanne has the exact same choice so I'm not sure why you keep saying he will make "zero and never get it back". The point is that if Selanne decides to make zero, that's his choice to make. He's not banned from earning money elsewhere.

    [/QUOTE]


    That was in a different thread.  It does not follow our conversation here at all.

    That's a pretty sad tactic to CYA.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

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

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

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

    The players in their 30s at the ends of their careers won't get this money back later.

    [/QUOTE]


    Any chance they'd get rollback cash returned at a later date and if not, why is it any different to you? Cash is cash.

    [/QUOTE]


    Yes, money is money.  Temmu Selanne was slated to earn $4.5M this season.  Roll it back 20% and he's at $3.6M.  Cancel the season and he's at $0M.

    He won't be getting that at a later date.

    [/QUOTE]


    Selanne can easily make that amount tax free in the KHL if he chose to. What's your point? I'm not sure where you guys are coming up with this zero number. They aren't banned from earning elsewhere. Remember a couple posts back where you mentioned that people are welcome to choose the avenue of working somewhere else if you don't fold to the company terms?

    [/QUOTE]
    Has anyone ever seen an arcticle that states exactly what these players make in the KHL? I have only seen speculations, and not real numbers.I'm sure the top end players do alright but i have never found actual dollar amounts.I have read where some players insurance payments are more than they are actually making per month.

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

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

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

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

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

    Dez,

    Your latest reponse does not follow our conversation at all.  Please don't think I'm ignoring you, but I am 100% ignoring that KHL post simply because it's unrelated.

    [/QUOTE]


    It's entirely related as you brought up the point that you were given a similar choice at your job, work for less or work elsewhere. Selanne has the exact same choice so I'm not sure why you keep saying he will make "zero and never get it back". The point is that if Selanne decides to make zero, that's his choice to make. He's not banned from earning money elsewhere.

    [/QUOTE]


    That was in a different thread.  It does not follow our conversation here at all.

    That's a pretty sad tactic to CYA.

    [/QUOTE]


    So you're saying that each conversation needs to stay thread specific? What you say on one thread has no bearing on another? Now that's a sad tactic. I won't miss that type of logic. That's for sure. Are you able to walk and chew gum at the same time? I'm starting to doubt it.

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

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

    In response to 50belowzero's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

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

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

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

    The players in their 30s at the ends of their careers won't get this money back later.

    [/QUOTE]


    Any chance they'd get rollback cash returned at a later date and if not, why is it any different to you? Cash is cash.

    [/QUOTE]


    Yes, money is money.  Temmu Selanne was slated to earn $4.5M this season.  Roll it back 20% and he's at $3.6M.  Cancel the season and he's at $0M.

    He won't be getting that at a later date.

    [/QUOTE]


    Selanne can easily make that amount tax free in the KHL if he chose to. What's your point? I'm not sure where you guys are coming up with this zero number. They aren't banned from earning elsewhere. Remember a couple posts back where you mentioned that people are welcome to choose the avenue of working somewhere else if you don't fold to the company terms?

    [/QUOTE]
    Has anyone ever seen an arcticle that states exactly what these players make in the KHL? I have only seen speculations, and not real numbers.I'm sure the top end players do alright but i have never found actual dollar amounts.I have read where some players insurance payments are more than they are actually making per month.

    [/QUOTE]


    NHL players are typically allowed to receive up to 65% of their NHL salaries in the KHL. The perks and lack of income tax means they can actually pocket the same cash at the end of the day. Ovechkin makes 5.7 million tax free for example.

    http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/alex-ovechkin-signs-millions-khl-patrik-berglund-plays-133930979--nhl.html

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

    Thanks for the info Dez, first time i have seen a dollar figure attached to a player.Its obvious that Ovechkin will do alright as he would be a big draw anywhere,especially in his home country,but i'm assuming a player like Ian White would not make $2,875,000.00 dollars a year to play in Russia.I personally think the majority of NHL players would take a big pay cut to play elsewhere.

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

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

    In response to 50belowzero's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Thanks for the info Dez, first time i have seen a dollar figure attached to a player.Its obvious that Ovechkin will do alright as he would be a big draw anywhere,especially in his home country,but i'm assuming a player like Ian White would not make $2,875,000.00 dollars a year to play in Russia.I personally think the majority of NHL players would take a big pay cut to play elsewhere.

    [/QUOTE]


    50, my buddy who scouts for Dallas talked to Jagr about the KHL and was told that travel was a huge issue. The teams are constantly flying around with 6-8 hour flights being commonplace. Cheers!

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 50belowzero's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Thanks for the info Dez, first time i have seen a dollar figure attached to a player.Its obvious that Ovechkin will do alright as he would be a big draw anywhere,especially in his home country,but i'm assuming a player like Ian White would not make $2,875,000.00 dollars a year to play in Russia.I personally think the majority of NHL players would take a big pay cut to play elsewhere.

    [/QUOTE]


    50, my buddy who scouts for Dallas talked to Jagr about the KHL and was told that travel was a huge issue. The teams are constantly flying around with 6-8 hour flights being commonplace. Cheers!

    [/QUOTE]

    Wow, would make playing in the eastern conference of the NHL a piece of cake.Flying 6 to 8 hrs just about every trip would become tedious pretty quick.

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

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:
    [QUOTE]
    So you're saying that each conversation needs to stay thread specific? What you say on one thread has no bearing on another? Now that's a sad tactic. I won't miss that type of logic. That's for sure. Are you able to walk and chew gum at the same time? I'm starting to doubt it.

    [/QUOTE]

    If you argument is dead on one subject, and you attempt to use a different topic to bring it back to life, that's sad and it doesn't work.

    I know you're aware of this and are probably unhappy that I've called you on it.  Let's just let it go so you don't start looking for spelling errors here.

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

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

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

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:
    [QUOTE]
    So you're saying that each conversation needs to stay thread specific? What you say on one thread has no bearing on another? Now that's a sad tactic. I won't miss that type of logic. That's for sure. Are you able to walk and chew gum at the same time? I'm starting to doubt it.

    [/QUOTE]

    If you argument is dead on one subject, and you attempt to use a different topic to bring it back to life, that's sad and it doesn't work.

    I know you're aware of this and are probably unhappy that I've called you on it.  Let's just let it go so you don't start looking for spelling errors here.

    [/QUOTE]

    What argument and conversation are you speaking of? Go back and look at what you and I each had to say on THIS THREAD and then go find something to soak up your tears. I asked for an explanation as to the difference between losing wages by sitting and losing wages to a rollback. Your "answer" was to tell me that Selanne was due to make 4.5 this year and that a cancelled season would mean he'd "get zero". You then complained when I pointed out (what everyone knows) that by no means is Selanne faced with making zero if the NHL season is lost because he could choose to make it in the KHL. If you want to cry about the KHL having no bearing on the conversation then explain what Selanne has to do with it. Better yet, go screw yourself for all I care. I'm not sure what you think you called me on because all you've managed to do is prove that your the exact same jack off that 99% of the posters thinks you are. I'll tell you the same as I told old Wendy, everyone can see exactly what was written earlier so don't bother trying to turn things around later when the answers seem too elusive. BTW, please enlighten us all as to when someone on THIS THREAD mentioned spelling errors you jack off.

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

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

    And here comes the white flag of surrender:  name calling.  What's wrong?  Couldn't find any spelling errors?

    Man up, Dez.

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

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

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

    And here comes the white flag of surrender:  name calling.  What's wrong?  Couldn't find any spelling errors?

    Man up, Dez.

    [/QUOTE]


    If the white flag of surrender, is name calling.......

    man, you've sure thrown in the towell a lot.

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

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

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

    And here comes the white flag of surrender:  name calling.  What's wrong?  Couldn't find any spelling errors?

    Man up, Dez.

    [/QUOTE]


    What am I surrendering? What point were you trying to debate and why is it you also feel you've gained the edge? Seriously, enlighten all of us..............and also explain the repeated references to "spelling errors" because I can't find any other references to it on this thread. How about just answering what's asked instead of worrying about trying to proclaim victory in a virtual war in which you're clearly flailing. You can't even keep track of what you were crying about in your previous post but hey, you're a winner I guess. Maybe I could see your medals some day...........

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

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

    Dez: The players are willing to lose a little money now so they won't lose alot of money later.

    Me:  The players in their 30s at the ends of their careers won't get this money back later.

    Dez:  Any chance they'd get rollback cash returned at a later date and if not, why is it any different to you? Cash is cash.

    Me:  Yes, money is money.  Temmu Selanne was slated to earn $4.5M this season.  Roll it back 20% and he's at $3.6M.  Cancel the season and he's at $0M.  He won't be getting that at a later date.

    Dez:  Selanne can easily make that amount tax free in the KHL if he chose to.

    ---

    This conversation wasn't about going to play elsewhere to make money.  This conversation was about not accepting the rollback today so they can earn more money later.  My point was that many players won't be earning that money later because their careers will be over. 

    And then you say that Selanne can play in Russia if he wants.

    Makes no sense at all.  But that's okay, Dez.  You can wave your internet arms in the air and proclaim yourself brilliant.  You can make all of your personal attacks and try to shout everyone down all the while avoiding the actual topic at hand.  I'm done with this.  My point has been made.  Players who are retiring or at the end of their careers won't benefit from this lockout.

    Let the next round of insults begin.  I'll give you a helping hand:

    NAS, everyone hates you.
    NAS, you said this and that.
    NAS, blah blah blah blah blah.


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

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

    "The players in their 30s at the ends of their careers won't get this money back later."

     

    Players who only have a short time left on their contract who might get injured

    Players who may only have a short time in the NHL at all

    Players who aren't making huge dollars

    Players who's stats may be in decline while enjoying a generous contract currently

    Players who will have to travel half way across the world to make less

    Most everyone

     

    It's unfortunate that these circumstances don't fit with the communist union ideology. So let's just spew garbage while being disingenous about the rationale. And, if exposed for radical views - just respond by attacking the messenger. It's in the playbook -

     

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

    In response to JWensink's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    "The players in their 30s at the ends of their careers won't get this money back later."

     

    Players who only have a short time left on their contract who might get injured

    Players who may only have a short time in the NHL at all

    Players who aren't making huge dollars

    Players who's stats may be in decline while enjoying a generous contract currently

    Players who will have to travel half way across the world to make less

    Most everyone

     

    It's unfortunate that these circumstances don't fit with the communist union ideology. So let's just spew garbage while being disingenous about the rationale. And, if exposed for radical views - just respond by attacking the messenger. It's in the playbook -

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    The Montreal Canadiens will likely be very happy to burn off a year each of Gomez's & Kaberle's deals to name just a couple.

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

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

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

    Dez: The players are willing to lose a little money now so they won't lose alot of money later.

    Me:  The players in their 30s at the ends of their careers won't get this money back later.

    Dez:  Any chance they'd get rollback cash returned at a later date and if not, why is it any different to you? Cash is cash.

    Me:  Yes, money is money.  Temmu Selanne was slated to earn $4.5M this season.  Roll it back 20% and he's at $3.6M.  Cancel the season and he's at $0M.  He won't be getting that at a later date.

    Dez:  Selanne can easily make that amount tax free in the KHL if he chose to.

    ---

    This conversation wasn't about going to play elsewhere to make money.  This conversation was about not accepting the rollback today so they can earn more money later.  My point was that many players won't be earning that money later because their careers will be over. 

    And then you say that Selanne can play in Russia if he wants.

    Makes no sense at all.  But that's okay, Dez.  You can wave your internet arms in the air and proclaim yourself brilliant.  You can make all of your personal attacks and try to shout everyone down all the while avoiding the actual topic at hand.  I'm done with this.  My point has been made.  Players who are retiring or at the end of their careers won't benefit from this lockout.

    Let the next round of insults begin.  I'll give you a helping hand:

    NAS, everyone hates you.
    NAS, you said this and that.
    NAS, blah blah blah blah blah.


    [/QUOTE]


    The clear point made over and over again is that these players, regardless of age, aren't totally dependant on the NHL to earn money. That money you claim Selanne is losing now that he can't get back makes no sense. As I said many times and ways, Selanne is free as we speak, to go earn elsewhere. Yourself and a few other math wizards keep throwing that "zero" number around over and over again in reference to player earnings and leverage. Let me know of even 1 player that is being forced to do without earnings as a result of this lockout and then maybe you can start applying your zero number with at least something that resembles sensibilty. Selanne will be the first one to say this isn't about him as much as it's about the 2nd and 3rd tier earners in the union. I'm not surprised the concept of doing something selfless is totally lost upon you. Let's be clear and concise about this. I'm asking what makes more sense, losing cash to sitting or losing cash to a lockout and your reply is that the NHLPA should cave because a guy like Selanne might not get to earn again? The NHLPA has 700 members and you want to worry about a guy that might retire after having earned approximately 50 million in his career? BTW, aren't you due to cry about me bringing up other posts conversations while doing the exact same thing yourself. I can't help but notice how many times you can do just that while refusing to own up to it. Typical and sad. Don't you find being right all of the time a little boring? I look forward to seeing where you try to take it this time (and to seeing pics of your medals).  PS., your point about Selanne and other retirees not gaining anything by sitting is also very wrong. CBA's cover many things including pension plans etc. Selanne doesn't just disappear when his playing career ends. If only we could go back to the good old days when players were stuck selling cars to make ends meet after a 15 year career. No you're right, they should fold for Selanne. He's really hurting if he can't get that cash from the Ducks.........

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

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

    In response to JWensink's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    "The players in their 30s at the ends of their careers won't get this money back later."

     

    Players who only have a short time left on their contract who might get injured

    Players who may only have a short time in the NHL at all

    Players who aren't making huge dollars

    Players who's stats may be in decline while enjoying a generous contract currently

    Players who will have to travel half way across the world to make less

    Most everyone

     

    It's unfortunate that these circumstances don't fit with the communist union ideology. So let's just spew garbage while being disingenous about the rationale. And, if exposed for radical views - just respond by attacking the messenger. It's in the playbook -

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I notice a lot of words but still no list started. All of these players have the opportunity to earn elsewhere. It's a free market system. Serious question (asked a 2nd time), how is it you can't see the irony in calling someone a communist while suggesting the players should take whatever the owners (Big Brother) is willing to give them? Are you really this simple or is it just an act (like Stanley)?

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

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

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

    Dez: The players are willing to lose a little money now so they won't lose alot of money later.

    Me:  The players in their 30s at the ends of their careers won't get this money back later.

    Dez:  Any chance they'd get rollback cash returned at a later date and if not, why is it any different to you? Cash is cash.

    Me:  Yes, money is money.  Temmu Selanne was slated to earn $4.5M this season.  Roll it back 20% and he's at $3.6M.  Cancel the season and he's at $0M.  He won't be getting that at a later date.

    Dez:  Selanne can easily make that amount tax free in the KHL if he chose to.

    ---

    This conversation wasn't about going to play elsewhere to make money.  This conversation was about not accepting the rollback today so they can earn more money later.  My point was that many players won't be earning that money later because their careers will be over. 

    And then you say that Selanne can play in Russia if he wants.

    Makes no sense at all.  But that's okay, Dez.  You can wave your internet arms in the air and proclaim yourself brilliant.  You can make all of your personal attacks and try to shout everyone down all the while avoiding the actual topic at hand.  I'm done with this.  My point has been made.  Players who are retiring or at the end of their careers won't benefit from this lockout.

    Let the next round of insults begin.  I'll give you a helping hand:

    NAS, everyone hates you.
    NAS, you said this and that.
    NAS, blah blah blah blah blah.


    [/QUOTE]


    The clear point made over and over again is that these players, regardless of age, aren't totally dependant on the NHL to earn money. That money you claim Selanne is losing money now that he can't get back makes no sense. As I said many times and ways, Selanne is free as we speak, to go earn elsewhere. Yourself and a few other math wizards keep throwing that "zero" number around over and over again in reference to player earnings and leverage. Let me know of even 1 player that is being forced to do without earnings as a result of this lockout and then maybe you can start applying your zero number with at least something that resembles sensibilty. Selanne will be the first one to say this isn't about him as much as it's about the 2nd and 3rd tier earners in the union. I'm not surprised the concept of doing something selfless is totally lost upon you. Let's be clear and concise about this. I'm asking what makes more sense, losing cash to sitting or losing cash to a lockout and your reply is that the NHLPA should cave because a guy like Selanne might not get to earn again? The NHLPA has 700 members and you want to worry about a guy that might retire after having earned approximately 50 million in his career? BTW, aren't you due to cry about me bringing up other posts conversations while doing the exact same thing yourself. I can't help but notice how many times you can do just that while refusing to own up to it. Typical and sad. Don't you find being right all of the time a little boring? I look forward to seeing where you try to take it this time (and to seeing pics of your medals).

    [/QUOTE]

    Each time you consider responding with something about playing elsewhere, please refer to the words in bold above.

    Thank you.

    If you want to focus on the amount of money that Selanne has made (which is 100% not the point, but fighting against it makes sense to you), feel free to use a different player as an example.  Let's use Jamal Mayers.

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

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

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

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

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

    Dez: The players are willing to lose a little money now so they won't lose alot of money later.

    Me:  The players in their 30s at the ends of their careers won't get this money back later.

    Dez:  Any chance they'd get rollback cash returned at a later date and if not, why is it any different to you? Cash is cash.

    Me:  Yes, money is money.  Temmu Selanne was slated to earn $4.5M this season.  Roll it back 20% and he's at $3.6M.  Cancel the season and he's at $0M.  He won't be getting that at a later date.

    Dez:  Selanne can easily make that amount tax free in the KHL if he chose to.

    ---

    This conversation wasn't about going to play elsewhere to make money.  This conversation was about not accepting the rollback today so they can earn more money later.  My point was that many players won't be earning that money later because their careers will be over. 

    And then you say that Selanne can play in Russia if he wants.

    Makes no sense at all.  But that's okay, Dez.  You can wave your internet arms in the air and proclaim yourself brilliant.  You can make all of your personal attacks and try to shout everyone down all the while avoiding the actual topic at hand.  I'm done with this.  My point has been made.  Players who are retiring or at the end of their careers won't benefit from this lockout.

    Let the next round of insults begin.  I'll give you a helping hand:

    NAS, everyone hates you.
    NAS, you said this and that.
    NAS, blah blah blah blah blah.


    [/QUOTE]


    The clear point made over and over again is that these players, regardless of age, aren't totally dependant on the NHL to earn money. That money you claim Selanne is losing money now that he can't get back makes no sense. As I said many times and ways, Selanne is free as we speak, to go earn elsewhere. Yourself and a few other math wizards keep throwing that "zero" number around over and over again in reference to player earnings and leverage. Let me know of even 1 player that is being forced to do without earnings as a result of this lockout and then maybe you can start applying your zero number with at least something that resembles sensibilty. Selanne will be the first one to say this isn't about him as much as it's about the 2nd and 3rd tier earners in the union. I'm not surprised the concept of doing something selfless is totally lost upon you. Let's be clear and concise about this. I'm asking what makes more sense, losing cash to sitting or losing cash to a lockout and your reply is that the NHLPA should cave because a guy like Selanne might not get to earn again? The NHLPA has 700 members and you want to worry about a guy that might retire after having earned approximately 50 million in his career? BTW, aren't you due to cry about me bringing up other posts conversations while doing the exact same thing yourself. I can't help but notice how many times you can do just that while refusing to own up to it. Typical and sad. Don't you find being right all of the time a little boring? I look forward to seeing where you try to take it this time (and to seeing pics of your medals).

    [/QUOTE]

    Each time you consider responding with something about playing elsewhere, please refer to the words in bold above.

    Thank you.

    If you want to focus on the amount of money that Selanne has made (which is 100% not the point, but fighting against it makes sense to you), feel free to use a different player as an example.  Let's use Jamal Mayers.

    [/QUOTE]


    Use whatever guys you want as you skirt the issue. There are 700 union members. Yes, some will retire and hopefully get a proper pension (another CBA issue you conveniently toss aside). Mayers also made enough in the past 5 years that he can sit out (as he's also CHOSEN to do). Why would anyone go back to a rollback when they don't need to? I'm saying they don't need to fold in order to keep earning. You're totally caught up in who pays them the money. Shouldn't you take time for some spelling bee cracks instead? It's been almost 2 full posts since you've totally contradicted yourself. What's with that?

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

    Re: Mark Recchi Logic

    You're just lost, Dez.  I'm finished with this.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share