Phaneuf turns down $6M per ($30M) deal

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

User avatar
Canuck-One
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 11:49 am
Location: Living the Life

Post by Canuck-One »

No one from Calpuck has the brains or the nerve to try to debate about their team. They over rate their players worse than any other team, even the Leaf fans aren't as bad. Go onto Calpuck and debate them. You will be kicked out and called a Troll. That's is the mindset that screams inferiority syndrome.
User avatar
Jyrki21
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 663
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 2:51 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON
Contact:

Post by Jyrki21 »

Linden Is God wrote:
whistler wrote:I'd like to see a maximum salary constrained under the cap.
Technically there already is. A player can not make more then 20% of the salary cap.
Yeah, I was going to say, this already exists! :lol:

I can't argue with a player getting his maximum obtainable contract. Anyone here would do the same. The beauty of the cap system is that it's the same for all teams, so even if Phaneuf is handcuffing one team (which should go into the GM's calculus anyway, not the player's), every other superstar out there is doing the same to other teams.
Image
User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
MVP
MVP
Posts: 31125
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Post by Blob Mckenzie »

Please remember this is from Garrioch and he is as big a weasal as Gallagher and Strachan. I hate the Flames but I'd take Phaneuf on my team any day. He is at this stage a far better player than McCabe is or was and at 22 I think he can improve in his own end. He needs a guy like Robinson tutoring him and the sky is the limit. The unofficial individual player cap is about 10 million right now..........or as was said earlier 20 % .
SRsez
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 579
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:13 pm

Post by SRsez »

Blob Mckenzie wrote:Please remember this is from Garrioch and he is as big a weasal as Gallagher and Strachan.
Raises an interesting question: just how is the rating system for weasels arrived at?
Blob wrote:I hate the Flames but I'd take Phaneuf on my team any day. He is at this stage a far better player than McCabe is or was and at 22.
I'm not sure I'd say that. Any of it. I'm not that impressed with Phanny-goof. Okay, you know I'm biased, but really the two are about as equal as I can see. Phanny-packer is far more annoying, I'll give you that.
BlM wrote:He needs a guy like Robinson tutoring him and the sky is the limit.
Yeah, and if my uncle had tits.... :roll: sheesh, how many you roll today?
Real hockey fans refuse to listen to the Idiot(tm)
User avatar
Meerschaum
MVP
MVP
Posts: 492
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 5:50 pm
Location: Vancouver, B.C.

Post by Meerschaum »

I can't see that sort of salary working in Calgary, given what has been committed to Iginla already (and which is thoroughly deserved in light of his numbers this season). It'll lead to too much of a tail-off in depth elsewhere on that squad.

I think that all teams can afford one highly paid star under the cap. But, managing two is difficult. Generally, I'd rather have two quality guys at $3.5 million than the second star at $7 million and a liability somewhere on the bench.

The only way I see having multiple monster salaries work under the cap is if you can balance them off with some real steals. Think of Burke and the Ducks. Last season he could afford Neidermeyer and Pronger because of the pittance that was being paid to Getzlaf, Perry and Penner and the very generous deal Selanne inked for one last shot at the Cup.

But, now - with fewer bargain salaries - he's had to cut players left right and centre and has a far less effective team.
Modo vincis, modo vinceris.
User avatar
mr perfect
MVP
MVP
Posts: 870
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 12:32 pm
Location: perfectville

Post by mr perfect »

Blob Mckenzie wrote:Please remember this is from Garrioch and he is as big a weasal as Gallagher and Strachan. I hate the Flames but I'd take Phaneuf on my team any day. He is at this stage a far better player than McCabe is or was and at 22 I think he can improve in his own end. He needs a guy like Robinson tutoring him and the sky is the limit. The unofficial individual player cap is about 10 million right now..........or as was said earlier 20 % .
I agree with you about Garrioch. I disagree with you about Phagoof. Yes, he has the shot, yes he throws a solid bodycheck. The rest of his game is suspect and with him, like Jovo he may never improve in his own end. I also notice something else about Phagoof - he hides behind his visor and only becomes tough when the other player weighs 180 lb. Like a Stephane Veillieux or an Todd Marchant. When Travis Moen stepped in for Marchant, Phagoof pulled one of the all-time turtle acts. He also backed away from Bieksa, Rypien and Brown in the last 2 seasons. It's no secret anymore, he can be intimidated which is what the Canucks did in the Dec 27 game, running Phagoof any chance they had. I'll say Nashville's Shea Weber will be a better D-man than DP. At least he had the cojones to fight Moen.
SRsez
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 579
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:13 pm

Post by SRsez »

mr perfect wrote: I'll say Nashville's Shea Weber will be a better D-man than DP.
Understatement of the year, regarding overhype of the decade. Weber's already better, same with Seabrook.
Real hockey fans refuse to listen to the Idiot(tm)
Kel
MVP
MVP
Posts: 658
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 1:26 pm

Post by Kel »

By the way, just want to remind people that the amount written on player contracts is not in terms of real dollars. It's in terms of funny money. The real dollar amount is determined by revenue. The funny money amount determines what a player gets relative to his peers. That is, a player with $6M "salary" receives double of what another player with $3M "salary" receives. In a bad year business-wise, the $6M player may get only $2M real dollars after tax, for example.
User avatar
ClamRussel
CC Legend
Posts: 3992
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 10:50 am
Location: New South Wales, Australia

Post by ClamRussel »

whistler wrote:Hockey is supposed to be a team sport but these stars are way too focussed on their individual rewards...often to the point of hurting their team's chances.

Somehow, the original dream of making huge money being a hockey hero has turned into pure, out-of-control, greed and/or posturing.
Our 'heroes' are mercenaries.

It isn't good for the fans and it isn't good for the game.
We watch ticket prices going out of reach while the stars jockey for even more money leaving fan favorites like Burrows and Linden, who also bring something valuable to a fan-based industry, designated as unimportant simply because of the money differential.
I know this probably won't be popular, and make me look like a Marxist/Leninist but I know exactly what the problem to this is.

Pay everyone EXACTLY the same salary thus forcing teams to pay ALL of the salary cap. Therefore you don't have ANY players not playing due to money, you also don't have teams tearing their teams apart to save money for the owners & scrimping on salaries. If the salary cap is $60 million then every player makes an equal share of $2.6 million each. Players should also be paid their fair share for all playoff revenue. The farther the team goes the more each player makes.

This is so obvious its painful that it wasn't implimented.

Take a vote w/ the NHLPA and since close to 50-75% of all players would get a raise I'd think it would easily pass. As revenues go up, EVERYONE'S salary goes up accordingly. Within a couple of years I'm sure everyone would be making $3+ million, who couldn't live off that? The only one's it would hurt would be the allstars and the over paid players from free agency but the allstars could easily make millions more in endorsement deals which they do anyways.

This is a TEAM sport and there is no place for individual bonus clauses for selfish statistics.

You would never again have a Phaneuf balking at 6 mill per.

Whats even better is TRADES would actually be made once again, and *gasp* they would be h-o-c-k-e-y trades based on skill sets NOT salaries.

The only argument against this is capitalist greed (for a minority) which flies in the face of a team sport. It would indeed solve a helluva lot of the problems the NHL faces yr after yr. Problems that often lead to huge talent not on the ice where they should be.

We might even get a dynasty franchise in this league again.
User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
MVP
MVP
Posts: 31125
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Post by Blob Mckenzie »

Clam i'm not sure whether to compare to to Karl Marx or Groucho. everybody EXACTLY the same salary ??? :shock: Sorry but if Jeff Cowan is making the same as Roberto Luongo there is something fucked here . Why would Luongo stay here if he could make more in that former communist country Russia ? Is the NHL going to control the individual salaries in rival leagues too ? i'm pretty sure you were talking out of your ass, but then again i have always known you to be a bit of a radical thinker as well. ;)

There are ways to tweak the current system which could enable more trades.
1. Take away the point for shootout loss- would eliminate more teams from playoffs earlier, as teams like the leaves would be out of it sooner . :)
2. Implement a luxury tax/ cap system that WOULD penalize teams for going over the cap , but not forbid them from doing so . IE if you go 5 million over at the deadline you pay dollar for dollar into a luxury tax system for low rev teams.
3. Bump the deadline forward to the middle of March as more teams will be out of it by then and thus willing to sell.[/i]
User avatar
Cookie La Rue
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2386
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 10:57 pm
Location: 50° 10' North / 8° 34' East

Post by Cookie La Rue »

Blob Mckenzie wrote:Why would Luongo stay here if he could make more in that former communist country Russia ?
Because he and anyone else (doesn't mean Luongo specifically) could be satisfied with for example 2.3 mil per year to make a good living anyways ?

In general Clam's idea is good as same as "Groucho's ideas" but you're right and like history told it's sentenced to fail because of all the greediness of people who already have enough to get more. Maybe it lies in the human nature, i don't know. That's the root of all evil and no matter what and where they'll be always looking for ways to get more, doesn't matter if it is corruption or anything like just escape somewhere...
"Every dog has its day." - CC Hockey Pool Champion 2004 & 2013 'Moves like Lenarduzzi'
User avatar
Jovorock
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 902
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 12:46 pm
Location: Kelowna

Post by Jovorock »

SRsez wrote:
mr perfect wrote: I'll say Nashville's Shea Weber will be a better D-man than DP.
Understatement of the year, regarding overhype of the decade. Weber's already better, same with Seabrook.
I've said since watching them in junior, Weber is and would be better. I can't agree with your comment about Seabrook, haven't been able to watch him alot but he is a good young NHL d-man.

Phaneuf has been over hyped is whole life, sure he has been good at every level, but I think he has been very much over hyped IMO.
User avatar
the Cunning Linguist
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 599
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 9:18 am
Location: If not in here then offthepost.ORG...
Contact:

Post by the Cunning Linguist »

I'm glad "The Dion" gets the kind of press he does... It only drives his price higher. Go for it, George Johnson!
Image
Image
User avatar
sk8er
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 516
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 8:46 am
Location: in my computer

Post by sk8er »

he refers to himself as "the Dion"????????????????/
omg.......
I can't even find words to express my feelings about that.......
except BWWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA!!!!!!!
Larry Goodenough
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 728
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 10:43 am

Post by Larry Goodenough »

ClamRussel wrote:
whistler wrote:Hockey is supposed to be a team sport but these stars are way too focussed on their individual rewards...often to the point of hurting their team's chances.

Somehow, the original dream of making huge money being a hockey hero has turned into pure, out-of-control, greed and/or posturing.
Our 'heroes' are mercenaries.

It isn't good for the fans and it isn't good for the game.
We watch ticket prices going out of reach while the stars jockey for even more money leaving fan favorites like Burrows and Linden, who also bring something valuable to a fan-based industry, designated as unimportant simply because of the money differential.
I know this probably won't be popular, and make me look like a Marxist/Leninist but I know exactly what the problem to this is.

Pay everyone EXACTLY the same salary thus forcing teams to pay ALL of the salary cap. Therefore you don't have ANY players not playing due to money, you also don't have teams tearing their teams apart to save money for the owners & scrimping on salaries. If the salary cap is $60 million then every player makes an equal share of $2.6 million each. Players should also be paid their fair share for all playoff revenue. The farther the team goes the more each player makes.

This is so obvious its painful that it wasn't implimented.

Take a vote w/ the NHLPA and since close to 50-75% of all players would get a raise I'd think it would easily pass. As revenues go up, EVERYONE'S salary goes up accordingly. Within a couple of years I'm sure everyone would be making $3+ million, who couldn't live off that? The only one's it would hurt would be the allstars and the over paid players from free agency but the allstars could easily make millions more in endorsement deals which they do anyways.

This is a TEAM sport and there is no place for individual bonus clauses for selfish statistics.

You would never again have a Phaneuf balking at 6 mill per.

Whats even better is TRADES would actually be made once again, and *gasp* they would be h-o-c-k-e-y trades based on skill sets NOT salaries.

The only argument against this is capitalist greed (for a minority) which flies in the face of a team sport. It would indeed solve a helluva lot of the problems the NHL faces yr after yr. Problems that often lead to huge talent not on the ice where they should be.

We might even get a dynasty franchise in this league again.
I have been saying something simular for years.

(All numbers about to be mentioned are just being thrown out there for argument's sake)

Everyone gets the same salary a year - for arguments sake - 1.5 million.

Then everyone gets a monetary reward for each regular season win - say $50,000.

Then everyone gets $250,000 per playoff series win and $5 million bonus for winning the cup.

I would expect way more intensity each and every night.
Post Reply