2004-10-02 #4

Hockey Strike

The fundamental issue in the NHL lockout is: aparrently US$2.3 billion is not enough for 30 owners and 730-odd players to share. The main cause of the lockout is that the owners have agreed to these insane salary levels of their own free accord, and now want some kind of rule in place to save them from themselves. Punishing the players is also good while they are at it, however that's a secondary objective. The primary objective of a salary cap or luxury tax won't stop the wealthy teams from spending big bucks on players, they will just have to be more inventive in the way they guide compensation to those marquee players.

You have to ask: what's best for hockey? I believe that both sides need to back away a bit. First, the players are the product, in other words, these guys are the reason why we pay our $28.50 or $180.75 or whatever we pay. I have zero problem with them getting a good cut of the rake. The power is where it always has been -- in the hands of the owners. If no one will pay some player US$10 million per season, then oddly enough salaries won't rise to that level. Once someone signs a large contract, it acts as pressure on everyone else's salaries as they want their contracts to reflect their respective places in the value chain.

The owners have dug themselves this hole, and no amount of "digging up" will get them out of it.