Tavares out for the season

[GhostofPotvin29]

Agreed. I am in favour of best-on-best. What I was just trying to say is that taking away NHL players doesn't make the Olympics an amateur event, like some people want. It just takes out 1st rate professional players. But I would imagine 90%+ of the players involved would still be professional hockey players playing in the AHL/KHL/SEL and the other European leagues.

Absolutely. Unless the IOC or IIHF cracked down on it, the Olympic hockey tournament would be almost entirely professional players regardless of NHL participation. What only taking the NHL out of the equation would really do is give the Russians a huge advantage, like they had before the NHL started participating.

Plus, like you said, all the other sports in the Winter/Summer Olympics with professionals.

 

[dappleganger]

That could have easily been PK, and the tournament isn't over yet.

Hopefully the JT injury marks the end of NHLers at the Olympics.

I'm ok with no NHL'ers at the Olympics but they'd have to do a World Cup best-on-best tournament. With that there'd still be the issue of injuries.

 

[bakeapples]

At least it will improve their positioning in the draft. Oh wait...

Well they can still use this year's pick.  It just sets up an interesting dilemma.  Do you use the pick this year if you have a high pick and risk giving up on a chance for McDavid next year?  If they're bottom 3, I'd probably use it.  Take the known over the unknown.

I thought the pick is now Buffalo's? Does NYI have an option to defer to another year?

 

[CarltonTheBear]

I thought the pick is now Buffalo's? Does NYI have an option to defer to another year?

It's top-10 protected, so if that happens the Sabres have the option of deferring it.

 

[louisstamos]

That could have easily been PK, and the tournament isn't over yet.

Hopefully the JT injury marks the end of NHLers at the Olympics.

I'm ok with no NHL'ers at the Olympics but they'd have to do a World Cup best-on-best tournament. With that there'd still be the issue of injuries.

Bring back the Canada Cup/World Cup of Hockey?

 

[Bullfrog]

The amateur runner, Usain Bolt, makes about $20M per year in prize money. So I don't think the amateur/professional argument really holds water anymore.

 

[Deebo]

That could have easily been PK, and the tournament isn't over yet.

Hopefully the JT injury marks the end of NHLers at the Olympics.

I'm ok with no NHL'ers at the Olympics but they'd have to do a World Cup best-on-best tournament. With that there'd still be the issue of injuries.

I'd think at least part of World Cup revenue would contribute to HRR though.

 

[dappleganger]

The amateur runner, Usain Bolt, makes about $20M per year in prize money. So I don't think the amateur/professional argument really holds water anymore.

The Olympics dropped the amateur requirement more than 20 years ago.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

Hopefully NHLers continue to participate in the Olympics.

Aside from the amateur prerequisite thing, there is the issue of teams investment in players, a fans investment in season tickets (I'm not happy if I'm an islanders fan right now) and also the men's hockey tourney kinda takes over the Winter Olympics. Statement like, "the only medal that matters is the men's hockey gold". It take away from the spirit of the event.

It makes good stock footage for Canadian tire commercials, however.

The amateur argument is no longer valid. There's athletes there making far more than even Crosby.

As for hockey taking over the Olympics, it's the number one draw, there's no doubt about that. I think it's why the IOC wants it there. With out it there, a good  number of us turn off the Olympics.

 

[moon111]

Olympics = men's hockey.  That's it.  The rest is just fluff.

As for Tavares, too bad so sad.  The Leafs have dealt with their own adversity. 

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

This Week?s Debate: As the 2014 Sochi Games wind down, there?s still no official word on whether the NHL will participate in future Winter Olympics. Should the league be in South Korea for 2018?

In Favor: Yes, of course they should.

Opposed: Yes, of course they should.

NHL Owners: No, we shouldn?t.

NHL Players: Yes, of course we should.

Hockey Media: Yes, of course they should.

TV Broadcast Partners: Yes, of course they should.

Corporate Sponsors: Yes, of course they should.

NHL Owners: No, we shouldn?t.

Die-hard Hockey Fans: Yes, of course they should.

Occasional Hockey Fans: Yes, of course they should.

Sports Fans Who Don?t Really Like Hockey But Might Someday: Yes, of course they should.

NHL Owners: No, we shouldn?t.

Everyone: WHY THE HELL NOT?

NHL Owners: Oh ? um ? well, you see ?

In Favor: This is about money, isn?t it?

NHL Owners: What? No! How could you say that? What do you think we are, a bunch of greedy, soulless, money-grubbing gargoyles who don?t care about anything other than our own bottom line?

Everyone: ?

NHL Owners: We?re insulted.

In Favor: OK, fine. So tell us, then, what is it really about?

NHL Owners: It?s about the sanctity of the game! The Olympics forces the whole league to shut down for several weeks every four years. And that?s bad for the integrity of the game. (Author?s note: No, really. That?s their chosen spin.)

In Favor: So interrupting the season is a bad thing?

NHL Owners: [Wiping away tears.] It would be so tragic ?

In Favor: And just to be clear, this is coming from the same group of guys who have shut down the league for two full years? worth of lockouts since Gary Bettman arrived?

NHL Owners: Oh. Uh, we kind of hoped you?d all forgotten about those.

In Favor: You know we all hate you, right?

NHL Owners: [Looking up from counting giant pile of money.] Sorry, what? We weren?t paying attention.

The Final Verdict: Sending NHL players to the Olympics makes hockey fans happy, so it has to end. Sorry, everyone. This is just how Bettman?s NHL works.

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/canada-us-grab-bag/

 

[Kin]

As for hockey taking over the Olympics, it's the number one draw, there's no doubt about that. I think it's why the IOC wants it there.

But that's why I feel like it's a little hollow when people complain about the NHL owners objecting to sending their players. I have no doubt that the owners are rich, greedy jerks who object on the basis of it costing them money but the flip side of that is that the IOC and IIHF are rich, greedy jerks who want the players there because they make money off of it.

So this is one of those very, very few areas where I kind of see the owners point. If the international committees want NHL players there they should at least be footing the bill for the insurance.

 

[losveratos]

As for hockey taking over the Olympics, it's the number one draw, there's no doubt about that. I think it's why the IOC wants it there.

But that's why I feel like it's a little hollow when people complain about the NHL owners objecting to sending their players. I have no doubt that the owners are rich, greedy jerks who object on the basis of it costing them money but the flip side of that is that the IOC and IIHF are rich, greedy jerks who want the players there because they make money off of it.

So this is one of those very, very few areas where I kind of see the owners point. If the international committees want NHL players there they should at least be footing the bill for the insurance.

Do they insure other sport players from other events? And if so is it just medical bills or salary too? And if salary too, what's the salary of a part time skier or bobsledder?

Let's say it was someone more expensive hurt in the olympics. Crosby for instance. Would it really be fair for them to foot the bill on 8+mil per season he's out? What if it's career ending like a terrible concussion again? Are they paying for years and years missed?

Hockey players are too expensive and there's too high of a possibility of not just one but many players being injured. I really don't think it's fair.

The players aren't being paid to play in the olympics. They volunteered. And I feel they did it with the knowledge of how dangerous it is. Especially since it's their day jobs and they experience it on an almost nightly (While Seasonally) basis.

As for if the NHL insurance should cover it... I'd say yes if they cover other accidents outside the NHL such as car or home accidents and no if other injuries outside the NHL are not normally covered.

That should be fair to all parties.

 

[losveratos]

As a side note. If this is the biggest draw for the Olympics and money grabber and the NHL want's to stop giving a break in February... there is an alternative.

The winter Olympics have been a northern hemisphere dominated sporting event. We could have the next few winter Olympics in countries like Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa.... places where winter (if it has one) comes in our summer, June/July/August. That way it's the off season for the players. And it would show the Olympics as being a bit more of the world than of the Northern half time zone and season wise.

 

[Kin]

Do they insure other sport players from other events? And if so is it just medical bills or salary too? And if salary too, what's the salary of a part time skier or bobsledder?

Well, there isn't really pro bobsledding. That's sort of the point.

Let's say it was someone more expensive hurt in the olympics. Crosby for instance. Would it really be fair for them to foot the bill on 8+mil per season he's out? What if it's career ending like a terrible concussion again? Are they paying for years and years missed?

I think you're a little confused about the concept of insurance. If they pay for the insurance of a contract and a player gets injured the insurance company would pay the NHL team for the balance of a NHL players contract.

Hockey players are too expensive and there's too high of a possibility of not just one but many players being injured. I really don't think it's fair.

It's not fair that they get to reap huge profits while taking on virtually no risk either. The NHL is under no obligation to let players go, why should they interrupt their season and bear the risk of something they see virtually nothing from? I understand the benefit to them if the players collectively bargain it but if I have to choose between greedy jerks, I'll choose the NHL owners.

As for if the NHL insurance should cover it... I'd say yes if they cover other accidents outside the NHL such as car or home accidents and no if other injuries outside the NHL are not normally covered.

Why should NHL owners pay to insure their players doing something that has nothing to do with the NHL? If you're a construction worker and you get injured helping your neighbour build a deck would you think your employer owed you worker's comp?

 

[Kin]

The winter Olympics have been a northern hemisphere dominated sporting event. We could have the next few winter Olympics in countries like Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa.... places where winter (if it has one) comes in our summer, June/July/August. That way it's the off season for the players. And it would show the Olympics as being a bit more of the world than of the Northern half time zone and season wise.

Leaving aside the fact that most of those countries don't have the climate, even in winter, to host outdoor winter olympic events scheduling the Winter Olympics in those months would have it run smack up against the World Cup.

 

[losveratos]

The winter Olympics have been a northern hemisphere dominated sporting event. We could have the next few winter Olympics in countries like Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa.... places where winter (if it has one) comes in our summer, June/July/August. That way it's the off season for the players. And it would show the Olympics as being a bit more of the world than of the Northern half time zone and season wise.

Leaving aside the fact that most of those countries don't have the climate, even in winter, to host outdoor winter olympic events scheduling the Winter Olympics in those months would have it run smack up against the World Cup.

I would hope that the world cup isn't the full three months. Winter Olympics are usually just a couple of weeks.

And in reply to the other post you made before.

I understand insurance though I could have made my point more clear. Insurance for a player isn't standard. Each team pays a different amount for each player to their insurance company. There's also the odd uninsured player as well. Making the olympics fork over for those cost especially since we're talking about more than any team pays for a whole year probably. We're not talking about 60 third pairing defense men and 180 bottom line players. Half of the Olympic players are top line top pairing players. And while there are some SEL and KHL players thrown in as well. Even the cheapest of the bottom league players earn more than most jobs I've had in my life.

Also... what do you mean "let them go"?

Wouldn't you be upset if you were that construction worker you were talking about... but also the best archer in canada and your boss said... nope.... can't let you go for that 2 weeks. Too bad.

The NHL has affiliate teams. They can pull up players if they really wanted to keep playing.

 

[Kin]

I would hope that the world cup isn't the full three months. Winter Olympics are usually just a couple of weeks.

It runs until mid-July, so you'd be confining the Olympics to the last half of July and August again in countries that have no real way to stage an outdoor winter games.

I understand insurance though I could have made my point more clear. Insurance for a player isn't standard. Each team pays a different amount for each player to their insurance company. There's also the odd uninsured player as well. Making the olympics fork over for those cost especially since we're talking about more than any team pays for a whole year probably. We're not talking about 60 third pairing defense men and 180 bottom line players. Half of the Olympic players are top line top pairing players. And while there are some SEL and KHL players thrown in as well. Even the cheapest of the bottom league players earn more than most jobs I've had in my life.

Sure, but you're insuring them for two weeks. It would not be a prohibitive cost.

Also... what do you mean "let them go"?

I mean that if players sign a contract with a NHL team and the NHL team schedules games in February a player would either have to go to one or be in breach of contract. To the extent that a NHL player could just up and leave his team for two weeks it would either have to be A) collectively bargained or B) allowed by his employer.

Wouldn't you be upset if you were that construction worker you were talking about... but also the best archer in canada and your boss said... nope.... can't let you go for that 2 weeks. Too bad.

When I wasn't self-employed my employer frequently refused to let me have two weeks off at a time to do whatever I wanted. I didn't like it but I considered it a trade-off for the paychecks.

But regardless, that's a dodge of the question. An employer should only be responsible for the actions of his employees when they're on the job. If you injure yourself on your own free time, why should your employer be accountable?

The NHL has affiliate teams. They can pull up players if they really wanted to keep playing.

Or they could just stop letting their players go and play hockey for the benefit of the IOC for a couple weeks.

 

[losveratos]

We both have our opinions on the matter. I think that the olympics once every 4 years and being restricted to a 2 week period is a reasonable request. And the NHL should grant it.

And if your employers wouldn't allow you a 2 week period once every 4 years to represent their country in the olympics.... your boss was an obnoxious asshat and didn't deserve to be in a position of power in the company you worked for.

I'm not talking about a 2 week vacation or a 2 week sit at home and watch tv... I'm talking about the pride of a country. And with the NHL... it's not just 1 country they'd be barring.

The NHL would essentially be saying to the world that the Russians are more fair employers than Americans and that the wants and desires of the many are outweighed by the needs of the rich and the few.

As for insurance... whatever... I don't care. The players are also rich. I'm sure they can support themselves over the course of the injury. Even the poorest of the NHL players make 10x more than I did working for Apple. I'm sure they can afford it if they accept the call to the Olympics. Which again... they have to choose to go to as well. They could say no if the individuals were actually worried about insurance. Just like Mr. Bobsled.

 

[Kin]

And if your employers wouldn't allow you a 2 week period once every 4 years to represent their country in the olympics.... your boss was an obnoxious asshat and didn't deserve to be in a position of power in the company you worked for.

Well, that's the consequences of you taking my analogy and making it a horribly flawed one. If I was a carpenter who wanted to compete in the Olympics I could take two weeks holiday to do so. NHL players don't get to take two week vacations in the middle of the season for any reason.

I'm not talking about a 2 week vacation or a 2 week sit at home and watch tv... I'm talking about the pride of a country. And with the NHL... it's not just 1 country they'd be barring.

Which is fine, you're allowed to take whatever romantic view of the Olympics you want but the stone cold reality is that the IOC sells the rights to broadcast these games and they do so for hundreds of millions of dollars. They don't put on the games out of the goodness of their hearts. They're a bunch of slimey, rotten, deeply corrupt goons and I see no reason to think they should enjoy the privilege of NHL players and not compensate the NHL for their absence.

The NHL would essentially be saying to the world that the Russians are more fair employers than Americans and that the wants and desires of the many are outweighed by the needs of the rich and the few.

No, they'd be saying that they employ a certain group of people from September to June and that their time is booked pretty solid during those months. Do you really think that anyone objective would look at this situation and see a league that paid its players millions of dollars and gave them three months a year off is a terribly unfair employer?

As for insurance... whatever... I don't care. The players are also rich. I'm sure they can support themselves over the course of the injury. Even the poorest of the NHL players make 10x more than I did working for Apple. I'm sure they can afford it if they accept the call to the Olympics. Which again... they have to choose to go to as well. They could say no if the individuals were actually worried about insurance. Just like Mr. Bobsled.

Yeah, it really doesn't seem like you grasp the concept of the insurance the NHL takes out on its player contracts.