Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Random
Beer sales can sure as hell tell the difference between a good economy and a bad one. It isn't the team's record that is damaging the bottom line this season, but the fans' disposable income.
Yes, and what they are is declining – in ancillary, day-to-day matters first; next year, probably, where it will really hurt, in season-ticket sales. This makes the owners particularly keen not to take on unnecessary expense. They will therefore be reluctant to retain salary on trades, even if they have no actual policy against it. Which was my whole damned point to begin with.
Which is why hedging is irrelevant in this context. I was arguing against Enoch Root's claim that all the team's financial worries were solved by hedging. Hedging can't solve a crappy economy.
|
Without commenting on the overall discussion between you and Enoch (and I don't want to enter the fray!), I just wanted to chime in on this one point.
I am not sure you are right about the Flames being unwilling in retaining salary. Perhaps on a long-term deal, you may be right, but I don't think they would have balked at any salary retention in the deadline deals.
For instance, the Jones trade. They agreed to take back Backstrom - he is highly paid, and hasn't played this year yet. One could argue that in essence, they traded cap space for a pick. David Jones would have probably added more to the team for the rest of the season than what Backstrom is likely to do, but the agreed to take him to assure themselves of the extra 6th round pick. One could argue it is akin to 100% retention on David Jones.