The Money or Your Name on the Cup?

[DarkStar50 679]

Now that Ryan Malone has played in his first and probably last Stanley Cup Final of his career after leaving Pittsburgh for the money in Tampa Bay, I was wondering which I would choose if I was an NHLer. Would I take the big money contract or would I take less money (still in the $3Mil range, using Malone as the example) and stay on a team like Pittsburgh which has tremendous potential to get back to the Cup Finals in the next few years. I know this question is a bit silly since except for David Perron, none of us here will ever face this question, I thought it was worth thinking about. I think I would rather have my name on the Cup and take less money. I am sure I would still earn enough money no matter what but your name on the Cup is for eternity.

Which would you choose?

[althoma1 574]

Playing careers can be cut short through injury or just through a mediocre season or two if you aren't one of the elite players. If you're a 2nd or 3rd line guy who just had a good year and may not have another opportunity for a big pay day then I think going for the money makes sense. However, if you're an elite player who already has a lot of cash then going somewhere where you could win a Cup and taking less money to do so can be considered. It's what Selanne and Kariya tried to do unsuccessfully with Colorado (although I think they had some damn good bonuses).

If I was in the position of a Mats Sundin, someone who has already had a long career that has made him a lot of money, then I would go where I thought I had the best chance of winning a Cup and not for the best offer. In the case of Ryan Malone who is 27 and a good, but not top 10 player and who just came off a good season I'd go for the money. In Malone's case this may be the best and only time for a big money contract. Sure, he would certainly be well off with the league minimum, but he might have to work again at some point. With a multi-million dollar contract if he doesn't over spend and manages his finances well then he'll only have to work when and if he chooses to after his playing career is over. I think Wade Dubielewicz signing in Russia for more money and likely more playing time also makes sense for him - why be a backup for $500K when you can be a starter and make more money? I'm sure Dubielewicz would love to win a cup as a starter and while that's not impossible it's unlikely to happen so he made a good financial decision.

I don't blame the guys who have toiled for years in the minors or have played for low (by NHL standards) pay for a while as a 2nd or 3rd liner who cash in after a successful year. It's the guys who have already made Millions like a Yashin who continually go after bigger and bigger contracts that are questionable - thinking about your finances long term makes sense, but if you're already set then getting your name on the Cup should be a priority. That's just my take on it.

[Sven 1]

In both ways, you end up in a good position, so actually it doesnt matter what you choose. But i personally dont like players who switch their teams like their underwear and become a modern "soldier" who will do whatever/whoever pays him, so i'd go with the second option.

You earn a s-load of money, no matter where you play. AFAIK, St. Louis #57 (or any other young player/rookie) doesnt have to worry about the bills in the rest of his life. Imagine the rookie salary for just 3 years. Then you are done (money wise) for the rest of your life. DAMN!

[JR Boucicaut 3768]

Ask Mike Modano about that. Things come up.

You earn a s-load of money, no matter where you play. AFAIK, St. Louis #57 (or any other young player/rookie) doesnt have to worry about the bills in the rest of his life. Imagine the rookie salary for just 3 years. Then you are done (money wise) for the rest of your life. DAMN!

[LegoDoom 0]

Between paying taxes, your agent, and many other expenses, I bet the money doesn't take players as far as fans think it does.

I'd probably take the money, but a large part depends on what stage of my career I'd be at.

[Penguinsfanatic 0]

I'd definitely take the Cup, I would sign for far less to be on a team where I could make cup runs every year......but money however does change people.

[mattzilla 0]

you know, we can all sit here and say that we'd take our names on the cup, but we're all prone to the same mistakes as the rest of the planet.

You dangle a large chunk of cash in front of people, and peoples minds start changing quick.

who says malone made a bad choice? looks like tampa is reloading, theyre not gonna be bad for long with guys like vinny, st louis and stamkos.

they need some d and a half decent goalie and they'll be fine.

[hockeyherb 1]

Of course all of the money sounds pretty sweet to all of us, but if you're making 3 mil a year and someone offers you 4, you really start to think about it. Another mil goes a LOOOONG way and it's hard to turn your back on that.

It's like if you're making $50k a year and then you make $100k. You think all your worries are over? No way - you'll easily spend the extra income and then feel strapped again. It's easy to say, well $3 mil is enough, I'm all set if I'm making that, but the reality is with the lifestyles they lead they can feel like they've gotta make 4 or 5 mil to feel comfortable. They also have to make that money last a lot of years because they will likely never make anywhere close to that amount once they quit hockey.

[the_sock 1]

There have been many players struggling with their pro careers, not knowing if they'll play next year, and their team just happens to win the cup and they get their names on it and a ring. Then there is players who play hard, with love for the game and with a great heart but the cup never is near them. Fate is sometimes cruel.

As for me, as money can always be made else ware, getting your name on the cup for history is much more enticing than a big paycheck. Holding up the cup is the dream of every little kid who plays in the minor hockey, and not everyone will be able to do it. I've heard it called the hardest trophy to win in pro sports, and I'd give my left nut to have my name on it and to parade it around my home for my friends to party with it.

[Smitty34 0]

It depends on how much money I was making already and at what point in my career I'm at. I would most likely take the money because I'd want to be financial secure for the future. I'd like to say I would take the cup though, but I would probably take the money.

[starskie 0]

I would take the cup. Winning/having your name on the cup is a priceless moment, every kids dream, and something I would take over money any day, even if it meant working after my hockey career was over. Besides, anyone could live comfortably making the amount NHL'ers make, it's just the way you define comfortable.

He is a good player, thus he would make a decent paycheck even if he stayed in pitts. I don't think he would have to worry too much about his financial situation unless he just throws money away like its paper

[Chadd 916]

There's no way to ensure that you will win a cup, no matter what you do. Given the urgency that Tampa is showing with these moves, I wouldn't be surprised if they made the finals before the Penguins.

That said, I would find it hard to leave a lot of money on the table. It only takes one major injury to end your career, no matter what team you pick. I would do what I could to ensure the financial future of myself and my family and once that happened, I would be more willing to take less to play for a team that I thought had a better chance to win.

[kosydar 0]

I would take the money. Like Chadd said there is no guarantee of anything except the money. I don't think its unreasonable to think that in four or five years Pittsburgh could be the new Tampa Bay.

[legiahockey 3]

im gunna agree with the money. if i could garentee the cup id take it but there are no garentees exept your paycheck.

so id go for more money and do whatever i can to make my team a cup team

[heatley015 0]

If I was making at least three mil a year I would go cup no doubt. But any less than three I would have to go with money.

[SuperMan3 1]

my name

[ashtonhutch05 0]

Money for sure. I'd rather a World Championship than a Stanley Cup.

[warrior37 0]

the money

[sweetblazer 0]

I think something most people dont take in consideration is a lot of these guys have families...In a perfect world where they are all single and care only about themselves, the cup obviously. But to pick up and move your family...not to mention every father wants to provide as good a life for his family as they can. People seem to think because someone takes money they are selfish, when in reality in most cases it is proably the opposite.

[djinferno 2]

money for sure... life is hard

[Jason Harris 31]

Assuming I was good enough to have a legitimate choice -- and not $10M versus $750K -- there's no doubt I'd rather go for the Cup.

I remember something Robert Parish said to Alonzo Mourning when he left the Charlotte Hornets (who were approaching contender status) at around $62M for the Miami Heat at $67M total. He said at that level of money, you can't tell the difference. Although I'll never be in that situation, I have to imagine he's right. If you need the extra $5 million to live comfortably, you're doing something wrong.

So, would I take $10M over $750K? Yes. But I wouldn't take $3.2M over $2.3M if it meant playing with a team that is habitually a contender, especially since endorsements can make up some of the difference.

[JJ Thompson94 0]

First I don't think Malone is trading money for a Stanley Cup. With St. Louis, Lecaviler and Stamkos I'm sure Malone feels he's getting more money and feels the Lightning and the Penguins have an equal shot of winning a cup in the next 5 years.

As for me, I'd rather get a cup or a few cups depending how much I'm giving up. If I'm getting 3.5 from a worse team I'd rather take 3 from a cup contender. If a cup contender is offering 2, then I'll take 3.5 from a worse team. I agree exactly with what Malone did. Just like him I think within 3-4 years, the Lightning will have a REAL shot of winning another cup.

I feel winning the cup can make you more money in the end. Depending on where you are. If I felt Minnesota was a contender I'd sign for less to win a cup in Minnesota where winning a cup can make you more money in the end. Commercials, autograph signings & apperances, starting a car wash named "Stanley Cup Carwash" all that stuff attached. Look at Messier, winning a cup in New York brings him alot more money in his pocket, just for winning a cup. Leetch, Richter and Graves also make a pretty penny just because they won a cup in New York.

[chef_ducky 0]

NAME>>>>Life is short, but non-rich people can survive, I would find away. Anything for the cup after party!

[mack 44]

WS Ring>Money>Cup

[razrbladz12 0]

So, would I take $10M over $750K? Yes. But I wouldn't take $3.2M over $2.3M if it meant playing with a team that is habitually a contender, especially since endorsements can make up some of the difference.

I agree with Jason. If you're making a big jump in salary, go for it. Most of them do have families to provide for and if this helps them out, all the better for them. However, if you're making an extra million or so, does it really make a difference? (depending on your previous salary) They don't have to live that much of an extravagant lifestyle. They can still afford a nice house, car, pay for bills, put money away, so on and so forth. A lot of the time it's about greed and getting every extra little penny they can. So if it were me, I would go for the cup for sure, guaranteed or not.