[Retired] Official Lockout Thread

[Guest Johnz96]

That's gotta be a sports record

[Jenny 315]

They didn't reject it because they didn't like it. They rejected it because they felt they didn't have enough information to properly evaluate it and the league wasn't interested in providing it to them.

Yeah, one of the big sticking points was that the players wanted a sample schedule to see what their travel schedules would really be like, and the NHL flatly refused to provide it. It seems impossible that the league wouldn't have made some sample schedules in the course of determining the realignment.

[cusimano_brothers 1,655]

Ryan Lambert with Puck Daddy had a scathing review of the League's (read: Bettman's) negotiating tactics. I'd recommend giving it a read.

I've left out a good chunk of the middle, because you really should go and give the whole thing a read. But I've included the parts that I agree with most.

Your recommendation should not be ignored. This is one of the best assessments of the situation to date; both scathing and absolutely truthful.

[drwscc 212]

This crap is exactly like politics these days. MY team is absolutely correct, and my opponents are all scumbags who are threatening to ruin the game/country/world. It's like everyone has lost the ability to be objective. NEITHER side has been negotiating in good faith, no matter how you spin it. BOTH sides are greedy and are working to get as much as they can. That doesn't change no matter who the commissioner is. They are fighting a PR war that, in the end, doesn't matter.

If the players caved today, and signed the last offer from the league, would you all be upset and not watch the games because the owners lost the PR war, but got what they wanted? If the league caved, would you be upset? It doesn't matter as long as they come back.

[VM1138 1,921]

I really don't want an 82 game season. Then they wouldn't suffer. They would be emboldened and know they could pull this crap every time the CBA ends and have it all work out. I want hockey back as much as everyone else, but they need to pay. And by "they" I mean the players and the owners. Best way to do that is to lose games and money and not be able to make them up. So I hope there's no deal for a while yet. Start in December or something.

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

Dreger spreading some measured optimism:

Both sides believe there is a deal to be made. Some on the union's side predict a resolution sometime in November, while the NHL remains firm that Oct. 25 is its breaking point in maintaining an 82-game regular season.

...

There's strong belief that if common ground can be found on the systemic issues such as revenue sharing, free agency, salary arbitration, entry-level restrictions and contract length, the 'make whole' concept the NHL put together earlier this week can be mutually molded to close the deal.

...

Both owners and players are growing weary of the chest pounding and day by day the pressure on both sides to get a deal done is building.

http://www.tsn.ca/blogs/darren_dreger/?id=407723

I really don't want an 82 game season. Then they wouldn't suffer. They would be emboldened and know they could pull this crap every time the CBA ends and have it all work out. I want hockey back as much as everyone else, but they need to pay. And by "they" I mean the players and the owners. Best way to do that is to lose games and money and not be able to make them up. So I hope there's no deal for a while yet. Start in December or something.

I know what you're saying and would like both sides to feel the sting of this crap too. But last time they lost part of a season was in 95, which was followed by losing an entire year the next CBA negotiations.

[Guest Johnz96]

Yeah

Yeah all that sounds a few people on here got together and wrote an article about what they thought....no proof of anything. Both the NHLPA and the NHL are wanting the moon and the stars and no one is willing to give anywhere. I lean more towards the owners simply for the fact that no other business in the world has it's employees making more money than the owners. That wouldn't be very smart of the owners.

The players are not only employees but also the product. i don't think many business owners are left with more than 40% of the revenues after paying their employees and all the costs involved in developing and producing their product

[Guest Johnz96]

With the latest cancellation of games I think that brings the grand total to 1,833 games lost under Bettman.

THAT'S gotta be a sports record

[thegerkin 189]

THAT'S gotta be a sports record

If it is record, it's a sad, sad statistic.

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

THAT'S gotta be a sports record

It is. Of the 4 major sports, the NHL leads by a longshot.

Granted the NFL has a lot fewer games per season, but it's still a ton compared to baseball and basketball.

[chances14 227]

This crap is exactly like politics these days. MY team is absolutely correct, and my opponents are all scumbags who are threatening to ruin the game/country/world. It's like everyone has lost the ability to be objective. NEITHER side has been negotiating in good faith, no matter how you spin it. BOTH sides are greedy and are working to get as much as they can. That doesn't change no matter who the commissioner is. They are fighting a PR war that, in the end, doesn't matter.

If the players caved today, and signed the last offer from the league, would you all be upset and not watch the games because the owners lost the PR war, but got what they wanted? If the league caved, would you be upset? It doesn't matter as long as they come back.

The best pr either side could have is to do get a deal done.

Dreger spreading some measured optimism:

I wonder who on the union side is saying a deal will be done in November?

Here's a nice article putting it all into perspective

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nhl--nhl-and-nhlpa-wasting-time-with-scare-tactics-and-pr-stunts-instead-of-settling-cba.html

Edited October 21, 2012 by chances14

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

The best pr either side could have is to do get a deal done.

I wonder who on the union side is saying a deal will be done in November?

I don't know. I highly doubt it was Fehr. Maybe an optimistic player?

Here's a nice article putting it all into perspective

http://sports.yahoo....ttling-cba.html

That is a good article.

It pretty well sums up why I blame the owners more than the union. (as a pre-emptive measure and to be clear, I also blame the union, just the owners side more).

They locked out the players for an entire season in 2004-05, and they got a salary cap and a 24-percent salary rollback. Now, despite seven years of record revenues, they're locking them out again and asking for more, more, more. They want them to go from 57 percent of HRR to 50, right now, when that represents $231 million a year, if revenues are flat. They want to tighten contracting rules, when loosening them was their concession last time. Their opening offer was too harsh, and now they're being only less harsh, and they're still being stubborn.

[Guest RedWingsDad]

They didn't reject it because they didn't like it. They rejected it because they felt they didn't have enough information to properly evaluate it and the league wasn't interested in providing it to them.

[/background][/size][/font][/color]

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=384427

Bettman basically implemented this plan without involving the union and dared them to kill it. It was the first F-You by the league to Fehr and the union, and a pre-cursor to how the CBA negotiations would go. (getting back on topic)

It's part of my problem with Bettman. Heading into a CBA negotiation instead of being diplomatic and involving the union he ignored them and literally said we don't need your approval. Great way to set the tone for coming negotiations.

It's too bad the players union stopped the re-alignment, I believe it was sorely needed. I wish the league could make business decisions without having to get prior approval from employees who in vast majority aren't experienced in running a business.

[Nev 1,085]

It is. Of the 4 major sports, the NHL leads by a longshot.

Granted the NFL has a lot fewer games per season, but it's still a ton compared to baseball and basketball.

How many players have suffered all 3 lockouts? Selanne springs to mind, but he can't be the only one. I wonder is someone will fail to make it into the HOF because of the points total they lost under the lockouts.

[Nightfall 871]

After reading all three proposals by the players and the latest one by the league, one thing is certain.....

None of the proposals are close to 50/50 right out of the gate as was touted by either side.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/id/19875/donald-fehrs-latest-letter-to-players

Even in Fehr's latest letter to the players where he outlines the proposals, the final proposal in which he said the split goes down to 50/50 right away, in reality it does not. Its similar speak like what we heard in the NHL proposal where they touted the 50/50 split but it really wasn't.

Right now, both sides are just playing the PR card. I also don't believe that both sides are negotiating in good faith. Especially when the league and the players can't stand listening to the other sides proposals for longer than 15 minutes and meeting for more than 1-2 hours at a time. Its readily apparent to me that these are two sides that don't trust each other. Now you can say this is the fault of the respective sides, the leaders that they chose, or the culture of the players vrs owners. I don't know which it is, but I can say that both sides do not trust each other and there is some dislike between the sides.

Firing Bettman and Fehr wouldn't solve the trust issue right away, but it is a start. In the past, these leaders were chosen to get the most for their side and not consider the other side. The leaders of both sides have to be canned in order to bring in fresh blood that is all about working with each other, not against. This should spark a culture change between both sides and assist with future negotiations.

As for the issue we have today, both sides have got to pressure their leaders to get into a room and work on a deal. Right now, it seems that both sides are happy just sitting on their asses and letting the season slip away. That should make any Bettman or Fehr fan unhappy.

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

It's too bad the players union stopped the re-alignment, I believe it was sorely needed. I wish the league could make business decisions without having to get prior approval from employees who in vast majority aren't experienced in running a business.

That's exactly the result Bettman wanted. It to look like the union killed a good idea for no good reason.

Hockey is entertainment and NHL players are ultimately elite talent. For those who think hockey players are just employees, I suggest you watch any other hockey league. Hockey is hockey, so there shouldn't be any difference, right?

Bettman is lucky that he's the commissioner of hockey and not some other sport because hockey probably has the smallest egos and fewest primadonnas. Can you imagine if NBA players were treated like this?

It was a stupid move on his part and achieved nothing other than setting a hostile tone before the CBA negotiations even began. If Bettman had any diplomacy skills he could've got the realignment approved and started a better relationship with players and Fehr headed into the CBA.

It wasn't that the players were against it. It's that it was sprung on them and they had little information to go on and the league wouldn't bother to provide it. Employees or not these are the guys who's lives and careers would be most effected by realignment. From their chances at winning the Cup down to how much they'd be on the road away from their family.

To not include them was terrible talent management by Bettman. It's like his short-man syndrome prevents him from making any move other than wielding whatever power he has.

How many players have suffered all 3 lockouts? Selanne springs to mind, but he can't be the only one. I wonder is someone will fail to make it into the HOF because of the points total they lost under the lockouts.

I read somewhere that Jagr was the only one to have played through all three lockouts. But you're right, Selanne has too.

[Buppy 1,720]

...

I read somewhere that Jagr was the only one to have played through all three lockouts. But you're right, Selanne has too.

Ray Whitney, Jason Arnott, and Chris Pronger (if you consider him as still playing) too. Probably a few more.

[Nightfall 871]

I read somewhere that Jagr was the only one to have played through all three lockouts. But you're right, Selanne has too.

Martin Brodeur has as well.

Edited October 21, 2012 by Nightfall

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

Ray Whitney, Jason Arnott, and Chris Pronger (if you consider him as still playing) too. Probably a few more.

Martin Brodeur has as well.

Wherever I read that, that journalist sure didn't do his homework saying it was only Jagr.

[Nightfall 871]

Wherever I read that, that journalist sure didn't do his homework saying it was only Jagr.

ESPN did a story on Brodeur actually and the lockout.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/id/19376/brodeur

Well worth reading.

[cusimano_brothers 1,655]

From Sportsnet:

The NHL's latest proposal didn't go over well with Washington Capitals superstar Alex Ovechkin, who has once again threatened to stay in the KHL if player salaries are significantly slashed in a new collective bargaining agreement.

Following Dynamo Moscow's 4-1 win on Saturday, Ovechkin told SovSport's Dmitry Ponomarenko, later translated by Peter Hassett, that he will explore ways to get out of his current NHL deal if there are major rollbacks in the new CBA.

"If my contract will be cut down greatly, it would be possible to annul it through the court," Ovechkin said.

"If we speak in Russian, the NHL provided a beautiful dream to the media and fans, but in reality it's a lie," he said. "It's showboating. The league is trying to show that they are kind of working, trying to save the season, but they offer nothing new. It's all the same, just in different words.

After all, this is his first rodeo/lockout.

In the KHL, does he get the bill for the shattered glass?

[Salviaman 104]

In other news I just moved to Northville. While I was finishing shopping at Target today I saw Niklas Kronwall walking in. It was cool to see a hockey player during the lockout.

[toby91_ca 620]

Ray Whitney, Jason Arnott, and Chris Pronger (if you consider him as still playing) too. Probably a few more.

Lidstrom just retired, so not him, but people like Arnott and O'Donnell have no contracts I believe, so they might retire too. Others would incude Jagr and Brodeur off the top of my head for sure...perhaps others, but can't think of anyone. Roloson is old enough for sure, but he didn't play in the NHL until he was 28 I believe.

It is comments like this from Daly that he has been making almost everytime someone talks to him that really annoy me.

Asked on Sunday

whether there was a chance for the sides to get something in place by Thursday's deadline, Daly responded by saying "that's more of a question for the union than it is for me."

So, in other words "whether there will be hockey played is totally up to the players, all they need to do is accept our offer. Whether they play or not has nothing to do with the NHL."

[Nightfall 871]

Burnside at ESPN just wrote one of the best columns on the NHL Lockout.

http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/8534787/nhl-week-make-break-nhl-legacy

What has been most striking as this lockout lurches into its sixth week now is how precious little true negotiating has been done. The two sides have worked on ancillary (i.e., non-core economic) issues but as for sitting down, shirtsleeves rolled up, let's-really-get-down-to-brass-tacks-on-how-the-money-will-be-split-up-to-which-of-the-NHL's-needy-teams, not so much.

The NHL, for instance, waited all of about 10 minutes before dismissing the players' proposals Thursday even though, according to the union, at least a couple of those proposals examined a manner in which they could get to the 50-50 split in revenues that seems to be the magic equation to getting a deal done.

Far too much time has been spent pontificating for the cameras, spinning and bad-mouthing and complaining and quiet sulking, and far too little time getting to work.

And the time for that has come to stop.

The best line in the story though is this....

A shortened 2012-13 season should be emblazoned with a scarlet letter "M" for "Morons."

[Buppy 1,720]

Burnside at ESPN just wrote one of the best columns on the NHL Lockout.

http://espn.go.com/n...reak-nhl-legacy

The best line in the story though is this....

Little point in sitting down if one side is going to throw out proposals after barely a glance. Remember, this is twice in a row Bettman has rejected proposals without even taking time to consider them. Just a glance to see if there's an immediate pay cut, and if not it goes straight in the trash. How do you negotiate with that? What more can the players do but capitulate to the owners demands?

What bugs me about all of the people bashing the union is that you all seem to agree that they shouldn't have to take a pay cut, but then say they have to be willing to compromise and give up a little more. Those two statements are contradictory. The players are as low as they can realistically go in the short term without pay cuts, and pretty much as low as they can go on the overall share% without going below 50% in any given year. And the worst part is that the longer the owners fail to acknowledge that, the higher the player's share has to be to avoid cuts.

That seems to be the owner's plan. They'll force the players to take a cut one way or another. They'll lose revenue this year, possibly strangle future growth, probably win again. Then when the next negotiations come around, and the league is in the exact same place, they'll do it all again.

The only place I find blame on both sides is that neither actually addresses the real problem. They need to solve the revenue disparity, and I don't think revenue sharing is the answer. They have to change the payroll range system. $16M is too small. And some teams have to move. If they don't, whether the split is 50% or 52% when this CBA ends doesn't make any difference. Either will still see a handful of teams that can't reach the floor, 10-15 more teams that could get themselves in trouble if they don't spend wisely. The top teams will add another $100M in profits on top of what they're already not allowed to spend, but the situation for the rest of the league won't be any different than it is now. The owners will come out talking about how unfair a 50/50 split is, and lockout again until they get 45%.

Maybe if this lockout causes revenues to take a hit, we might be lucky enough to see the kind of labor peace MLB has had since the strike, but I think for that to happen players have to "win" this negotiation.