Jump to content


Dabura's Photo

Dabura

Member Since 27 Feb 2004
Offline Last Active Today, 04:31 PM
***--

#2335816 [Retired] Official Lockout Thread

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 10 December 2012 - 05:16 PM

good article on the breakdown of the core economic issues and while those are the most important issues, there are some things that the owners have given the players. and while they aren't nearly as important as the big issues, i'm sure the players will be glad to have them. also, that article didn't mention the pension issues, which would be considered an owner's concession

http://www.startribu.../177160641.html

legally, the owners are the ones being generous with the make whole because all contracts signed are subject to changes to a new cba. the players and agents are fully aware that contracts could and most likely will be changed when a new cba comes along, which is why i believe suter and parise got so much signing bonus money, which is not subject to cba changes. now you could argue morally and ethically the owners are in the wrong if they don't offer to honor contracts in full which i agree they should, but legally they don't have to.

I know what you're saying, but I'd hardly call it generous to agree to honor a portion of the contract you've decided not to pay in full, some of which were signed only months ago.

My understanding is they tried a similar move in the NBA lockout (which isn't surprising since all 4 major sports are repped by the same law firm in CBA negotiations) and it got quickly shot down. While they NBA players agreed to 50/50, they play in a league with a soft cap and luxury tax and had the owners make a large increase in revenue sharing.

All sports are different, but the NBA is a relatively close business to the NHL. And in comparison, the NHL players are getting hammered in this negotiation, in great part due to the sins of the owners.

And of the things that benefit players listed in the article:

1) artificially inflate the salary cap in Year 1 so teams don’t have to trade or release players;
That helps the owners just as much for teams to get under the cap. And I would hardly call that a benefit to players, other than things could have been much worse. They're having their salaries cut back and the cap further restricted. Not waiving players isn't a benefit offered to the players. It just means the owners didn't make things even worse for them.

This is the problem I have with the logic of the league side. Because of the owners ridiculous first proposal, Bettman keeps claiming all they've done is concede. Starting at an insane point and moving towards something reasonable, however, is not really a concession. It just means you've actually decided to negotiate in good faith. Fehr should have started by taking the cap off the table, or increasing player share to 70%. Then he could have "conceded" to allowing the cap be in play again. Or having the percentage come down to 60%.

At best, this one's a wash.

2) trade player salary and cap charges in trades (this is something both teams and players have wanted);
probably benefits owners more in that they can dump the awful deals they've made. At best, also a wash.

3) eliminate re-entry waivers;
I'd say wash, but I may be missing something on how this benefits players more than owners because I don't know all the ins and outs. Teams being able to send players down without potentially losing them is a benefit.

4) Increase revenue sharing with further increases as revenues grow, and the top grossing teams making the biggest contributions (revenue sharing is something Don Fehr is passionate about; wants it so the teams that really need assistance are assisted);
This helps the league and unlike anything the owners have proposed, actually addresses the fundamental problem in the league's economic structure. Definitely a wash.

5) Introduction of appeal rights to a neutral third-party arbitrator in cases involving on- and- off-ice discipline (player-proposed wish).
This one I don't know much about but I initially read somewhere it would probably be a very rare circumstance.

Taken in total, none of those even come close to moving from 57 to 50% in salary and giving up all the contracting rights the players will need to in order to make a deal.


Negotiations are give and take. The starting point for who determining who is conceding something is the last CBA, not the first ridiculous proposal the NHL made. Bettman keeps trying this slight of hand and it seems to be working on people.


#2334867 [Retired] Official Lockout Thread

Posted by StormJH1 on 28 November 2012 - 01:06 PM

This whole thing is so sickening. Even though I feel like the NHLPA still has some measure of additional support from the public/media as compared to the owners...it feels like even the people who support the NHLPA have allowed this entire debate to be stuffed into the framework laid out by the NHL. The idea that "we have to get to 50/50", which is really just a completely arbitrary distribution that SOUNDS non-arbitrary, necessarily called for a massive reduction in player revenues and a lockout. What rationale could there possibly be for completely shutting down the product and asking the players to shift hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue back to the owners, when the product (as a whole) was actually generating far more money than seemed possible in 2005?

We don't see the actual numbers behind these purported losses by the 18 NHL franchises. What part does the players share of revenues have in the fact that about half of the league can't operate at a profit...any more than the players have to do with the fact that some other franchises have turned CONSIDERABLE profits? Moreover, if the cap floor is fixed at $16 million below the cap maximum, why don't we see 15-20 teams bottoming out as close to that floor as they possibly can, if they're hurting for money so bad anyways? Heck, you have a greater chance of making the playoffs as you do missing the playoffs anyway (16 out of 30), why not just save $10 million a year by bottoming out and hoping that enough other teams do the same? If Nashville and Phoenix can make the playoffs multiple times with all the issues they have financially, couldn't anybody?

The surprising truth is that most owners actually want to win. They want to win so badly that they will cheat their own CBA provisions as much as they can, waste money on stashed minor leaguers, backloaded deals, and bonuses that don't even appear in the cap, and overpay undeserving players like Ville Leino, Mike Cammileleri, and Jeff Finger chasing the dream. Then, when the bubble bursts again, they'll just ask for more money every 7 years. I'm sorry, but that's not the way to run a business. I don't blame Jeff Finger for taking huge money to play a game he loves, to support a career that could be over tomorrow if he crashes into the boards wrong. I do blame the guys who thought paying that money was a good idea, and drooled over expansion fees without putting any type of revenue sharing in place to support struggling teams.


#2334724 Has your opinion of kenny changed?

Posted by kipwinger on 26 November 2012 - 12:14 PM

So you dont think Kenny did a good job?


Look, as far as GM's go I think Holland is one of the best, so I think he does a good job. However, you can't lose 3 of your top 4 defensemen in the course of two years and not bring somebody in. Obviously you can't replace Lidstrom, but you can replace Stuart and a very old and beat up Rafalski. Players were available, they weren't signed for one reason for another. I think that was a mistake. So to answer your question, yes I think he does a good job, but he didn't that time.


#2334300 Sheahan arrested for "superdrunk" driving

Posted by kipwinger on 19 November 2012 - 04:16 PM

I honestly can't believe how much stone throwing is going on here. Who knew LGW was so full of morally, ethically, and behaviorally PERFECT individuals? I know I screwed up a lot in my youth, then learned my lessons and got over it. How lucky for all of you that you've never done anything wrong or irresponsible before. Nothing to get over. Easy.

Here's hoping Riley (and the rest of us degenerates) can one day live up to the high bar that you've set for us. Lord knows you'll all be there waiting to point a finger and give us a good old fashioned self-righteous sermon if we don't.


#2334303 [Retired] Official Lockout Thread

Posted by Wingzman91 on 19 November 2012 - 06:02 PM

And the owners rightfully so will not be giving up their money any time soon so the players can all go over seas to play I guess. If that's what they want so bad. The idiot players that are running their mouths to the media need to shut up and let the big boys negotiate and stop crying.


Ya, get in your pen cattle.
How dare you have an opinion on your boss not letting you make a living.
You are a product and not a person.
You are under contract, that needs to be respected along with the man who signed it.
--PFFFFT--

Sounds like the only crying is from the turncoats on these boards and the PR boys running TSN right now.

A two week break was proposed, how is that negotiating???
Ian spoke up and threw Bettman under the bus, saying what all of us have said or thought at one point.
And what happened???
They got their asses back to the table, way to go and thank you Mr. White.


#2333454 Red Wings Off Season: I Give Them an A

Posted by GoWings1905 on 04 November 2012 - 11:26 AM

I think an "A" is a little generous. At best, I would give it a "C". Love the Tootoo move to add a different element to an already strong bottom-six. Not really thrilled about signing an aging Samuelsson (again) and expecting him to contribute offensively in a top-six role. The top-six has really been stagnant for years -- Zetterberg and Datsyuk have to generate everything offensively and in the playoffs especially lately, we don't have forwards that can score goals in tight games. Filppula had a terrific breakout season. Can he duplicate it or even get better? We all know what Franzen provides. The other two spots belong to maybe Bertuzzi and Samuelsson? I have said it in other threads previously discussing the off-season, but the Red Wings are going to need Nyquist and/or Brunner to contribute immediately whenever hockey resumes.

The defense is bad. Losing three of your top four d-men in two years is not a good situation especially when one of them is Nick Lidstrom. Obviously there's no replacing him and Holland did his best to secure the closest thing in Suter. I can't get upset over that, but it does bother me more wasn't done in advance when it was clear Nick's days were winding down and Stuart was going back to California. Colaiacovo is a decent depth signing (if healthy), however, who logs big minutes on this defense now besides Kronner? You are asking for major leaps out of Quincey and Ericsson, plus rapid development from Smith. I think all of that is certainly possible, but it's a rather scary position to be in.

A lot of things would have go to well for the Red Wings to even win a playoff round with this roster. Remember, they won ONE game last spring with Lidstrom around. The transition to being younger, bigger and faster is finally taking place at least.


#2333110 Where would you go?

Posted by Kira on 31 October 2012 - 10:11 AM

I can see both alternatives...wanting to stay close to family, and yet expanding your horizons by going to a different place.

I kinda envy Drew Miller playing in Scotland...I've always wanted to go there, it's a beautiful country, English speaking (if you can get past the brogue), great pubs, wonderful music, history up the ying yang...what more could you ask for?


#2331217 Russians Possibly Staying In KHL After Lockout

Posted by esteef on 10 October 2012 - 03:11 PM

Z should be in politics, "I know for a fact the Russians will probably stay." :lol:

esteef


#2330814 Z basically says Bettman should be fired

Posted by Wingzman91 on 05 October 2012 - 09:36 PM

Caring about the fans does not mean capitulating to the other side.

I would hope they love the game more than it's fans.
This deal also will affect hundreds of players not even in the league yet, there are more things to consider than "will fan X have something to do after work tonight?"

I want hockey back also, but in no way am I pretending I am the victim here.

The simple fact: The OWNERS locked out the PLAYERS, because the OWNERS saw a opportunity to take back guaranteed contract money and use it to subsidize teams in non-traditional markets.

I sign contracts with people all the time, never has anyone ever suggested that I take less money and do the same amount of work.
I don't know why people feel entitled to these players, they don't owe you anything, they owe their family for all the time they are gone and cutting their household income by 1/4 doesn't fly.

If Mario had to give back 1/4 of his money back in the day then there might not be a Penguins team today.
Yet now he has the balls to demand that of the people he inspired to join this profession.

Bottom Line: The league is not losing money, it is earning a profit. Some teams are winning, others losing.
The heaviest contributing factor to the losing of said teams is that they don't have a big enough fan base in their non-traditional market.
Taking money from the players allows owners to operate the flawed system longer, but does nothing to fix the problem.
If there is no problems then what will they point to next time they feel like changing all the rules because their team can not win the cup.


#2329958 New League?

Posted by Bring Back The Bruise Bros on 24 September 2012 - 10:31 PM

If I was to start a hockey league, this is how it would look, from an on-ice standpoint:

-No trapezoid area. Goalies can freely handle the puck.
-Players make their own decisions regarding facial protection.
-No instigator penalty. Let the players police themselves.
-Head hunting rules in place, however not nearly ridiculously touchy as today's NHL head hunting rules.
-Tolerance for a bit more obstruction (Hooking, holding, interference) than today's NHL.
-No penalties for "Delay of game"

As far as off the ice:

-No salary rollbacks on player contracts. Once the deal is done, its done.


I don't have many other concrete opinions as to what it should look like off the ice. No greedy owners. No greedy players.

Obviously, starting a new hockey league in North America wouldn't be easy. The NHL is the top dog. It'd be hard to compete in cities that have NHL teams. Then again, since those NHL teams are constantly locked out, now would be a great time to give it a shot. Who's in this with me?


#2329779 Report: NHL may cancel Winter Classic by November if no CBA deal

Posted by VM1138 on 23 September 2012 - 10:28 AM

Someone create a new league, please. For all the storied history of the National Hockey League, the luster has really worn off. Using a lockout as a negotiating strategy every time the CBA comes up for renewal is a terrible business tactic. They can't keep jerking people around like this. Unfortunately, there isn't any sort of organized movement to force the owner's hand so we're stuck with whatever they choose to do to us.

We can rant all we want, and I'm certainly angry, but I'm not going to say I'm done with the league. If the Wings come back, I'll watch because I'm a die-hard hockey and Wings fan.

But I wouldn't mind if the players started their own league and I'd probably give that a chance.


#2329770 Report: NHL may cancel Winter Classic by November if no CBA deal

Posted by F.Michael on 23 September 2012 - 04:48 AM

Food Network FTW.

FOOD FIGHT!


#2329761 Report: NHL may cancel Winter Classic by November if no CBA deal

Posted by drumnj on 22 September 2012 - 10:28 PM

Food Network FTW.

I'm thinking the SPEED network would be a perfect fit for Doc.

Plus, ice rinks are already shaped like ovals :shifty:


#2329757 Report: NHL may cancel Winter Classic by November if no CBA deal

Posted by kylee on 22 September 2012 - 09:05 PM

Don Cherry forces all European born producers off the set during his show. They don't have the toughness to make a good meal.


#2329748 Report: NHL may cancel Winter Classic by November if no CBA deal

Posted by irishock on 22 September 2012 - 06:15 PM

Doc burns the stove and yells "FIRE!"