HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Minnesota Wild (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=39)
-   -   So who is bummed about the lockout? II (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1273963)

Fel 96 10-21-2012 04:51 PM

So who is bummed about the lockout? II
 
Continue.

NHL believes deal to end lockout is ‘on the table’ (Latest article)


--------------------

Part I

Victorious Secret 10-21-2012 04:54 PM

Not getting done. Wild win MacKinnon. Trade Parise and get back some salary space. Dynasty.

Avder 10-21-2012 05:00 PM

I'm gonna be stuck with this avatar until next September.

Victorious Secret 10-21-2012 05:02 PM

I think you are skipping a year. This will go to 2014 baby.

Wueste 10-21-2012 05:20 PM

I doubt they officially cancel the season until 2013. It would remove any motivation for the players to make any compromise. Talk about it now seems like a scare tactic

bozak911 10-22-2012 11:51 AM

I cleaned up my numbers: A Make It Work Moment

D U M B A 10-22-2012 01:14 PM

With that over 5 year contract rule, we won't be trading Parise or Suter because once they retire, we're screwed.

bozak911 10-22-2012 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Utterly Disgusting (Post 55189681)
With that over 5 year contract rule, we won't be trading Parise or Suter because once they retire, we're screwed.

Wut?

squidz* 10-22-2012 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bozak911 (Post 55187695)
I cleaned up my numbers: A Make It Work Moment

I just glanced through the post, but the layout and those tables are really not playing well with each other. Might need to adjust your formatting and break up the tables.

squidz* 10-22-2012 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Utterly Disgusting (Post 55189681)
With that over 5 year contract rule, we won't be trading Parise or Suter because once they retire, we're screwed.

We won't be trading them anyway, but the rule is unlikely to have quite as huge an effect as people think. Suter's deal runs until he's 40, which for his style of play isn't exactly unreasonable. I would be surprised if he retired with more than 2 years left, and wouldn't be surprised at all if he played out the whole thing.

Parise's contract is a little more concerning as he's more likely to retire earlier. But even then, I can't see him retiring with more than 3 years left as he'd lose out on $6MM in salary if quit a year earlier.

Now the biggest reason for a lack of concern is that there's not necessarily reason to assume that clause is going to stay in the CBA. Sure the league is pushing for it right now, but it doesn't have any teeth because the only contracts it could possibly affect over the term of the CBA are Chara (not even a cheat contract, it's back loaded) and Pronger (which is a 35+ contract and already played under these rules). Aside from those two contracts, there aren't any deals that will expire under a 6 year CBA. In fact, a few of the deals (Parise, Suter, Weber, Kovalchuk, possibly Crosby) wouldn't even expire under the CBA after that if it's also 5-6 years in length.

D U M B A 10-22-2012 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bozak911 (Post 55190395)
Wut?

Quote:

Originally Posted by squidz (Post 55190641)
We won't be trading them anyway, but the rule is unlikely to have quite as huge an effect as people think. Suter's deal runs until he's 40, which for his style of play isn't exactly unreasonable. I would be surprised if he retired with more than 2 years left, and wouldn't be surprised at all if he played out the whole thing.

Parise's contract is a little more concerning as he's more likely to retire earlier. But even then, I can't see him retiring with more than 3 years left as he'd lose out on $6MM in salary if quit a year earlier.

Now the biggest reason for a lack of concern is that there's not necessarily reason to assume that clause is going to stay in the CBA. Sure the league is pushing for it right now, but it doesn't have any teeth because the only contracts it could possibly affect over the term of the CBA are Chara (not even a cheat contract, it's back loaded) and Pronger (which is a 35+ contract and already played under these rules). Aside from those two contracts, there aren't any deals that will expire under a 6 year CBA. In fact, a few of the deals (Parise, Suter, Weber, Kovalchuk, possibly Crosby) wouldn't even expire under the CBA after that if it's also 5-6 years in length.

Sorry Bozak, I was on my phone when I replied about the 5 year contract. I forgot to clarify that it wasn't in place currently but something the league is fighting for. Like squidz noted above, who is to say that the next time they work on the CBA (years later) that change doesn't get removed. It's nothing worth losing sleep about now but something to keep in mind.

bozak911 10-22-2012 03:13 PM

fixed the tables a little bit... IE at work only and it is always barfed anyway. I will look at it when i get home.

forthewild 10-22-2012 03:56 PM

out of all the people i think Fehr might have come up with a solution roadmap for the whole dispute.

in his letter for proposal 3, what Fehr basically said that under the immediate reduction to 50% player contracts are reduced by roughly 12%, so what Fehr proposed is to take the contract and split it, he said 13% of the contract is set aside and paid out in full, the other 87% would then be what gets counted against the cap and thus is subject to the escrow each year.

that is basically going to even out for the next year.

now suppose this, what if the owners who want immediate cuts do this, do as Fehr suggest, split the contracts, something like 85% for payed, and 15%, but the 15% they would pay starting year 3. this way players get full value of their deals, and also the owners get the cuts they desire to help reduce pay this year.

essentially if you make $1,000,000, you would get 850,000k, with 150,000k being deferred to year 3 of the deal, this way the contract is split and NHL gets their reduction, while players get their full value. also the deferred amount gets paid over years 3,4,5 of the deal unless a player retires in which case they get full amount when they retire.

i dunno if i worded that to make sense.

Quote:

A reduction to 50% from 57% of HRR is a 12.3% cut (that is, 7/57), but the loss in an individual player’s salary would be about 13%. (This is because benefit costs do not fall and these come off the top.)
• The owners honor all existing player contracts. We do this by dividing an existing contract, on a yearly basis, into two separate parts: the 13% and the remaining 87%. The 13% is paid to the player in any event, and it is not counted in the players share and is also off the cap.
• The remaining 87% of existing contracts, plus all new contracts, go into the players’ share (plus all benefits). Thus constructed, the players share will become 50% of HRR, immediately.
• This means that an individual player under an existing contract would receive the 13% segregated, plus a normal payment, subject to escrow, of 87% of his salary. A player with a new contract would have 100% of his salary subject to the 50/50 split. However, since the 13% of existing contracts are off the cap, this should create more cap space, which will be important as the cap will be squeezed.
• Over time, the existing contracts expire, and the share will fall towards 50%. Below is a chart showing the anticipated savings, but these could be greater if there are a significant number of buyouts.
also clean up the math a bit, but this is the gist of it, also i don't think its needed to segregate contracts for more then two years, 2nd year is up in the air depending on growth. also i believe the key to my proposal for solution is that portion being deferred by two years giving owners immediate relief while still ensuring players get their money also one thing i need to mention is the deferred amount will be adjusted for inflation, to ensure that what is taken in today's dollar value is paid in two years dollar value, this doesn't mean players get interest just that they get their amount adjusted for inflation.

Jarick 10-22-2012 04:34 PM

You can avoid all that mess by just stepping down percentage share over the next two seasons. With even modest rises in HRR, it should get close to 50% by then.

forthewild 10-22-2012 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jarick (Post 55195467)
You can avoid all that mess by just stepping down percentage share over the next two seasons. With even modest rises in HRR, it should get close to 50% by then.

this is a very good point, however owners seem hellbent on getting immediate reduction, i believe their point is that t hey have to reduce costs (player pay) this way both parties walk away happyish

squidz* 10-22-2012 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jarick (Post 55195467)
You can avoid all that mess by just stepping down percentage share over the next two seasons. With even modest rises in HRR, it should get close to 50% by then.

54.5%-52%-50%-50%-50%-50%

Honestly, if the players had offered this deal, I think the league would have taken it. Unfortunately, Fehr seems intent upon de-linking salary from HRR. The league would rather lose two seasons than do that. (Note, this is not at all giving even the least bit of credence to those nutjobs who imply that losing two seasons is even remotely possible)

Add a "make whole" provision in the case of a revenue hit this year or next and have it come out of the owners pockets and we're playing hockey.

squidz* 10-22-2012 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by forthewild (Post 55195745)
this is a very good point, however owners seem hellbent on getting immediate reduction, i believe their point is that t hey have to reduce costs (player pay) this way both parties walk away happyish

Stepping down even just to 54.5% is almost certainly acceptable to owners as long as they get down to 50% by year 3. While it might look like the owners are pushing hard for an immediate step down to 50%, that's just a negotiating position. Their primary concern is that they have more years than not at that split.

Jarick 10-22-2012 04:56 PM

Squidz I think that is where they will end up. Just a matter if it gets proposed or not.

If Fehr/NHLPA doesn't offer some kind of proposal based on HRR similar to that (may not hit exactly those numbers) I will jump on the Fehr/NHLPA hate bandwagon.

forthewild 10-22-2012 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jarick (Post 55196001)
Squidz I think that is where they will end up. Just a matter if it gets proposed or not.

If Fehr/NHLPA doesn't offer some kind of proposal based on HRR similar to that (may not hit exactly those numbers) I will jump on the Fehr/NHLPA hate bandwagon.

get your jumping boots ready because the PA won't offer that

IHaveNoCreativity 10-22-2012 08:35 PM

There's nothing new to talk about.... I wish these selfish ****** would strike a deal already.

Wueste 10-23-2012 08:04 AM

Reduced HRR share for players costs players money regardless of the means to get there. So if the players are willing to take a reduced share (as is evidenced by their counter-offers) why is there not a deal signed. Frankly, they make too big a deal about the value of their current contracts. Every player who has their contract expiring during the duration of the PA's proposals should be questioning the logic. Fehr says that the NHL's proposal has players paying players, but really, so does the PA's. In order to pay current contracts at face value AND get towards 50% HRR, all new contracts will be artificially deflated. So any player signing a new contract has to accept less pay so the long-term contracts can be honored. The vast majority of players' contracts expire within 5 years.

rynryn 10-23-2012 09:29 AM

Well, season gone and they're out a lot more money than they would be for the life (5-6 years?) of the next CBA in the percentage points they're arguing about. both sides. Well, most of them.

bozak911 10-23-2012 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by squidz (Post 55190427)
I just glanced through the post, but the layout and those tables are really not playing well with each other. Might need to adjust your formatting and break up the tables.

Fixed the tables entirely. :)

BigT2002 10-23-2012 06:25 PM

Last rumor I heard is Thursday they are supposed to announce all games up to the WC being cancelled in order to pressure the players.

rynryn 10-23-2012 06:58 PM

All the sought after players are going to go play elsewhere then the leftovers and those coming up are going to dissolve the PA and start a new one. Then some of the former players will beg to come back.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:46 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.