HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   New York Rangers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   Good things about the season being Canceled. (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=128829)

free0717 02-11-2005 12:22 PM

Good things about the season being Canceled.
 
There are some good things about this season being cancelled. Tom Poti and Mike Dunham are gone.

SingnBluesOnBroadway 02-11-2005 12:24 PM

There are no playoffs to miss.

Shadowrunner 02-11-2005 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway
There are no playoffs to miss.


Lol, post of the week.

True Blue 02-11-2005 01:04 PM

There is no need to tape our favorite TV shows.

Firefly 02-11-2005 01:06 PM

A huge disappointment (no season) leads to less disappointment overall (another Rangers season).

LiquidClown 02-11-2005 01:07 PM

The Flyers/Devils/Isles didn't win the cup.

Fletch 02-11-2005 01:08 PM

I have about a thousand reasons...
 
$$$$...more money for beer and select fried foods...

FLYLine24* 02-11-2005 01:26 PM

There is nothing good in my book. We lost of year of turning our prospects into NHLers (NHL ready players like Murray...not like Jessiman)

True Blue 02-11-2005 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fletch
$$$$...more money for beer and select fried foods...

Mmmmmmmm.....wings & beer.....

Fletch 02-11-2005 01:57 PM

Fly..
 
it's probably best we didn't get to see those prospects. Murray's barely looking like a fourth liner in the AHL; I don't know if I would be ready to see him in 60+ NHL games. The most NHL ready, perhaps Tyutin and Kondratiev, are playing competition that's nearly as good as the NHL, so nothing lost there. Further, if this is the real Balej and Lundmark, it would be very painful watching them. On the flip side, this roster was on its way to a lottery pick, and once again, the Rangers' rebuilding effort have beent thwarted.

AG9NK35DT8* 02-11-2005 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by free0717
. Tom Poti and Mike Dunham are gone.

Actually thats what I thought until some one told me if there is no season the contracts of players are on hold, so we will still have Dunham and Poti along with Weekes and who ever else. thats from my understandng. What are you going to do if so they can always be bought out or some how traded, maybe.

AG9NK35DT8* 02-11-2005 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FLYLine4LIFE
There is nothing good in my book. We lost of year of turning our prospects into NHLers (NHL ready players like Murray...not like Jessiman)

I strongly agree, besides Murray players like Ortmeyer, Pock , Tyutin, Balej would be ready for real NHL time got to start them some where and now is the time Murray is gonna be a big piece I feel a future leader maybe assistant captain.The kid will be a goodinspiration to young and old. Guy has great energy.

FLYLine24* 02-11-2005 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AG9NK35DT8
Actually thats what I thought until some one told me if there is no season the contracts of players are on hold, so we will still have Dunham and Poti along with Weekes and who ever else. thats from my understandng. What are you going to do if so they can always be bought out or some how traded, maybe.

I think Bettman said that the contracts do count for this missed season. So we wouldnt have Poti and Dunny.

True Blue 02-11-2005 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FLYLine4LIFE
I think Bettman said that the contracts do count for this missed season.

I do not see how Bettman can make that claim. The players have a binding contract. There is no employment at will. He could have a case if the players were on strike, but they are locked out by the owners. The same owners that signed a binding contract. No one forced the owners to lock the players out. It's not that easy to get out of them. That is why folding a franchise is not quite so easy. If a franchise declares bankruptcy, they are still liable for the contracts that they sign. Just depends on what order the creditors line up in. But that is another topic. Anyway, no, it is not quite so easy to get rid of existing contracts.

007 02-11-2005 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by True Blue
I do not see how Bettman can make that claim. The players have a binding contract. There is no employment at will. He could have a case if the players were on strike, but they are locked out by the owners. The same owners that signed a binding contract. No one forced the owners to lock the players out. It's not that easy to get out of them. That is why folding a franchise is not quite so easy. If a franchise declares bankruptcy, they are still liable for the contracts that they sign. Just depends on what order the creditors line up in. But that is another topic. Anyway, no, it is not quite so easy to get rid of existing contracts.

This will probably end up being another bone of contention once the PA and the league actually get past the first hurdle of getting an agreement . . .

Back to the original topic of the thread: I won't have to hear "another hockey game!?" from my roommate every time I want to sit down and watch a game.

Kodiak 02-11-2005 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by True Blue
I do not see how Bettman can make that claim. The players have a binding contract. There is no employment at will. He could have a case if the players were on strike, but they are locked out by the owners. The same owners that signed a binding contract. No one forced the owners to lock the players out. It's not that easy to get out of them. That is why folding a franchise is not quite so easy. If a franchise declares bankruptcy, they are still liable for the contracts that they sign. Just depends on what order the creditors line up in. But that is another topic. Anyway, no, it is not quite so easy to get rid of existing contracts.

I believe player contracts run to certain dates. A player doesn't sign a contract for "3 NHL Seasons," he signs a contract for "August 1, 2003 through June 30, 2006" or the like. They'd have to argue that a number of seasons is implicit in the agreement, but that would be a sticky one if it ever goes to court.

DarthSather99 02-11-2005 07:47 PM

We have another year of development for our young prospects and didn't have to mess with their heads with calling them up then dropping them, calling them up again then dropping them ...

free0717 02-11-2005 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by True Blue
I do not see how Bettman can make that claim. The players have a binding contract. There is no employment at will. He could have a case if the players were on strike, but they are locked out by the owners. The same owners that signed a binding contract. No one forced the owners to lock the players out. It's not that easy to get out of them. That is why folding a franchise is not quite so easy. If a franchise declares bankruptcy, they are still liable for the contracts that they sign. Just depends on what order the creditors line up in. But that is another topic. Anyway, no, it is not quite so easy to get rid of existing contracts.

Don Maloney said on Future Blue all contracts are running. From what I have heard all player contracts have a start date and end date. The Yashin contract was a suprise that he lost the arbitration and owed the Senators one more year.

Brooklyn Ranger 02-12-2005 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by free0717
Don Maloney said on Future Blue all contracts are running. From what I have heard all player contracts have a start date and end date. The Yashin contract was a suprise that he lost the arbitration and owed the Senators one more year.

The Yashin outcome may have been a "suprise" but a precedent was set. In any case, this is another problem that will either be settled by a new collective bargaining agreement or through the courts. Yet another hurdle to overcome before there is an agreement.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:05 AM.

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.