HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   The Business of Hockey (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=124)
-   -   Arthur: Gap between NHL and NHLPA is "crack is the sidewalk". (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1305973)

Crease 12-10-2012 08:14 AM

Arthur: Gap between NHL and NHLPA is "crack is the sidewalk".
 
Concise summation of last week's theatrics, and also a positive outlook that the end is near.

Quote:

Cue the lightning, the gloom, and a chill in the air. Except they are not a billion dollars apart. They are, other than escrow and buyouts issues, zero dollars apart, based on the offers made this week. They are two years apart on the length of the CBA, three years apart on term limits for contracts, and there is other housekeeping here and there. But that’s it. That’s the gap. It’s a crack in the sidewalk. Just hop across.
Full article here:
http://sports.nationalpost.com/2012/...-of-theatrics/

stingo 12-10-2012 08:16 AM

Then sign the thing already and let's play some hockey. Come on already.

I heard rumblings they're ready to resume meetings sometime this week. Who knows.

If we lose an entire season over this foolishness, then I'm going to be upset.

Epsilon 12-10-2012 08:36 AM

This is going to be done soon. Both sides are doing their last round of posturing with the intention of making it look like they "won" when a deal is agreed to.

ottawah 12-10-2012 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crease (Post 56417107)
Concise summation of last week's theatrics, and also a positive outlook that the end is near.



Full article here:
http://sports.nationalpost.com/2012/...-of-theatrics/

Compliance buyouts and limited escrow are not exact dollar figures, but they are definitely money related and still an issue. This has been the case all along though, Fehr keeps saying they are X dollars apart, but the potential ramifications of certain items he assumes as zero, but the league does not seem to be willing to take on those risks.

So I think on the financials there is more to be done.

Fehr has also stated something along the lines of "The transition is yet to be talked about". Who knows what ideas he will introduce in "transition", but it did not sound promising to me.

GKJ 12-10-2012 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Epsilon (Post 56417257)
This is going to be done soon. Both sides are doing their last round of posturing with the intention of making it look like they "won" when a deal is agreed to.

I'm not sure if they're trying to make sure their side "won." The owners are some point, even if they know they "won" are going to make the players look like heroes, because they need people who bought into all their propaganda still have respect for the players.

txpd 12-10-2012 09:24 AM

except that its not going to get done soon. fehr is already holding them back over things that dont effect 90% of the players. this is occupy leaving the decision to the 1%. its a hoot.

burf 12-10-2012 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by txpd (Post 56417709)
except that its not going to get done soon. fehr is already holding them back over things that dont effect 90% of the players. this is occupy leaving the decision to the 1%. its a hoot.

It's members of the 1% holding out for the benefit of the .1%, with both of those groups making a bunch of financial concessions to the .0000001%.

Just sign a compromise deal already, i want hockey. 7 year contracts with no variance over 10%, 7 year CBA with mutual option to take it to 10 on a year-by-year basis - boom, nobody's too happy, nobody's too unhappy, and we're playing by New Years.

tony d 12-10-2012 10:06 AM

If they're that close though you figure they would still be talking. I think there still got to be an outstanding big issue out there that's preventing them from settling this.

Crease 12-10-2012 10:06 AM

An explanation from Jamal Mayers on why the NHLPA is opposed to 5 year term limits and instead proposed 8 year limits.

Quote:

“What would happen is, guys like Sidney Crosby would end up taking 20% of whatever the cap would be – for the entire term for five or seven years – and there would be a couple other guys on the team that would do that, then it would completely crush the middle- and lower-tier players,”

“There would be no middle guy because there would be no money left. If Sid is making $12 [million] and [Evgeni] Malkin is making that and then you have [Kris] Letang and [Marc-Andre] Fleury coming up, how would they fit everybody in?”
So basically, the players like back-diving deals. Crosby gets paid, but the cap hit is reduced so that guys like Mayers can also get paid. My question is this...doesn't uncapped escrow ensure that guys like Mayers and Crosby feed from the same finite bowl regardless as to what their cap hits are?

Nevertheless, he feels there is a deal to be made soon.

Quote:

“I don’t have to be a mathematician to figure out that there’s a deal there to be made. It’s not a huge discrepancy.”
http://sports.nationalpost.com/2012/...g-out-of-time/

KingsFan7824 12-10-2012 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by burf (Post 56418209)
It's members of the 1% holding out for the benefit of the .1%, with both of those groups making a bunch of financial concessions to the .0000001%.

Strange that we all care so much.

We're usually cheering for strangers and getting emotional about corporate logo's. None of it makes all that much sense.

People just want the escape back. Get home, watch a game for a few hours, and go to sleep. Instead all we get is the same language and theatrics we see and hear coming out of Washington DC.

BLASPHEMOUS 12-10-2012 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony d (Post 56418321)
If they're that close though you figure they would still be talking. I think there still got to be an outstanding big issue out there that's preventing them from settling this.

There is an "outstanding big issue" for sure, but in my opinion that issue is not money or anything that has to do with what will be written in the CBA itself. It is a psychological elephant that separates the two. Arthur's article is bang on: on paper, there is little worth fighting over.

Unfortunately, I look at how the players dealt with the initial deal they got in July. I look at the owners' terrific act during the week that transpired. For the NHLPA, this is about the foolish notion of "winning" the negotiation; for the hawks over at ownership, it is about crushing the NHLPA's harmony.

This is precisely why I think it will be great for the NHL when both Bettman and Fehr leave, as it would be the first step in trying to bring some form of limited trust in the other party when the next CBA comes up.

Freudian 12-10-2012 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crease (Post 56418335)
An explanation from Jamal Mayers on why the NHLPA is opposed to 5 year term limits and instead proposed 8 year limits.



So basically, the players like back-diving deals. Crosby gets paid, but the cap hit is reduced so that guys like Mayers can also get paid. My question is this...doesn't uncapped escrow ensure that guys like Mayers and Crosby feed from the same finite bowl regardless as to what their cap hits are?

Nevertheless, he feels there is a deal to be made soon.

So Jamal Mayers think that if only Malkin and Crosby were to sign 8 year deals, their cap hit would be much smaller and all the middle class get to make money?

The only way stars can free up money for the middle class is if their cap hit is much smaller than their salary. This CBA will fix that no matter what the players think.

tantalum 12-10-2012 11:35 AM

I guess it depends on what you think the ultimate motivation behind the back diving deal is.

I personally believe the motivation is having necessary cap space left after signing a big player or two to fill out a deep roster. Removing the back diving and limiting the contract term doesn't change that motivation from a GM. While the cap hit for someone like Crosby may go up a bit it isn't going to go to 20% of the cap hit as the GM still needs to ice a deep team to compete for the cup. Instead what you get rid of is the $30 mil over the first couple of years stuff which HELPS the middle class because escrow is calculated in real dollars not cap hit.

Now if the PA truly believe that this is some huge threat to the middle class the solution is easy...and it isn't tacking on an extra year for free agents re-signing with their teams (NHL offer was 7 and PA moving to 8). It's reducing the max cap hit of the player to, say, 14%. Somehow I don't think they go for that because IMO this isn't about the middle class at all but rather about the select few with huge long term back diving deals.

santiclaws 12-10-2012 11:54 AM

I think they will get a deal done the next time they sit down, hopefully this week. Killing a season over such small differences would be insane, and both Bettman and Fehr are anything but. Players will give on the length of the CBA, I don't think they really care, it's just a bargaining chip Fehr is waiting to put down. Owners will have to give a little on the length of contract term, maybe a little on the percentage year-to-year and we're done. This really could get done in an hour. Of course, given the history between the parties, it won't take an hour. But I can't imagine everyone deciding it is a good idea to drive off the cliff over nothing.

bigd 12-10-2012 12:15 PM

The players can't win in this negotiation. The only thing they can do is minimize the blood letting. If that means negotiating right up until the end then I respect them for that. Every offer the NHL has presented is a take it or leave it offer with a threat of the next one being worse even though they come back with a better one. How can you present an offer and say that's it "we just want a yes or no answer". What kind of negotiating is that? And then they have the balls to say they are negotiating with themselves. I guess they are right because they sure as hell aren't negotiating with the PA. :shakehead

colchar 12-10-2012 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stingo (Post 56417123)
Then sign the thing already and let's play some hockey. Come on already.

I heard rumblings they're ready to resume meetings sometime this week. Who knows.

If we lose an entire season over this foolishness, then I'm going to be upset.


They have talked about resuming negotiations this week but, thus far, no day has been decided for when they will do so.

JawandaPuck 12-10-2012 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crease (Post 56417107)
Concise summation of last week's theatrics, and also a positive outlook that the end is near.



Full article here:
http://sports.nationalpost.com/2012/...-of-theatrics/

From a US perspective, there's no compelling reason to hop over the crack before the NFL season has wound down in most of their common markets. IMO, both the league and PA know that and are just trying to get as much as they can before they absolutely have to agree to a deal.

It's just a matter of a few weeks now.

RedWingsNow* 12-10-2012 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Epsilon (Post 56417257)
This is going to be done soon. Both sides are doing their last round of posturing with the intention of making it look like they "won" when a deal is agreed to.

it will be done soon. But I think it's in the best interest of league for the PA to believe they've won. Even though they obviously have not.

RedWingsNow* 12-10-2012 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigd (Post 56420569)
The players can't win in this negotiation. The only thing they can do is minimize the blood letting. If that means negotiating right up until the end then I respect them for that. Every offer the NHL has presented is a take it or leave it offer with a threat of the next one being worse even though they come back with a better one. How can you present an offer and say that's it "we just want a yes or no answer". What kind of negotiating is that? And then they have the balls to say they are negotiating with themselves. I guess they are right because they sure as hell aren't negotiating with the PA. :shakehead

Exactly.

I hope the Players accept a 10-year deal rather than a 5-year deal. Because it's the only thing that will prevent the jackasses who run this league from another lockout in 5 years.

RedWingsNow* 12-10-2012 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JawandaPuck (Post 56421027)
From a US perspective, there's no compelling reason to hop over the crack before the NFL season has wound down in most of their common markets. IMO, both the league and PA know that and are just trying to get as much as they can before they absolutely have to agree to a deal.

It's just a matter of a few weeks now.

Jeopardizing Fan Loyalty and Corporate Sponsorship money are good arguments to start ASAP

RedWingsNow* 12-10-2012 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freudian (Post 56419551)
So Jamal Mayers think that if only Malkin and Crosby were to sign 8 year deals, their cap hit would be much smaller and all the middle class get to make money?

The only way stars can free up money for the middle class is if their cap hit is much smaller than their salary. This CBA will fix that no matter what the players think.

Do you really not understand? Or are you pretending?

If I'm a superstar I'll take 5 Years $50M. Now, maybe if I have the chance for an 8 year deal, I'll take 8 Years at $8.5M a year. That $1.5M goes to someone else.

Do that 3 or 4 times on a team. That's 3 or players who go from being $2M to minimum wage players.

Get the picture yet?

The other side is this. If Crosby is only worth 5 Years $60, doesn't that make it harder for a medium to good player to get any kind of security in his contract?
Everyone else is going to slot in lower.

Less money. Less security for the middle class.

castle 12-10-2012 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Bob (Post 56421373)
Do you really not understand? Or are you pretending?

If I'm a superstar I'll take 5 Years $50M. Now, maybe if I have the chance for an 8 year deal, I'll take 8 Years at $8.5M a year. That $1.5M goes to someone else.

Do that 3 or 4 times on a team. That's 3 or players who go from being $2M to minimum wage players.

Get the picture yet?

unless somebody else offers them 8 years at $80M. get the picture yet?

Riptide 12-10-2012 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crease (Post 56418335)
An explanation from Jamal Mayers on why the NHLPA is opposed to 5 year term limits and instead proposed 8 year limits.

So basically, the players like back-diving deals. Crosby gets paid, but the cap hit is reduced so that guys like Mayers can also get paid. My question is this...doesn't uncapped escrow ensure that guys like Mayers and Crosby feed from the same finite bowl regardless as to what their cap hits are?

Depends on how their deals are structured. Parise, Suter and Weber's contracts all contain massive signing bonuses (Weber 68m in signing bonuses over 6 years, Parise/Suter 25m each over 3 years), and almost no salary (2m for Parise and Suter, 1m for Weber). Crosby has no signing bonuses, and is all salary.

What that means is that when it comes to escrow, I'm assuming that it's based off of the players salary (basically a portion of each cheque goes into the escrow pot) is that everyone else is actually giving up a larger portion of their income into escrow than those that are causing escrow to be lost in the first place.

If escrow takes 15% of each cheque, and Weber makes 1m, he's putting 150k into escrow. While James Neal makes 5m, and is putting 750k into escrow. Assuming they get back 66% of that (for nice easy math), Weber lost 50k to escrow while earning 13.95m (13m SB, 1m salary). James Neal lost 250k to escrow while earning 4.75m (5m salary).

How players haven't commented more on the fact that once you bring escrow into the equation, that paying anyone more than their cap hit only makes everyone feel the escrow pinch. This is almost certainly where the limits on escrow is coming from... but they're not really trying to address the real issue. They're also completely ignoring the fact that the Penguins could not afford Crosby, Fluery, Letang and Malkin all having a huge cap hit (and still have depth).

MoreOrr 12-10-2012 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigd (Post 56420569)
The players can't win in this negotiation. The only thing they can do is minimize the blood letting. If that means negotiating right up until the end then I respect them for that. Every offer the NHL has presented is a take it or leave it offer with a threat of the next one being worse even though they come back with a better one. How can you present an offer and say that's it "we just want a yes or no answer". What kind of negotiating is that? And then they have the balls to say they are negotiating with themselves. I guess they are right because they sure as hell aren't negotiating with the PA. :shakehead

The only way that the owners can win in this process is if a CBA can be created which helps to keep a greater number of teams above water. If a new CBA doesn't accomplish that, it may look as though the players gave up a lot, but the League still being structured to the financial disadvantage of too many teams will mean that nobody won. Besides though, ultimately could the players be losing money? No! They could just be earning less. Some owners, on the other hand, could still continue to be losing money, just hopefully significantly less.

Turbofan 12-10-2012 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by castle (Post 56421397)
unless somebody else offers them 8 years at $80M. get the picture yet?

Yep. And it's not as if the '2 million' players get cut to 'minimum wage'. The '2 million' guys get signed to other teams who don't have 3 Sidneys on their team. The majority of teams.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:45 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.