View Single Post
07-14-2012, 09:08 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,288
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by HABsurde View Post
From Renaud Lavoie Twitter

leagues request

46% of revenue to the players instead of 57% right now

max length of contracts 5 years

no more arbitration

entry level contract 5 years instead of 3

you need to be in the NHL 10 years before free agency...

if there is any truth to this, we may look at hard hard negociations...
Originally Posted by JohnnyReb View Post
So for all those saying it's a negotiating tactic, and that you start low, and that this is some clever ploy by Bettman, would you be saying the same thing if Fehr made just as ridiculous an offer? Or would you be howling in outrage? Imagine if Fehr and the NHLPA made this offer

* An increase in players share to 65%

* UFA at 24

* Increase ELC by 50%

* Minimum contract length must be three years

* Mandatory signing bonuses equivalent to 5% of every contract

* No trade clauses for every player

Would everybody be sitting there saying "oh, it's just initial offer, nothing to worry about?" Of course not. It would be a stupid offer, just like this is a stupid offer. This is all about breaking the union again, so these billionaires can claim yet another victory. Has nothing to do with the good of the game, in any way, shape or form.
Originally Posted by NORiculous View Post

I'm thinking that some of those points are not so important for the owners and thus they can be "removed" for the begociation as a barganing point.

That being said, I would classify the demands into two groups.

1. 46%

2. The rest of the demands which are only ways to help manage.

I'm guessing that all the points under #2 can be conceded, to a point, in order to maintain point #1.

Of course, the NHL will try to keep as much points in #2 that they can during the process.
I agree that in the end, the percentage matters by far the most; the rest is about fairness BETWEEN players, which owners should be not that concerned about, as it is the union's job, and about ease of management, which the union should not be difficult about if they get their main points at an acceptably good ratio.

My suggestions:

No change in definition of revenue. 54% of revenue to the players instead of 57% right now, 8.4% rollback, cap for 2012-13 to be the same as in 2011-2012 ($64.3M). Any future drop in the cap of more than 5% would be accompanied by a proportional rollback. No change to floor rules.

Max length of contracts 6 years till age 31, 5 years at age 32, 4 years at age 33 and up. The full cap hit rule will apply on any contract in its THIRD year or later to ANY player who is age 37 or older

Salary must be the same every year and equal to cap hit

Maximum signing bonus 10% of total contracted salary; charged to salary cap the day it is paid

Options are permitted, but only where the option period plus the contract period do not exceed the maximum contract period; teams can have options to continue at same or higher salary; players can have options to continue at same or lesser salary. Cap hits will be according to salary during the year in question if the option is exercised.

Arbitration unchanged

Entry level contract remains 3 years, but clubs can obtain an extra year of waiver exemption if the player has played at least 20 NHL games or at least 10 NHL games in the last year of his ELC, but in all cases less than the maximum number of games permitted before waiver rights kick in.

You need to be in the NHL 9 years or be 28 years old before unrestricted free agency...

Contracts remain guaranteed, buyout percentage reduced to 50% from 66.67%

Over 35 rules will apply only to the third or later years of the contract, instead of 2nd year or later now.

A new provision will be added, that a team trading a player may choose to pay up to 50% of his salary and have it charged to their cap instead of the new club's cap.

Last edited by BaseballCoach: 07-14-2012 at 09:16 AM.
BaseballCoach is offline   Reply With Quote