View Single Post
11-21-2012, 01:19 PM
Non-registered User
cheswick's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Peg City
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,694
vCash: 232
Originally Posted by bozak911 View Post
Revenue Sharing about the same between the two sides.
On ice discipline is the same (and what I proposed! yay!)
I think the elimination of NHLPA side letter escrow responsibility is a nuance to escrow as it continues to exist in the current state. (sorta)
No clue on the no-trade/no-move clauses.
Re-entry, same.
NHL proposed the players/cash/cap trading. PA agrees now.
Wade Redden rule. Awesome how the PA put that. Not sure the NHL will agree.
Chris Campoli rule. NHL will concede this point.
NHLPA Cap-recapture... I think this was actually part of the NHLs last proposal. Not sure.
I like the + / - 20% better.
As for the make whole... Good on them for asking more. The NHL will negotiate on those numbers.

Outside of the first year of lock out impacted revenues, I don't think the players share less than previous year is a big deal.

The NHL are the ones who initially proposed the Wade Redden rule. In fact they proposed a more strict one where salries over 550k in the AHL counted agaisnt the cap.

cheswick is offline