View Single Post
12-07-2012, 12:49 AM
Seahawks 43
me2's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 22,649
vCash: 50
Originally Posted by Canucker View Post
I'm still waiting to hear what the NHL has "given" the players.

They HAD 57% of HRR and got some "make whole" money to partially compensate for the loss, down to 50%. MINUS
the problem here is cap was allowed to go to $70m which created an artificial bubble in salaries which was not sustained by the next CBA and likely going to pop. Knowing the CBA would end before it any $70m season would start and that the HRR split would come down under the new seasons CBA - well it's predictable most of the ugliness we see over this is due to this bubble being popped. All this mess for 2 months offseason bubble caused by an imaginary cap that disappeared before the season started.........

When the CBA ended the cap should have stayed at the old season cap until a new cap was negotiated. What's the worst that could have happened - they kept the cap at $64m but renewed 57% and the players would have received a massive end of seaspm bonus to boost it up from 52% (64m) to 57%. Hopefully the NHL learns from this, but I doubt it.

Contract Limits at 5 years. MINUS

5% variance. MINUS
disagree. A small number benefit and most suffer. Suter's deal eats into every other player's pay via escrow. Parise's deal eats into every other player's pay. Weber's deal eats into every other player's pay etc. The 5% per year could arguable be an advantage for most as it stops front loaded contracts eating into other players share of HRR.

At worst it's neutral, HRR split evens it out anyway. The players don't come out this worse off - outside of a few elites chasing back diving contracts.
Arbitration rights stay the same. SAME

10 year agreement. UNKNOWN (PA wants 5 years though)
Both sides should take 10 years and be happy. The longer the gap between these two sides fighting over a CBA the better.

Last edited by me2: 12-07-2012 at 12:54 AM.
me2 is offline