Lockout IV: One likes to believe in the freedom of hockey (Moderated: see post #2)
View Single Post
12-09-2012, 12:00 PM
Just the tip!
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Cold and Dark place!
Originally Posted by
And what I find quite odd is that the NHLPA is not up in arms about cap circumvention as well. The truth is the players should hate it far worse than the owners. Far worse.
Prime examples this summer. Say the CBA did not end this year. You take the deals for Parise, Webber and suter. Who is paying those salaries? Collectively it is not the owners, it is the players. And to be honest, I do not think the vast majority are smart enough to realize this. In fact, I'd even doubt the majority of posters on here even realize that.
It is really simple. When the teams collectively pay over the agreed upon percentage they are to receive, they have to give every dollar back in the form of escrow. For years the players have received a far greater percentage then what they were allowed (approaching 70% some years, and from what I understand about 63% last year). That number get reduced to 57% via escrow.
So when those 3 signed for what amounts to about 35M for this season, that is just that much more about 57%, aand the full amount of this 35M must be paid back by the players collectively.
Lets say you are a run of the mill 4th line player making 1.2M dollars. These guys sign that contract. 35M over a 1.9B cap may not sound like much, but its actually 1.75%. So your 1.2M player now has to fork out his share, or 21K of his money to pay for those contracts.
Sure its not a huge amount, but if the rank and file players actually really realized what this meant, they would probably want to get rid of these contracts too.
Ultimately cap circumvention of this nature helps out only precious few owners and players. It is quite detrimental to the vast majority of players and owners. And if I thought the union wanted to help their membership more than stick it to the owners, I honestly think they would demand (not just accept) this from the owners and show the players why its good for the 99% who will never get this type of deal.
to me this is just further indication that the union leadership are more interested in sticking it to the owners and helping out the top 1% of the players rather than helping out the rank and file players
You understand the issue quite well but forgot that this is about a negotiation. If you know the other side want something that you also want but they asked for it first why would give it out unless you get a concession back on another point.
View Public Profile
Visit madhi19's homepage!
Find More Posts by madhi19