HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

Stan Kasten's POV from www.NHLOwnersPropagandha.com

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-07-2004, 03:37 PM
  #1
Oilers Ent
Registered User
 
Oilers Ent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Burnaby, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,665
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Oilers Ent
Stan Kasten's POV from www.NHLOwnersPropagandha.com

http://www.nhlcbanews.com/generated/rtTM51u5v9.html

Some interesting insights:

"It is ironic that the certainty of a new economic system now gives the union an opportunity to achieve major gains. The union could, and should, turn its attention from the losing battle on economics and focus on the dozens of other issues that affect players every day, like game rules, rink conditions, traveling and scheduling, not to mention the structural issues like contract guarantees and free agency."

Basically he is saying if the players give in to a cap the owners will likely give in to a number of other concessions. To think outloud - lower UFA, smaller schedule, more off time, shorter road trips, etc, etc, etc.

Sounds fair - doesn't it?

Oilers Ent is offline  
Old
10-07-2004, 03:59 PM
  #2
Joe T Choker
Roll Wide Roll
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Melrose
Country: Italy
Posts: 23,849
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikeisevil
http://www.nhlcbanews.com/generated/rtTM51u5v9.html

Some interesting insights:

"It is ironic that the certainty of a new economic system now gives the union an opportunity to achieve major gains. The union could, and should, turn its attention from the losing battle on economics and focus on the dozens of other issues that affect players every day, like game rules, rink conditions, traveling and scheduling, not to mention the structural issues like contract guarantees and free agency."

Basically he is saying if the players give in to a cap the owners will likely give in to a number of other concessions. To think outloud - lower UFA, smaller schedule, more off time, shorter road trips, etc, etc, etc.

Sounds fair - doesn't it?
why would the owners shorten the regular season? I just think they should get rid of the pre-season games altogether move the regular season starting to sometime in September, because the players practically workout all year anyway...just get rid of the meaningless games...make training camp the pre-season...play home and home games with your maybe/not sure/undecided players against division rivals 8 games in 15 days to get your roster completed...after that a week for practice/camp/scheming for your season ... but I agree with everything else...more division games = fewer road trips imho

Joe T Choker is offline  
Old
10-07-2004, 04:09 PM
  #3
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seven_Nation_Army
why would the owners shorten the regular season? I just think they should get rid of the pre-season games altogether move the regular season starting to sometime in September, because the players practically workout all year anyway...just get rid of the meaningless games...make training camp the pre-season...play home and home games with your maybe/not sure/undecided players against division rivals 8 games in 15 days to get your roster completed...after that a week for practice/camp/scheming for your season ... but I agree with everything else...more division games = fewer road trips imho
You don't think the evaluation of your prospects in situations as close to actual NHL games as possible provides any value to the org.?

Not critisizing the thought, I am just asking.

copperandblue is offline  
Old
10-07-2004, 04:13 PM
  #4
Joe T Choker
Roll Wide Roll
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Melrose
Country: Italy
Posts: 23,849
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue
You don't think the evaluation of your prospects in situations as close to actual NHL games as possible provides any value to the org.?

Not critisizing the thought, I am just asking.
the interdivisional "preseason" games would be prospects as well...sorry for not explaining further...that game would be played before the big boys played.

Joe T Choker is offline  
Old
10-07-2004, 10:56 PM
  #5
thinkwild
Veni Vidi Toga
 
thinkwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,305
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikeisevil
http://www.nhlcbanews.com/generated/rtTM51u5v9.html

Some interesting insights:

"It is ironic that the certainty of a new economic system now gives the union an opportunity to achieve major gains. The union could, and should, turn its attention from the losing battle on economics and focus on the dozens of other issues that affect players every day, like game rules, rink conditions, traveling and scheduling, not to mention the structural issues like contract guarantees and free agency."

Basically he is saying if the players give in to a cap the owners will likely give in to a number of other concessions. To think outloud - lower UFA, smaller schedule, more off time, shorter road trips, etc, etc, etc.

Sounds fair - doesn't it?
Im sure those are all bargaining items that the players would like to bargain over. Are any of them on the table? Maybe they could come up with enough of them to let players decide its worth letting the owners decide what they are going to count as revenues, but I doubt it.

This guy cant be working for the NHL anymore, or surely he would have been fined heavily for these statements. I like how he tries to suggest players need to give in to the darkside. Resistance is futile. Accept the inevitability.

Players are accepting the inevitability it seems to me. The salary market will and is correcting downwards, and they offered ways to move it down even further. Why not negotiate how much further you want to take it down using that system instead of saying its not enough and we need something radically different that we know will cause a long fight?

thinkwild is offline  
Old
10-08-2004, 12:03 AM
  #6
ceber
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Wyoming, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkwild
The salary market will and is correcting downwards
Last I read, I think it was in the hockey news, this is not the case. It's going up still. Slower, but still up.


Quote:
Why not negotiate how much further you want to take it down using that system instead of saying its not enough and we need something radically different that we know will cause a long fight?
You know why. You just dont want to have to admit it to yourself.
(just a tease.. not serious)

ceber is offline  
Old
10-08-2004, 12:15 AM
  #7
thinkwild
Veni Vidi Toga
 
thinkwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,305
vCash: 500
You're right, I do. It should have been rhetorical

thinkwild is offline  
Old
10-08-2004, 12:31 AM
  #8
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 19,345
vCash: 1000
One thing I think might appeal to players is an automatic no-trade clauses for players over 25 during the season. This gives them a chance to settle in to a spot for the year. They could of course waive the NT clause if they wished.

This would appeal to the family men in the nhlpa.

me2 is offline  
Old
10-08-2004, 02:00 AM
  #9
X8oD
Registered User
 
X8oD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 612 Warf Ave.
Country: United States
Posts: 7,212
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by me2
One thing I think might appeal to players is an automatic no-trade clauses for players over 25 during the season. This gives them a chance to settle in to a spot for the year. They could of course waive the NT clause if they wished.

This would appeal to the family men in the nhlpa.
the issue then becomes, a player who is up for free agency can veto a trade on a team who will NOT resign him. Basically sticking them with any chance of getting value for him.

Ill add an option. what if Every player who signs an UFA contract with 5 years of NHL expierence has the right to Veto any trade. RFA's and Undrafted Free Agents shouldnt receive a NTC becuase either they arent worthy of it [UDFA] or their rights are already owned.

then, You can lower the UFA age to lets say 29. So that, at age 29, everybody who signs an UFA contract then, in a sense, has a NTC [not really a NTC, just a right to veto the trade]

X8oD is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:48 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.