HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Anaheim Ducks
Notices

Around The League - Hockey is back!

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-19-2012, 11:54 AM
  #101
Kalvinators
Mindholm!!!!
 
Kalvinators's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Latvia
Country: Latvia
Posts: 8,167
vCash: 500
So why the hell bob isnt going after weber? Or sutter? Or parise?

*sarcasm*

Kalvinators is offline  
Old
07-19-2012, 12:14 PM
  #102
Duck Off
HF needs an App
 
Duck Off's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Oklahoma
Country: United States
Posts: 10,060
vCash: 500
So I hope football goes well since there definitely won't be a NHL season next year

Duck Off is offline  
Old
07-19-2012, 12:51 PM
  #103
Eddie Shack
RIP KevFist
 
Eddie Shack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Anaheim, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,936
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Ryan Getzlaf View Post
After this, I'm guessing the NHL fights tooth and nail for it. They wanted it before, but they never really had much proof in the sense that it was hurting small market teams, especially with a smaller market handing out two of them. This changes things, though.

And we don't know for sure, but it's a very safe bet these contracts are done with. If I'm Getzlaf or Perry, I don't bet against that happening for sure. Too risky IMO.
I agree the league will want these contracts gone. But at the end of the day, what they want is to keep a bigger piece of a smaller defined pie. If they can get an acceptable (to them) version of that, I believe they will be less concerned with how the player's piece of the pie is split. I believe they will be more than willing to compromise on things like length and front loading. IMO, at the end of the day everything is a bargaining chip in order to keep more of the HRR.

Eddie Shack is online now  
Old
07-19-2012, 01:31 PM
  #104
Kalvinators
Mindholm!!!!
 
Kalvinators's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Latvia
Country: Latvia
Posts: 8,167
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duckstudd269 View Post
So I hope football goes well since there definitely won't be a NHL season next year
Kings fans will be f**ing around because they`ll be champions for two years in a row, if the upcoming season fails

Kalvinators is offline  
Old
07-19-2012, 03:22 PM
  #105
Nab77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 312
vCash: 500
Good move by Holmgren, I think Nashville will have a hard time matching that especially if Weber doesn't even wanna stay there, I know Anaheim wouldn't match if somebody offered that to Getz or Perry.

Even if they match, Holmgren ensures that nobody is getting him for free next summer. That means Pens, Detroit or Rags are gonna have to pay through the nose if they wanna trade for Weber.

Nab77 is offline  
Old
07-19-2012, 05:48 PM
  #106
Gibsons Finest
Beast
 
Gibsons Finest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Saskatoon/Brandon
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddie Shack View Post
I agree the league will want these contracts gone. But at the end of the day, what they want is to keep a bigger piece of a smaller defined pie. If they can get an acceptable (to them) version of that, I believe they will be less concerned with how the player's piece of the pie is split. I believe they will be more than willing to compromise on things like length and front loading. IMO, at the end of the day everything is a bargaining chip in order to keep more of the HRR.
I think they go hand in hand. Cutting down the players' percentage of HRR, or redefining HRR, is somewhat in vain if cap circumventing contracts like these are still allowed. These contracts have thrown salary structures out of whack and have really hurt small market teams, it's clearly a concern for them. They'll get both the percentage cut and these contracts disallowed. They probably won't get 5 year maximum lengths, but there'll definitely be caps IMO. Same with the way year to year salaries vary, they'll have some sort of limit on that.

Gibsons Finest is offline  
Old
07-19-2012, 06:06 PM
  #107
Eddie Shack
RIP KevFist
 
Eddie Shack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Anaheim, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,936
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Ryan Getzlaf View Post
I think they go hand in hand. Cutting down the players' percentage of HRR, or redefining HRR, is somewhat in vain if cap circumventing contracts like these are still allowed. These contracts have thrown salary structures out of whack and have really hurt small market teams, it's clearly a concern for them. They'll get both the percentage cut and these contracts disallowed. They probably won't get 5 year maximum lengths, but there'll definitely be caps IMO. Same with the way year to year salaries vary, they'll have some sort of limit on that.
I agree with thinking it would be good for the league to see that happen. I just think that if the league expects to shrink the pie, shrink the players % of the pie, cut down the length of contracts and disallow front loading that we will not see NHL hockey for a very long time.

To some degree, it seems they already have the ability to unilaterally define cap circumvention contracts as the Devils found out. But they haven't been too serious about any of the others that have occurred.

Eddie Shack is online now  
Old
07-19-2012, 06:14 PM
  #108
Nab77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 312
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Ryan Getzlaf View Post
I think they go hand in hand. Cutting down the players' percentage of HRR, or redefining HRR, is somewhat in vain if cap circumventing contracts like these are still allowed. These contracts have thrown salary structures out of whack and have really hurt small market teams, it's clearly a concern for them. They'll get both the percentage cut and these contracts disallowed. They probably won't get 5 year maximum lengths, but there'll definitely be caps IMO. Same with the way year to year salaries vary, they'll have some sort of limit on that.
No way the players give up that much, I think you're underestimating the pull the big teams have with the league. Bettman is not gonna cut the legs from under his moneymaker teams.

Nab77 is offline  
Old
07-19-2012, 06:59 PM
  #109
Gibsons Finest
Beast
 
Gibsons Finest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Saskatoon/Brandon
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nab77 View Post
No way the players give up that much, I think you're underestimating the pull the big teams have with the league. Bettman is not gonna cut the legs from under his moneymaker teams.
I don't understand why people actually believe this. 8 years ago a salary cap was cutting the legs from under his moneymaker teams. And even if that's different(it is, in a way), the NHL has already proposed all of those things, on a much larger scale. Clearly they have no problem weakening the big money teams.

As for the players, I actually think capping contract lengths and stopping salaries from varying wildly is a concession they easily make. Only a small percentage of the NHLPA actually benefit from this, but as far as I can tell, the rest actually suffer. Because of these ridiculous front-loaded deals, there's a fair bit more salary actually being paid than accounted for on the cap, so that could affect how much the players lose from escrow.

Escrow is also how the NHL is going to get their way in a lot of the negotiations, if they so choose. They lower the amount paid into escrow, or get rid of it altogether, and the players probably concede a ton of other issues.

Gibsons Finest is offline  
Old
07-19-2012, 07:37 PM
  #110
Ducks DVM
Moderator
There is no grunion
 
Ducks DVM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,247
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nab77 View Post
No way the players give up that much, I think you're underestimating the pull the big teams have with the league. Bettman is not gonna cut the legs from under his moneymaker teams.
Bettman doesn't run the league, the owners do. If 20 owners decide they don't want 5-6 *******s ruining the sport they won't let them.

Ducks DVM is offline  
Old
07-19-2012, 10:01 PM
  #111
Theridion
Registered User
 
Theridion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Orange, CA
Posts: 1,831
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducks DVM View Post
Bettman doesn't run the league, the owners do. If 20 owners decide they don't want 5-6 *******s ruining the sport they won't let them.
I think capping contracts at 8 years or so makes sense for both sides, maybe dropping the cap as well.

The loopholes are long contracts and signing bonuses. I think those are non-isssues. Those deal with circumventing cap, and the players won't have much leverage there. They will have to accept that change, but it might come at the cost of the owners not dropping the player and salary cap. That seems like a draw.

The bigger issues are revenue sharing and avertising money... That's goina be the holdup. I can't imagine how far apart both sides are.

Theridion is offline  
Old
07-19-2012, 11:57 PM
  #112
Duck Off
HF needs an App
 
Duck Off's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Oklahoma
Country: United States
Posts: 10,060
vCash: 500
I think the issue shouldn't be term but each year should only be allowed to change so often. No more 12 year deals with 1 million last 3 years. That's the killer.

Duck Off is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 01:27 AM
  #113
mightyquack
Rekordtorschütze!
 
mightyquack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Perth, WA
Country: Germany
Posts: 17,332
vCash: 500
Cutting the term to 5 or 6 year limit eliminates that though, which is the whole point of capping contract limits. Stops any young UFA from taking cheap years at the end of a deal as logically they'll still be close to their prime at the end of that 5 year deal for example.

mightyquack is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 05:51 AM
  #114
snarktacular
Moderator
Ducks tank is on!
 
snarktacular's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 16,226
vCash: 500
I think it would be better to make the 35+ rule apply to all years over 35+ rather than explicitly cap contract length. But the age might have to be made older than 35 then.

snarktacular is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 10:31 AM
  #115
Ducks DVM
Moderator
There is no grunion
 
Ducks DVM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,247
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duckstudd269 View Post
I think the issue shouldn't be term but each year should only be allowed to change so often. No more 12 year deals with 1 million last 3 years. That's the killer.
Someone on the main boards proposed that contracts couldn't vary more than 2M from the cap hit. So a 7M cap hit could have a high year of no more than 9M and go no lower than 5M. Would allow flexibility year to year but get rid of circumvention.

I also think signing bonuses should be eliminated or drastically curtailed (no more than 10% of total contract value or something along those lines).

Ducks DVM is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 11:55 AM
  #116
Duck Off
HF needs an App
 
Duck Off's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Oklahoma
Country: United States
Posts: 10,060
vCash: 500
Agreed with everything here ^^

Duck Off is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 01:01 PM
  #117
Eddie Shack
RIP KevFist
 
Eddie Shack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Anaheim, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,936
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by snarktacular View Post
I think it would be better to make the 35+ rule apply to all years over 35+ rather than explicitly cap contract length. But the age might have to be made older than 35 then.
Thank you, thank you, thank you.

Eddie Shack is online now  
Old
07-20-2012, 04:03 PM
  #118
Gibsons Finest
Beast
 
Gibsons Finest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Saskatoon/Brandon
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducks DVM View Post
Someone on the main boards proposed that contracts couldn't vary more than 2M from the cap hit. So a 7M cap hit could have a high year of no more than 9M and go no lower than 5M. Would allow flexibility year to year but get rid of circumvention.

I also think signing bonuses should be eliminated or drastically curtailed (no more than 10% of total contract value or something along those lines).
If the NHL wants signing bonuses gone, I can't see the players fighting too hard over that one. This isn't the NFL, the players get their money no matter what. Obviously there's an upside to it, but I think it's probably a concession they make.

Gibsons Finest is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 07:14 PM
  #119
Ducks DVM
Moderator
There is no grunion
 
Ducks DVM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,247
vCash: 500
Good article on league finances

Ducks DVM is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 07:57 PM
  #120
Eddie Shack
RIP KevFist
 
Eddie Shack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Anaheim, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,936
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducks DVM View Post
I think that article is pretty spot on.

All the recent expansion the league has done has mostly been into markets that will never support hockey like the Canadian markets and a few others. If the league continues to insist on having franchises in marginal markets then they are going to have to share more amongst themselves. If not then they need to shrink the size of the league so it can be more profitable individually. Of course shrinking the league is a disaster nobody wants. Neither owners (at least those that would lose their investment) nor the marginal players who will no longer be NHLers.

I think the players need to allow more work rule flexibility but I can't really see where asking them to shrink their % of the pie is the solution to this problem.

This CBA negotiation could be worse than the previous ones. Ugh.

Eddie Shack is online now  
Old
07-23-2012, 02:51 AM
  #121
Finnpin
Registered User
 
Finnpin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Helsinki
Country: Finland
Posts: 8,539
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kalvinators View Post
Kings fans will be f**ing around because they`ll be champions for two years in a row, if the upcoming season fails
And many bandwagoners have already forgotten the game of hockey by then.

I'm confident that the season will start but not in time though...we'll probably have a 60-70 games regular season... they are just playing hard ball againts each other atm... normal stuff.

But it's so weird seeing the owners throwing around these crazy contracts in these times.

Finnpin is offline  
Old
07-23-2012, 02:07 PM
  #122
duckaroosky
So sayeth Duckthulu
 
duckaroosky's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Long Beach, Ca
Posts: 23,729
vCash: 500
Jackets got bent over a barrel

duckaroosky is offline  
Old
07-23-2012, 02:18 PM
  #123
Exit Dose
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Cerritos, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 17,984
vCash: 500
We don't have to hear Dubinsky and Anisimov offers any more!

Exit Dose is online now  
Old
07-23-2012, 02:20 PM
  #124
Leizi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Finland
Country: Finland
Posts: 2,094
vCash: 500
So glad Nash isn't there to score 2 goals each game against the Ducks, multiple times during the season


Leizi is offline  
Old
07-23-2012, 02:21 PM
  #125
Static
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: SoCal
Country: United States
Posts: 17,481
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Static
Haha Columbus.

Static 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 01:09 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.