HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Carolina Hurricanes
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The Lockout Thread: Good Things Come To Those Who Wait

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-17-2012, 05:55 PM
  #151
Blueline Bomber
Expectations - high
 
Blueline Bomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 21,816
vCash: 500
If it's like the last draft, Edmonton will have one of the worst chances to draft #1 overall.

Each team starts with 3 balls. Each playoff appearance in the last 3 years and each #1 pick in the last 4 years removed a ball.

So I don't think Edmonton would have a chance. Ironically, Carolina would have one of the best, not losing a single lottery ball (by those standards).

Blueline Bomber is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-17-2012, 05:57 PM
  #152
Finlandia WOAT
Do U Like Quebec?
 
Finlandia WOAT's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Raleigh NC
Country: United States
Posts: 9,232
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueline Bomber View Post
If it's like the last draft, Edmonton will have one of the worst chances to draft #1 overall.

Each team starts with 3 balls. Each playoff appearance in the last 3 years and each #1 pick in the last 4 years removed a ball.

So I don't think Edmonton would have a chance. Ironically, Carolina would have one of the best, not losing a single lottery ball (by those standards).
Wait, so we could possibly end up with Seth Jones?

Come on Lockout!!!

Finlandia WOAT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-17-2012, 06:24 PM
  #153
geehaad
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 3,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedgreen View Post
The whole what if your job makes you suffer so much you commit suicide rings hollow to me. This IS a game.
I can see that, but I also don't think boiling it down to merely a child's game represents what risks these guys are taking with their bodies. I'm hoping, as a paramedic, that you wouldn't care to debate the seriousness of that risk.

Does that lead me to believe that all of them should be paid millions, and never have to be worried about money again? No. However, I am sympathetic to the risks, I'm sympathetic to the pain they likely put themselves through (I really cannot fathom having to eat with all of injuries they seem to suffer routinely to their mouth area), and I'm sympathetic to the year-round strenuous work required to maintain their place. They do something extraordinary, owners do not.

I guess I'm always gonna side with the prostitute rather than the pimp.

geehaad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2012, 04:30 AM
  #154
Carolinas Identity
This is ARRGH State!
 
Carolinas Identity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Calgary, AB
Country: United States
Posts: 6,908
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plan The Parade View Post
Wait, so we could possibly end up with Seth Jones?

Come on Lockout!!!
wow, didn't realize the connection until I checked wiki, but I grew up watching his dad as a Maverick.

I'm old

Carolinas Identity is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2012, 07:26 AM
  #155
bleedgreen
Moderator
 
bleedgreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: colorado
Posts: 10,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by geehaad View Post
I can see that, but I also don't think boiling it down to merely a child's game represents what risks these guys are taking with their bodies. I'm hoping, as a paramedic, that you wouldn't care to debate the seriousness of that risk.

Does that lead me to believe that all of them should be paid millions, and never have to be worried about money again? No. However, I am sympathetic to the risks, I'm sympathetic to the pain they likely put themselves through (I really cannot fathom having to eat with all of injuries they seem to suffer routinely to their mouth area), and I'm sympathetic to the year-round strenuous work required to maintain their place. They do something extraordinary, owners do not.

I guess I'm always gonna side with the prostitute rather than the pimp.
I agree they put themselves at risks but they are more than fairly compensated as you say. Are navy seals given millions? Firefighters are paid well around here but cops and paramedics aren't. I'd say a third or more of my co workers wear bullet proof vests for their shifts. I should too, it's just too hot and I like to think I careful but that's kinda stupid. Our starting pay is 18 bucks an hour with no pension like fire or pd since the hospital bought the paramedic division from the city.

There was a time when I was younger where I was much more in agreement with posts I'm
now disagreeing with. I've seen things in my life to change my mind. I was at a funeral of a cop I knew that got shot in the head at a shooting in a park I live near. Friends were there that got nearly trampled. That shooting didn't make the national news like aurora obviously. I'm going too far and I apologize as this is all about a business deal and we shouldn't get involved too much. I just don't feel bad for guys who are all now uniformly at least paid well. Re doing this deal doesn't really hurt them. The minimum pay makes it worth the risk of injury. If someone offered me that to be a paramedic in a war zone where other medics get killed, I'd have to think about it. That's death vs risk of injury. A chance to take care of my family in a way id never be able to otherwise.

I get the pimp vs ho theory and respect it. These ho's are here by choice and live well. Not very many of them get to ***** to the media about how unfair their boss is and tell them they deserve more.

bleedgreen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2012, 08:01 AM
  #156
Old Uncle
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 369
vCash: 500
While I agree that all the players in the NHL are paid well and others considerably more at risk are not, I believe that we all accept the nature of our employment however grudgingly. But if the rules changed as your compensation got better and more, so that you weren’t allowed to push for what you felt you should receive in your field, then pretty soon everyone would be told by some agency or burocrat what they “deserved” for their efforts. As it is they only have to negotiate with their employer. Then we are back to playing hard ball and who blinks first.
I sincerely hope that there is no lockout. This kind of theoretical discussion will drive me nuts.

Old Uncle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2012, 10:45 AM
  #157
Blueline Bomber
Expectations - high
 
Blueline Bomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 21,816
vCash: 500
http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/08/...forgetful.html

Article from Luke today that's getting some attention league-wide.

Blueline Bomber is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2012, 11:45 AM
  #158
Carolinas Identity
This is ARRGH State!
 
Carolinas Identity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Calgary, AB
Country: United States
Posts: 6,908
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueline Bomber View Post
http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/08/...forgetful.html

Article from Luke today that's getting some attention league-wide.
I think he's spot on.

Carolinas Identity is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2012, 01:25 PM
  #159
Blueline Bomber
Expectations - high
 
Blueline Bomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 21,816
vCash: 500
Quote:
But the line between owners and players is not drawn in the classic sense. Revenue-sharing could become the key point because of how it could affect small-market clubs, a group of eight to 10 franchises that includes the Blue Jackets.

Because of this, it’s possible that as talks progress, they could pit owner against owner. The small-market owners could find themselves siding with players against the large-market owners, the power-brokers in the league.“I think as many as eight NHL owners would accept the NHLPA’s initial proposal,” said an NHL player agent who spoke to The Dispatch on the condition of anonymity. “And there’s probably four to six others who would find the proposal acceptable enough that they could tweak a couple of things and live with it.”

But don’t expect any owner to acknowledge that publicly. The NHL has threatened a fine of at least $1 million to any club that speaks out during the lockout.Any disagreement would have to be confined to private talks among owners. One NHL executive told The Dispatch last week that Bettman has the “full support of every owner in the room right now.”

Boston owner Jeremy Jacobs and Philadelphia owner Ed Snider hold considerable sway with Bettman and are strongly opposed to revenue-sharing. Those clubs, along with Chicago, Detroit, Montreal, the New York Rangers, Toronto and Vancouver, would stand to lose the most revenue.
http://www.bluejacketsxtra.com/conte...de-owners.html

Blueline Bomber is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2012, 02:02 PM
  #160
DaveG
Mod Supervisor
RIP Kev
 
DaveG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Durham NC
Country: United States
Posts: 31,109
vCash: 2498
guarantee that group of 8 includes Phoenix, Columbus, and Florida, with possibly us, Tampa, and Nashville in that mix as well. It's funny, as much as he says the Snyders and Jacobs have sway, so do some guys like JR/Karmanos.

DaveG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2012, 07:01 PM
  #161
bleedgreen
Moderator
 
bleedgreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: colorado
Posts: 10,605
vCash: 500
They do have sway too, but they are historically bettmans mouthpieces. I've always believed this was part of their initial relationship, bettman promised to make pk an owner and in turn they will always have his back on these issues. If bettman is following orders from Snyder and Jacobs then pk/jr will likely do the same. While I've already stated my opinion on the players here, I am equally against the owners on this particular topic. Big wallets are what prevents appropriate revenue sharing, these two an others refusing to share with the needy. Revenue sharing done right would make this a more fair league, as well as financially healthier. I think fehr is generally scum, but he is smart to attack from this angle as its an obvious chink in the owners armor. I hate that he is intentionally gonna sidetrack this whole thing trying to fix THAT problem when I view that as a fruitless effort. If the owners can't get themselves on the same page fehr sure as hell won't and its just gonna help drag this out. It would be nice to see the smaller teams rise up and demand appropriate revenue sharing. Just not holding my breath.

bleedgreen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2012, 10:03 PM
  #162
Blueline Bomber
Expectations - high
 
Blueline Bomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 21,816
vCash: 500
http://www2.macleans.ca/2012/04/03/c...into-overtime/

Great article on what it's like to negotiate with Bettman. I believe the author uses the phrase "like an endless trip to the dentist".

Blueline Bomber is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2012, 07:23 AM
  #163
sheriff bart
Registered User
 
sheriff bart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Rock Ridge
Country: United States
Posts: 290
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedgreen View Post
I agree they put themselves at risks but they are more than fairly compensated as you say. Are navy seals given millions? Firefighters are paid well around here but cops and paramedics aren't. I'd say a third or more of my co workers wear bullet proof vests for their shifts. I should too, it's just too hot and I like to think I careful but that's kinda stupid. Our starting pay is 18 bucks an hour with no pension like fire or pd since the hospital bought the paramedic division from the city.
I really don't see how you can compare what athletes, actors, entertainers, etc. make with what "regular folks" make. None of them are worth what they are paid, but we are willing to pay them by buying tickets. I'm not just talking out of my arse here either, my wife is a teacher.

Pro hockey players have a skill they you and I do not have. They have spent years honing that skill to get to the point they are now. Thousands of hockey players have put that same time in and are now the very firefighters, policemen, and paramedics you are talking about. To me, the salary numbers that are thrown around for major sports athletes is just Monopoly money.

There needs to be some changes made to ensure the health of the league as a whole, and just not the top 25% of teams. Both sides need to make some concessions. I would ask you this, if the league got exactly what they wanted, do you think the owners will pass some of that savings back to the ticket buying public (like they said they would do last time)? 8 years ago, the owners locked out the players to get the deal they wanted to ensure the health of the league. Now, they are threatening the very same thing. The problem is that the owners keep wanting to be saved from themselves. They can control a lot of these issues themselves.

In my opinion, they should meet in the middle and set the cap at about 50% of revenue. The floor should be a percentage of the cap and not some dollar amount less than the cap. I like the idea of budget teams being able to sell or trade unused cap space to other teams. It is then a luxury tax that is voluntary. A team not using it's cap space could then receive cash to help with the bottom line or picks/prospects to help with a rebuilding process.

sheriff bart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2012, 08:18 AM
  #164
geehaad
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 3,002
vCash: 500
If professional athletes weren't worth those millions, you can be sure that the owners wouldn't pay them that much. Problem is, they are.

geehaad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2012, 08:36 AM
  #165
impeach estaalo
RIPronrefo nevar4get
 
impeach estaalo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 10,601
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueline Bomber View Post
http://www2.macleans.ca/2012/04/03/c...into-overtime/

Great article on what it's like to negotiate with Bettman. I believe the author uses the phrase "like an endless trip to the dentist".
Summary: "Bettman got everything he initially wanted, but I didn't give him the additional concessions he wanted, therefore some point that is completely lost on We Like Our Group"

impeach estaalo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2012, 10:10 AM
  #166
bleedgreen
Moderator
 
bleedgreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: colorado
Posts: 10,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheriff bart View Post
I really don't see how you can compare what athletes, actors, entertainers, etc. make with what "regular folks" make. None of them are worth what they are paid, but we are willing to pay them by buying tickets. I'm not just talking out of my arse here either, my wife is a teacher.

Pro hockey players have a skill they you and I do not have. They have spent years honing that skill to get to the point they are now. Thousands of hockey players have put that same time in and are now the very firefighters, policemen, and paramedics you are talking about. To me, the salary numbers that are thrown around for major sports athletes is just Monopoly money.

There needs to be some changes made to ensure the health of the league as a whole, and just not the top 25% of teams. Both sides need to make some concessions. I would ask you this, if the league got exactly what they wanted, do you think the owners will pass some of that savings back to the ticket buying public (like they said they would do last time)? 8 years ago, the owners locked out the players to get the deal they wanted to ensure the health of the league. Now, they are threatening the very same thing. The problem is that the owners keep wanting to be saved from themselves. They can control a lot of these issues themselves.

In my opinion, they should meet in the middle and set the cap at about 50% of revenue. The floor should be a percentage of the cap and not some dollar amount less than the cap. I like the idea of budget teams being able to sell or trade unused cap space to other teams. It is then a luxury tax that is voluntary. A team not using it's cap space could then receive cash to help with the bottom line or picks/prospects to help with a rebuilding process.
a) i get and agree that obviously these are people who dont compare to us in terms of money and how their jobs pay out, only that the whole "they should be paid because they put their lives at risk, and the sacrifices they make should be rewarded" makes no sense to me. only because they ARE very well compensated for any risk they take and for those sacrifices, none of which compare to actual risks and sacrifices regular people endure and get paid fractionally for. i know there is a different standard for these people, but please never play the "poor athletes being taken advantage of" in the case of the nhl. the minimum salary is more than fair and their contracts are guaranteed, even buy outs are generous. over 35's get treated like kings now. name a player of note that got "screwed" on his last contract? for being at best the 4th sport in the US these guys are killing it. there should be no sympathy for these guys this time around, they arent suffering and arent being treated bad - this is a pure business deal, arguing over pieces of the pie. smaller market teams are the only ones struggling in the nhl, not any of the players or the rest of the owners.

b) with the current percentage at 57% and their demand in the 40's its pretty obvious it is their intent to get that 50%, and its hard imagine they wont. the big argument to me is likely how they put a number on what revenue is.

c)i dont think the owners would be able to fix any of their problems, and wouldnt even if their original offer got accepted. revenue sharing as is makes no sense. it is the biggest actual issue and the owners arent gonna touch it because the biggest voices in the room still get their way. they dont want to share. im fine with the general attitude that this is the owners pushing it around, but they were always gonna tweak the cap system. who thought they would get it right the first time? they said at the end of the last lockout there would need to be tweaking. they had to give it go to see what worked and what didnt. the players have it great, they are gonna make every time the owners tweak it look like the end of the world and fight it because they have it so good. the owners have every right to tweak, its their business.

i get frustrated because i have little sympathy for the players, they have it good now and will have it good later. they get paid from performance, and many get paid on mere potential and this new cba wont change that. they have to accept if they want to play they have to make a deal, the owners are stronger. fehr's attempt to show solidarity is nice, but its for show. at the end of the day at least half these guys would be really losing it after a full season. we are going to miss hockey because in the end fehr is being paid to make a fight and has shown he'll go to the ends of all sanity to accomplish that. it wont be worth it for the players in the end. make a deal. fehr going off in his own direction is merely a delay tactic designed to win favor in the media for players and start driving a wedge between the owners.


Last edited by bleedgreen: 08-20-2012 at 10:17 AM.
bleedgreen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2012, 10:43 AM
  #167
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,131
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by We Like Our Group View Post
Summary: "Bettman got everything he initially wanted, but I didn't give him the additional concessions he wanted, therefore some point that is completely lost on We Like Our Group"
I think the purpose of the final paragraph is to illustrate the psychological brick wall that Richard Stursburg has formed around the memory of being bent over for an entire year by Gary Bettman.

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2012, 11:31 AM
  #168
geehaad
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 3,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedgreen View Post
they were always gonna tweak the cap system. who thought they would get it right the first time? they said at the end of the last lockout there would need to be tweaking. they had to give it go to see what worked and what didnt. the players have it great, they are gonna make every time the owners tweak it look like the end of the world and fight it because they have it so good. the owners have every right to tweak, its their business.
In no way does the owners proposal look like a simple tweak to the existing CBA.

I get that folks say that it's simply an initial proposal, but the return salvo from Bettman after hearing the player's response didn't make it sound like they were ready to make concessions. And from the feeling I get about Bettman, he isn't really one to make concessions anyway. So why should we assume that he would back off of the owner's initial proposal in any meaningful way? And if he isn't willing to back off of those terms, then a simple tweak is not what they seek.

geehaad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2012, 11:57 AM
  #169
bleedgreen
Moderator
 
bleedgreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: colorado
Posts: 10,605
vCash: 500
the final result is something we have no idea about. i agree making it a 50/50 split isnt a "simple" tweak but it is a readjustment to an already existing layout. we cant say bettman wont make concessions, the owners have made them in the past and they will make them again. the last lockout imo wasnt the slam dunk win its made out to be, and neither was the 95 lockout. the owners made concessions from their original proposals both times. i think you split the difference on every point of the owners proposal compared to what it is now and they will likely accept that, and they arent points that are worth losing hockey about. elc to 4 years, ufa to 8/9 years, 7 year contracts, these arent make or break issues for players imo. the elc helps a lot of guys. dalpe and boychuk would get an extra year to make it, and wouldnt have to take paycuts like boychuk just did. it only keeps the top players coming out from getting a huge payday an extra year. it would result in more fair contracts overall, as youd have a better idea of who your guy really is. 5-7 year contracts are better for everyone, who thinks 14 year deals make sense? the year or two of ufa is the only true concession that directly affects the players immediately. even giving just one year back makes a difference for the teams, and doesnt dramatically hurt the players. most of these are tweaks, i agree the revenue split isnt a "simple" tweak. to be fair i never said simple. overall if the deal turns out the way im talking about it basically is a tweak, with the revenue split being the one issue that potentially makes it bigger based on how it turns out.

bleedgreen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2012, 12:54 PM
  #170
geehaad
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 3,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedgreen View Post
i agree the revenue split isnt a "simple" tweak. to be fair i never said simple.
Then again, "tweak" is never going to be associated with descriptors like major, significant, and wholesale, so "simple" is kind of implied in the word itself. And when you accumulate a number of tweaks, it is no longer "a tweak"...it moves into the "significant change" category.

geehaad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2012, 03:04 PM
  #171
totalkev
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,513
vCash: 500
At this point, I'm actually pulling for the players so hard, that I hope they force this thing past the Winter Classic and through another full season. I'd be willing to give up another full season (or more) just to see the owners lose badly this time around. It's one thing to want to "partner" with the players to "grow the sport" and it's quite another to be greedy a$$hats.

totalkev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2012, 03:12 PM
  #172
What the Faulk
The Real Swede Shady
 
What the Faulk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: North Carolina
Country: United States
Posts: 25,961
vCash: 500
Hate to say it, but a lockout *could* benefit Carolina more than most teams.

What the Faulk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2012, 03:20 PM
  #173
Finlandia WOAT
Do U Like Quebec?
 
Finlandia WOAT's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Raleigh NC
Country: United States
Posts: 9,232
vCash: 500
I don't want to see another 1994, where both sides accept a haphazard arrangement that results in a decade of terrible hockey.

Finlandia WOAT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2012, 03:33 PM
  #174
Chicago Made Punk
You're Gonna Go Far
 
Chicago Made Punk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Raleigh, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 15,223
vCash: 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by What the Faulk View Post
Hate to say it, but a lockout *could* benefit Carolina more than most teams.
I don't see any positives for us.

Lose a year of Skinner's and Faulk's development. Lose a year of Cam and Eric's primes. Lose Jordan's debut year. Lose Semin's only year on the contract.

Chicago Made Punk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2012, 03:44 PM
  #175
Blueline Bomber
Expectations - high
 
Blueline Bomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 21,816
vCash: 500
Bettman and Fehr meet again tomorrow. Any bets on if there's any actual progress? Perhaps a starting point?

Please

Blueline Bomber is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 06:35 PM.

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.