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
09-04-2012, 01:41 PM
  #301
Blueline Bomber
Expectations - high
 
Blueline Bomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 21,808
vCash: 500
Quote:
Chris Botta ‏@ChrisBottaNHL

AHL has spoken with NBC Sports Net and regional sports networks about broadcasting games in event of an NHL lockout. @SBJSBD
Some (relatively) good news. If there is a lockout, we can still watch the Checkers with relative ease.

Blueline Bomber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-04-2012, 03:58 PM
  #302
Carolinas Identity
This is ARRGH State!
 
Carolinas Identity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Calgary, AB
Country: United States
Posts: 6,891
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueline Bomber View Post
Some (relatively) good news. If there is a lockout, we can still watch the Checkers with relative ease.
I may have to CHECK some of them out

Carolinas Identity is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-04-2012, 06:07 PM
  #303
Juneemoon
Registered User
 
Juneemoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,269
vCash: 500
Speaking of your AHL team, will Skinner be assigned there if there's a lockout?

Juneemoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-04-2012, 08:54 PM
  #304
Blueline Bomber
Expectations - high
 
Blueline Bomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 21,808
vCash: 500
Quote:
Paul Bissonnette ‏@BizNasty2point0

Fun Fact: Only 4 NHL owners have taken part in CBA negotiations.
Probably just BizNasty attempting to start ****, but if that's true...

EDIT: Apparently, it's legit.

Quote:
David Pagnotta ‏@TheFourthPeriod

To @BizNasty2point0's tweet, the 4 owners in CBA negotiations so far have been: Leipold (MIN), Jacobs (BOS), Edwards (CGY) & Leonsis (WAS)


Last edited by Blueline Bomber: 09-04-2012 at 09:21 PM.
Blueline Bomber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-04-2012, 09:52 PM
  #305
Boom Boom Anton
Registered User
 
Boom Boom Anton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,415
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueline Bomber View Post
Probably just BizNasty attempting to start ****, but if that's true...

EDIT: Apparently, it's legit.
I guess I'm not sure what "taking part in the CBA negotiations" means. If it means the actual sit down talks with Fehr, then I'm not surprised by this at all. Bettman, Daly, a couple of owners, an army of lawyers and accountants and probably a few GMs is already a huge contingent. Adding more won't help and will only complicate matters and might even be harmful to their effort if Fehr tried to cause division among the ranks.

I used to negotiate agreements for a company I worked for (yes...I know it's the internet so I could make anything up, but I really did so you can choose to believe it or not). I got to do some of the smaller deals and my boss was the lead negotiator for some huge (some over $100M) deals. He rarely had more than 1 or 2 key stakeholders in with him during negotiations. He met with all of them separately to understand their key points and their walk away positions and then he handled all the negotiations with only a few of them, some lawyers, and some finance guys in the room. He made it clear he was the 1 voice and in charge in the negotiations.

Boom Boom Anton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-04-2012, 10:27 PM
  #306
Blueline Bomber
Expectations - high
 
Blueline Bomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 21,808
vCash: 500
I'm not saying all of them need to show up to every meeting, but I am surprised that so few have shown up at all.

I understand that Bettman speaks for all of them (allegedly), but when we're talking millions of dollars to be made or loss (with regards to the owners), I'd want to show up for at least 1 meeting to ensure everything's progressing as well as Bettman (or whoever my appointed figurehead) is reporting.

And, again this might just be me, if I'm a smaller market and we're discussing revenue sharing or other points that may help/hinder my ability to run the team, I'd want to make sure the smaller markets are being represented by Bettman as equally as the larger markets.

Blueline Bomber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2012, 05:25 AM
  #307
Boom Boom Anton
Registered User
 
Boom Boom Anton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,415
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueline Bomber View Post
I'm not saying all of them need to show up to every meeting, but I am surprised that so few have shown up at all.

I understand that Bettman speaks for all of them (allegedly), but when we're talking millions of dollars to be made or loss (with regards to the owners), I'd want to show up for at least 1 meeting to ensure everything's progressing as well as Bettman (or whoever my appointed figurehead) is reporting.

And, again this might just be me, if I'm a smaller market and we're discussing revenue sharing or other points that may help/hinder my ability to run the team, I'd want to make sure the smaller markets are being represented by Bettman as equally as the larger markets.
I think you are reading way too much into this and I suspect this is the type of reaction BizNasty was going for (over-reaction on a non-issue by people not understanding what's going on). Having more than a handful at the actual negotiation sessions OR rotating who shows up would worse IMO. You have no idea how much communication is occurring between those at the negotiations and other owners, no idea if there are other representatives there, how often Bettman and the owners meet, etc...

This isn't the owners (or Bettman's) first time around on this and they all know the drill. They know what proposals are going forward and at this point, they aren't even close to the big terms (money split). For more owners to sit in at this point would be nothing but symbolic.

Boom Boom Anton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2012, 07:35 AM
  #308
Joe McGrath
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,143
vCash: 500
Hasn't Rutherford been in on these meetings? Isn't he at least a partial owner?

Joe McGrath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2012, 12:51 PM
  #309
caniac247
Registered User
 
caniac247's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Raleigh
Country: United States
Posts: 4,654
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe McGrath View Post
Hasn't Rutherford been in on these meetings? Isn't he at least a partial owner?
Yes, he's on the committee and has been at every meeting.

There are GMs/Owners attending. With Rutherford attending, we don't need PK attending as well. What's the saying "too many cooks in the kitchen." Its hard enough getting the two sides to sit down and talk with a small group, imagine if they made the meetings bigger.

Not every player has attended or been involved on the NHLPA side either. But Fehr will keep in touch via email on what is happening. I'm pretty sure the other side is doing the same thing for those that are not attending.

caniac247 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2012, 02:04 PM
  #310
Blueline Bomber
Expectations - high
 
Blueline Bomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 21,808
vCash: 500
http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/jrh...161832665.html

In the event of a lockout, Murphy may be allowed to play in Charlotte rather than return to the CHL.

Blueline Bomber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2012, 02:08 PM
  #311
Joe McGrath
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,143
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueline Bomber View Post
http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/jrh...161832665.html

In the event of a lockout, Murphy may be allowed to play in Charlotte rather than return to the CHL.
Couldn't Skinner and Faulk play there as well since they are on 2 way deals?

Joe McGrath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2012, 02:23 PM
  #312
Blueline Bomber
Expectations - high
 
Blueline Bomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 21,808
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe McGrath View Post
Couldn't Skinner and Faulk play there as well since they are on 2 way deals?
No clue. I can't see why not, but I'm sure there's some stipulation or worry that would prevent them from playing there or make it too much of a risk.

Blueline Bomber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2012, 02:30 PM
  #313
Joe McGrath
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,143
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueline Bomber View Post
No clue. I can't see why not, but I'm sure there's some stipulation or worry that would prevent them from playing there or make it too much of a risk.
Eric Staal and Cam Ward played in the AHL last lockout and I'm pretty sure their careers benefited greatly from that.

Joe McGrath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2012, 02:32 PM
  #314
impeach estaalo
RIPronrefo nevar4get
 
impeach estaalo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 10,601
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe McGrath View Post
Eric Staal and Cam Ward played in the AHL last lockout and I'm pretty sure their careers benefited greatly from that.
I don't think so. Ward has been on a steep, rapid decline ever since.

impeach estaalo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2012, 02:37 PM
  #315
Joe McGrath
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,143
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by We Like Our Group View Post
I don't think so. Ward has been on a steep, rapid decline ever since.
Long live the king

Joe McGrath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2012, 02:48 PM
  #316
Boom Boom Anton
Registered User
 
Boom Boom Anton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,415
vCash: 500
I think it would be beneficial to guys like Faulk and Skinner, especially if are a number of NHL caliber players are playing there. I think there would also benefit guys like Dalpe, Rask, Boychuk, Levi, Nash, etc...if a bunch of guys like Faulk and Skinner do play in the AHL. They would get to hone their game playing against a higher level of competition while not quite the level of the NHL.

Boom Boom Anton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2012, 03:42 PM
  #317
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,115
vCash: 500
The biggest benefit for Skinner would be an opportunity to enjoy a little more "easy" offense, which would give him a bit more time and energy to put toward his own zone. Defense is a habit and it would be nice to see him learn it.

Faulk, I think, just needs ice time and repetition. Doesn't really matter which league.

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 11:19 AM
  #318
Blueline Bomber
Expectations - high
 
Blueline Bomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 21,808
vCash: 500
Quote:
Paul Branecky ‏@PaulBranecky

Don't know specifics, but I believe waivers should be considered when trying to figure out who would play in CLT in event of NHL lockout

Would everyone clear? Would Canes even risk it for certain players in case lockout was only a few weeks long? Don't know.
Might be a reason why Skinner/Faulk wouldn't play in Charlotte. Still not 100% on how waivers work currently (especially with regards to 1-way/2-way contracts), and that could change in the new CBA being debated.

Blueline Bomber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 11:30 AM
  #319
DaveG
Mod Supervisor
RIP Kev
 
DaveG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Durham NC
Country: United States
Posts: 31,075
vCash: 2498
PRETTY sure that Faulk wouldn't have to clear. Not sure if Skinner would have to clear or not, not sure what the games played threshold for a 20 year old is.

DaveG is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 12:55 PM
  #320
Boom Boom Anton
Registered User
 
Boom Boom Anton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,415
vCash: 500
I don't understand it all, but if the collective bargaining agreement is expired, why would any waiver rules still be in effect?

Boom Boom Anton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 01:04 PM
  #321
Blueline Bomber
Expectations - high
 
Blueline Bomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 21,808
vCash: 500
http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/83...te-discussions

LeBrun's got a very nice article about the state of the negotiations so far. No bias one way or the other, just the facts.

Blueline Bomber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2012, 10:41 PM
  #322
Chrispy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Cary, NC
Posts: 973
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveG View Post
PRETTY sure that Faulk wouldn't have to clear. Not sure if Skinner would have to clear or not, not sure what the games played threshold for a 20 year old is.
Per capgeek, Skinner is still exempt from waivers (3 years or 160 games, Skinner is at 146.) No reason to think any other rule would apply if they can't agree on a CBA.


Last edited by Chrispy: 09-06-2012 at 10:42 PM. Reason: Add capgeek link
Chrispy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 07:10 AM
  #323
caniac247
Registered User
 
caniac247's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Raleigh
Country: United States
Posts: 4,654
vCash: 500
Bettman, Daly, and Fehr are supposed to meet today. They better be able to stop acting like children and have a good meeting that lasts longer than 45 minutes before sides break it up and start finger pointing.

I'd like to know that they know they really can't afford yet another lock out in less than 10 years. But they seem to don't care and will lock the doors.

It doesn't have to get done before or on Sept 15, just get done in prior to Oct. K Thanks.

caniac247 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 07:22 AM
  #324
Boom Boom Anton
Registered User
 
Boom Boom Anton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,415
vCash: 500
I really think they can afford another lockout. In every sport where there has been a delay, strike or lockout, the fans have always come back. It might not happen in year 1, but it always happens. The fans will come back and the value of franchises will continue to increase (which is the real value to owners, more than the P+L).

I realize the owners asking for the players to accept 43% and 46% is overkill, but the players having 57% is equally as absurd. Other major sports are closer to 50% and some of those don't even have the guaranteed contracts like the NHL does. In the NFL, they cut guys loose mid contract all the time. I actually don't blame NFL players for holding out like they do wanting a new contract when owners/GMs can cut a guy loose and end the contract at any time.

Boom Boom Anton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2012, 08:11 AM
  #325
Mr America
Registered User
 
Mr America's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 965
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boom Boom Anton View Post
I don't understand it all, but if the collective bargaining agreement is expired, why would any waiver rules still be in effect?
Would really seem like this applies?

Mr America is offline   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 06:46 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.