Just thought of something, and I don't remember the answer last time, but if we are locked out for an entire season, how do they handle the 2013 draft order?
I would assume that is something they would have to work out first.
Last time there was a lottery based on the past 3 years. Teams were assigned 1 to 3 balls depending on performances in the past 3 years with regards to top picks and playoff participation. The Penguins had 3 balls in the lottery (along with Buffalo, Columbus and NY Rangers), and came out winners, and drafted one Sidney Crosby. The Kings had 2 balls in the lottery.
From the Wiki-page on the draft.
Quote:
Teams were assigned 1 to 3 balls based on their playoff appearances and first overall draft picks from the past three years. According to the draft order, the selection worked its way up to 30 as usual; then instead of repeating the order as in past years, the draft "snaked" back down to the team with the first pick. Therefore the team with the first pick overall would not pick again until the 60th pick. The team with the 30th pick would also get the 31st pick.
It's a little disturbing that we thus far haven't missed one actual day of anything and everyone's already talking about another lost season.
I can't imagine why. I saw some stat about how hockey has missed more games or had more time off than any other sports league under Bettman. Why would anyone be optimistic this will be wrapped up soon?
I can't imagine why. I saw some stat about how hockey has missed more games or had more time off than any other sports league under Bettman. Why would anyone be optimistic this will be wrapped up soon?
Sure but there's no middle ground between "haven't missed a day" and "season's toast?" Who are you guys? My ex-girlfriend?
It depends on how long it takes for the players to cave. To hurt the owners' pocket books would be to take multiple seasons off, which isn't going to happen. Most people think it will be a year long lockout because of just how far apart the two sides are. It really isn't even remotely close as they are arguing over roughly a billion dollars. The owners are being quite stubborn and Fehr also has a history of not budging and Bettman has an established history of waiting indefinitely to get what he wants, he really has no interest or connection to hockey, he is only there as a business man to make money. Hell, so is Fehr... There really is no sign that this will end any time soon.
__________________
"It has not been a good day. I lost my glasses early this morning and I had to go buy a pair of 79 dollar reading glasses today. 79 bucks. You can literally get them at Costco, three-for-20." - Darryl Sutter's response to going up 2-0 in the series.
I don't think there is much solidarity on either side this time around. Right now it seems so, but I doubt it stays that way. I don't have the grim feeling I had during that cancelled season year (that could be the cup, though )
If I was a rank and file guy, I'd be pissed to see big name guys going to play elsewhere. Here I am taking a hit for what I believe is a fair deal, and guys who are already have ridiculous amounts of money are bolting to make even more. Their ridiculously structured contracts are a reason the league is in a fix. It's "Pay me, or I leave". I have no problem with free agency, but just milking teams for everything you can is very unbecoming. The vast majority of guys who don't make a kings ransom have to have a gnawing feeling inside. They still make a lot of money, but after taxes and all if they only play for 3 or 4 seasons on a lower contract they aren't making any more money over their lifetimes than a solid, successful businessman. There's nothing wrong with that, but there is an opportunity cost here, and it's a loss of income that can never be made up. I don't see them sticking together for long like they claim to be now. If I'm a guy like Westgarth, I'm steamed because I don't make a fraction of what a star does, and I'm here working and representing and he's overseas padding his wallet.
On the other hand, I don't see a brotherhood with the owners at all. They certainly aren't all in the same boat. Guys like Snider don't give a crap about the other owners, they are in it to win, and they don't care how much it costs. In a perfect world, that's how it should be, but there are limited dollars in the pool of sports fans out there with regards to the NHL. The big teams have a successful product and don't want to give money to the small teams, and I don't blame them. While some smaller teams may legitimately bust their butts to do everything they can to build a successful franchise, there are guys like Wang who consistently just take advantage of the system. I see a rift developing as the big market teams have plenty to lose by a lockout, while the smaller markets have absolutely nothing to lose.
Both sides are to blame here. In addition, I also put some blame on some of the ridiculous things certain agents do. For every Brisson, a good guy who gets a fair shake for his client without a circus, there are idiots like Meehan and others at Newport, who put on a show to suck every penny out they can for their client, regardless of the damage done. That's just bad for the health of the game in general. The hardball-holdout crap and the extravaganza for Brad Richards just leave a bad taste in my mouth. The players have a hand in it, because they hire these guys, but I don't think a lot of them know exactly what they are signing up for with certain agents.
Another group I blame are some of the GM's in the league who have no idea how to build a team, draft, and structure a payroll. They have little vision and only think short-term, which leads to craptacular decisions and throwing loads of money at mediocre players to try to fix a problem that is beyond fixing with free agents. The Islanders have had top 10 picks in 6 out of the last 7 seasons, with 4 of them being top 5, and they haven't sniffed the playoffs in 5 years. It's not like they are on the cusp, either. The Blue Jackets have had a top 10 pick 11 our of their 13 drafts, 8 of which have been #6 or earlier. They've broken 90 points and made the playoffs just once. That, is the definition of poor management.
Once the rules are in place Snider does everything he can to put a winning team on the ice. He is known though as one of the hard line owners when it comes to reducing the percentage of HRR that the players take home in salary.
Sure but there's no middle ground between "haven't missed a day" and "season's toast?" Who are you guys? My ex-girlfriend?
Well, once Frozen Fury gets scrapped, I'll be pissed. Most of us plan that months in advance. I have a fully refundable hotel and didn't fly this year but not everyone did. That would piss me off. Plus I haven't missed it in 8 years with the exception of the last lockout.
The day a regular season gets scrapped, I'm sending and email to the Kings advising them not to contact me for tickets this season (if there is one or next if there isn't). I actually already spent that money on a 47" HDTV but don't tell them I told you that!
Once the rules are in place Snider does everything he can to put a winning team on the ice. He is known though as one of the hard line owners when it comes to reducing the percentage of HRR that the players take home in salary.
I knew he was one of the old boys network, but it's very strange that he would tow a hard line on this. Philly tosses money at players like crazy. After the huge Weber offer sheet and the overpaid 51M Bryzgalov contract, I figured he would be the last person that would care how much a player got paid.
It's become a total and utter cliche to criticize Bettman around here, but how can anyone defend this guy anymore? Yes, he is a mouthpiece for the owners. Yes, he's seen some success as commissioner of the league. But looking at the fiscal history, overall, of the NHL over the past 20 years, where are his contributions? Under his tenure, the league has increased revenue? So why are so many teams crying poor?
So many of the pro-owners fans have the same agenda they recite over and over again. The league is generating more revenue today than it was eight years ago, the PA is being unreasonable, the players think they are partners when they are not. Some of that has merit and some of it doesn't.
As far as revenue is concerned, I think it's misleading and disingenuous to claim "the league" is generating record revenue when it's the elite super group (Toronto, Montreal, Philadelphia, Boston, New York, Vancouver, Chicago, etc.) making all the money. It's a great phrase to coin, saying, "the NHL has generated record revenues" when in reality only a dozen teams are making good money. You can't yell "profit!" one day then claim huge employee costs are a necessity the next. It doesn't make sense and it's not true. Enough of the pandering. Say it how it is. "Yes, we have quite a few teams doing very well financially, but more than half of the league is drowning in red ink."
I think Spector raised quite a few valid points regarding Bettman's tenure, with two standout arguments:
1. Bettman's inability to encourage and enforce the fiscally responsible management of franchises. Other than the Kovalchuk situation, in which Bettman and the league arbitrarily drew their line in the sand, there has been next to zero pressure on teams to operate responsibly. Mega deal after mega deal has been drafted and signed since the inception of the cap system with little to no backlash from the league. If these gargantuan albatross contracts are hurting the league financially by a. making it difficult for poorer teams to keep up, and b. burdening the league as a whole with monstrous cash obligations, then why hasn't Bettman stepped in? Why have the owners and the league sat back and twiddled their thumbs while 10+ year retirement contracts became outlandishly burdensome? It is the commissioner's job, even as a figurehead, to encourage sound economic practice within the league. If the NBA is bold enough to block lopsided trades in an effort to preserve the integrity of the game, and the NFL is suspending entire coaching staffs for perceived irresponsible behavior, then where is the NHL's leadership? Right or wrong in their specific decisions, other leagues are at least demonstrating that the buck does indeed stop at a certain office, whereas the NHL seems to demand zero accountability all the way down the totem pole. The only top down structure of accountability we seem to have is a widely criticized player safety board and a commissioner that acts more like a Yes Man for the ownership group than a pillar of ethical business practice for the league to follow.
2. Bettman's inability to properly grow franchises in non-traditional hockey markets and a refusal to acknowledge any wrongdoing in said decision. This has been discussed to hell and back, but the numbers don't lie. We had two unquestionably failed sunbelt teams in Atlanta and Phoenix. One has been relocated; the other is in instant limbo, likely to be eventually relocated. Added to that are additional southern expansion teams that, despite success, ebb and flow in revenue and are consistently ranked among the "have-nots" of the league (Tampa Bay, Anaheim, Carolina, Nashville, Florida, Columbus) - all of which were created with Bettman at the helm, except for Tampa. Regardless of the usual morally driven and xenophobic auto-responses to this discussion, I think everyone can agree that, as a whole, pertaining to the overall financial viability of the NHL, that sunbelt expansion has been a demonstrative failure. These franchises may have helped "grow" the sport in the sense that there may be more ice hockey rinks in Tennessee today than there was 10 years ago, but for the most part, these teams are consistently ranked among the franchises needing the most financial aid. But moreso than ANY of this, whether you vehemently disagree or not, Bettman and the league have refused to address these failures in their expansion teams. Other than letting Atlanta go (and immediately seeing a spike in calculated league wide revenue) what has the league done to address these problems? They've held onto Phoenix like a child that refuses to give up their favorite binky despite massive losses, a public relations disaster, and next to zero proof that their "end game" with the entire situation is even viable. What kind of message is this?
There is a very real and very recognizable lack of competent leadership at the very top of the league, so why should we expect anything more than constant labor disputes and CBA re-drafts? We're talking about the only major sports entity in North America to lockout for an entire season in the last 20 years, despite being the fourth ranked in popularity. If that doesn't tell you everything you need to know about the NHL's state as of today, then I don't know what does. The owner's shoulder just as much blame for this financial catastrophe as Bettman himself, if not more, but Bettman, as a man in a position of authority, whether real or imagined, has utterly failed to properly manage this league.
And don't for one second think I'm a PA horn blower. They've acted equally ridiculous throughout this entire process. This union has backstabbed, deceived, and imploded their way into multiple poor CBA decisions for decades now, and I didn't expect much more this year. The fact that this entity refused to even begin negotiations until the 11th hour tells you all you need to know about their motivations and collective next-fraction-of-a-second foresight. Shame on the PA for not even being willing to make concessions in negotiations and shame on them for trying to turn this into yet another public relations media war of words.
There were two clear early indicators of a lockout this year.
1. The hiring of Don Fehr. Those that have followed baseball, or any professional sport for that matter, knew what the hiring of Fehr was all about. Fehr has a history of combating lockouts, organizing strikes, and demonstrating unrelenting control and unity over a PA. He brought the MLB to its knees years ago and can likely do so again with the NHL, especially with a splintered ownership group. By hiring a man like Fehr, with that kind of reputation, the NHLPA sent a clear message to the league that they weren't rolling over this time, which all but ensured another lockout.
2. The signings of Parise, Suter, and Weber, totaling a combined approximate $300 million dollars, all from teams crying poor. If this doesn't paint the league as confused, hypocritical, or downright self destructive, I don't know what does. These moves, more than anything else, exposed the ownership group for what it was. The league had nothing to stand on after this, no tears to illicit for all the wittle teams going broke. It came to no surprise to hear Westgarth talk so candidly about these signings in particular. You can't cry poor one day and spend $200 million dollars on two players the next. Completely ridiculous. Either these ownership groups are outright deceitful regarding their business practices, or totally out of touch. I don't know which is scarier at this point.
In closing, this league is on its last leg in America as a "top four" professional sports entity. Where we go from here, who the hell knows. At least the Kings got their cup before the whole house of cards really starts tumbling down.
“One side of their mouths is how we’ve had record revenues, the game has never been stronger,” Westgarth said. “And all of a sudden, next week is how they can’t live with the way things are right now and how these contracts are too long. And the next day, two guys [Zach Parise and Ryan Suter] sign for $200 million [combined].
“It is very strange from our point of view. And we’re not sure what to believe from the owners at this point, given how different teams have acted.”
The thing that bothers me most about what Westgarth is saying (which is true) is that the examples that he uses, Parise and Suter are also perfect examples of the players greed. Both of them demanded $25 million for their names to even touch paper, before they even stepped on the ice as part of the Wild. In fact they already have $10 mill for this year in the bank so what do they care if they play a single game? Those two contracts that Westgarth is using are blatant examples of what's wrong with both sides in this whole arguement... You can't really fully blame the owners for handing out crazy contracts when the players are making such crazy demands and the oppisite is true, you can't fault a player when he demands crazy money if the owner just goes "Sure!" and throws $100 million at a player. To me it comes back to the league offices and a complete lack of control over keeping everyone in check and that falls squarely on Bettman's shoulders. If the league stands up when these contracts first come up and does something about it, we aren't in this mess right now with both sides using the same things as examples...
Meh. It will spare us from the president, whoever it may be at the time, from making a really bad pun regarding Quick.
It will still be an honor. And politics aside, I hope it's still Obama since he is a genuine sports fan. And I'm pretty sure they will honor Brown for being just the second American captain to win the Cup.
It will still be an honor. And politics aside, I hope it's still Obama since he is a genuine sports fan. And I'm pretty sure they will honor Brown for being just the second American captain to win the Cup.
I don't know much about Romney's sports fandom, but the fact that he delivered the Salt Lake City Olympics should say something.
But really, why would the lockout prevent the team from meeting the President (whomever it is)?
I don't know much about Romney's sports fandom, but the fact that he delivered the Salt Lake City Olympics should say something.
But really, why would the lockout prevent the team from meeting the President (whomever it is)?
Aren't the players gonna be prohibited from representing the league until the lockout is over? Much like the NBA players were not allowed to use anything affiliated with the NBA during the lockout last year.
Some of the players are working out on their own during the lockout. Since Willie lives close to Vancouver, he is working out with some of the Canucks. He is also a former teammate of many of them, obviously.
It's become a total and utter cliche to criticize Bettman around here, but how can anyone defend this guy anymore? Yes, he is a mouthpiece for the owners. Yes, he's seen some success as commissioner of the league. But looking at the fiscal history, overall, of the NHL over the past 20 years, where are his contributions? Under his tenure, the league has increased revenue? So why are so many teams crying poor?
So many of the pro-owners fans have the same agenda they recite over and over again. The league is generating more revenue today than it was eight years ago, the PA is being unreasonable, the players think they are partners when they are not. Some of that has merit and some of it doesn't.
As far as revenue is concerned, I think it's misleading and disingenuous to claim "the league" is generating record revenue when it's the elite super group (Toronto, Montreal, Philadelphia, Boston, New York, Vancouver, Chicago, etc.) making all the money. It's a great phrase to coin, saying, "the NHL has generated record revenues" when in reality only a dozen teams are making good money. You can't yell "profit!" one day then claim huge employee costs are a necessity the next. It doesn't make sense and it's not true. Enough of the pandering. Say it how it is. "Yes, we have quite a few teams doing very well financially, but more than half of the league is drowning in red ink."
I think the main problem here is you seem to be confusing revenue and profit....yes the league is making record revenues (in theory all sports should be making record revenues every year as the continue to charge more and receive more in sponsorships while the markets remain steady...for the most part...obvious exception being during a recession). Thus if the league is making record revenue and is still losing money they problem lies on the cost side of the equation. And what is the biggest cost for the NHL (and most business)? Labor....in order to turn your record revenue in to actualized profits you need labor "under control".
Quote:
I think Spector raised quite a few valid points regarding Bettman's tenure, with two standout arguments:
1. Bettman's inability to encourage and enforce the fiscally responsible management of franchises. Other than the Kovalchuk situation, in which Bettman and the league arbitrarily drew their line in the sand, there has been next to zero pressure on teams to operate responsibly. Mega deal after mega deal has been drafted and signed since the inception of the cap system with little to no backlash from the league. If these gargantuan albatross contracts are hurting the league financially by a. making it difficult for poorer teams to keep up, and b. burdening the league as a whole with monstrous cash obligations, then why hasn't Bettman stepped in? Why have the owners and the league sat back and twiddled their thumbs while 10+ year retirement contracts became outlandishly burdensome? It is the commissioner's job, even as a figurehead, to encourage sound economic practice within the league. If the NBA is bold enough to block lopsided trades in an effort to preserve the integrity of the game, and the NFL is suspending entire coaching staffs for perceived irresponsible behavior, then where is the NHL's leadership? Right or wrong in their specific decisions, other leagues are at least demonstrating that the buck does indeed stop at a certain office, whereas the NHL seems to demand zero accountability all the way down the totem pole. The only top down structure of accountability we seem to have is a widely criticized player safety board and a commissioner that acts more like a Yes Man for the ownership group than a pillar of ethical business practice for the league to follow.
Really? You want the commish stepping in and doing whatever he wants based on his own desires?? That is working real well in the NFL where Goddell has complete control of anything and has led to chaos following "bountygate" and don't even get me started on Stern canceling a trade to the Lakers "cause it wasn't a fair trade".....even worse is Goodell's powers were collectively bargained, can you imagine the players hearing the commissioner is telling owners not to pay players?? Collision lawsuits would come flying out of Fehrs grinning teeth....
Quote:
2. Bettman's inability to properly grow franchises in non-traditional hockey markets and a refusal to acknowledge any wrongdoing in said decision. This has been discussed to hell and back, but the numbers don't lie. We had two unquestionably failed sunbelt teams in Atlanta and Phoenix. One has been relocated; the other is in instant limbo, likely to be eventually relocated. Added to that are additional southern expansion teams that, despite success, ebb and flow in revenue and are consistently ranked among the "have-nots" of the league (Tampa Bay, Anaheim, Carolina, Nashville, Florida, Columbus) - all of which were created with Bettman at the helm, except for Tampa. Regardless of the usual morally driven and xenophobic auto-responses to this discussion, I think everyone can agree that, as a whole, pertaining to the overall financial viability of the NHL, that sunbelt expansion has been a demonstrative failure. These franchises may have helped "grow" the sport in the sense that there may be more ice hockey rinks in Tennessee today than there was 10 years ago, but for the most part, these teams are consistently ranked among the franchises needing the most financial aid. But moreso than ANY of this, whether you vehemently disagree or not, Bettman and the league have refused to address these failures in their expansion teams. Other than letting Atlanta go (and immediately seeing a spike in calculated league wide revenue) what has the league done to address these problems? They've held onto Phoenix like a child that refuses to give up their favorite binky despite massive losses, a public relations disaster, and next to zero proof that their "end game" with the entire situation is even viable. What kind of message is this?
Not sure how you can consider Nash/TB/Carolina a failure. Sure they are a "have not" but no matter what league you are in and how much it makes there are always have nots. In the NFL its the Jags and in MLB its Florida/Pitts/A's and while all are "have nots" (relatively) all are making plenty of money despite all having attendance problems.
And do you know why they are making money??
Why yes a wealthy national TV deal...do you know how you acquire a wealthy national TV deal??? Its not by having 10 teams in Canadian and DC being your southernmost team.....this isn't the Civil War....
Quote:
There were two clear early indicators of a lockout this year.
1. The hiring of Don Fehr. Those that have followed baseball, or any professional sport for that matter, knew what the hiring of Fehr was all about. Fehr has a history of combating lockouts, organizing strikes, and demonstrating unrelenting control and unity over a PA. He brought the MLB to its knees years ago and can likely do so again with the NHL, especially with a splintered ownership group. By hiring a man like Fehr, with that kind of reputation, the NHLPA sent a clear message to the league that they weren't rolling over this time, which all but ensured another lockout.
In closing, this league is on its last leg in America as a "top four" professional sports entity. Where we go from here, who the hell knows. At least the Kings got their cup before the whole house of cards really starts tumbling down.
And the Union's made an attempt at a reasonable relationship with the NHL?
exxaaaaaaactly.
Everyone wants to be pro players and anti-bettman/owners here. But let's be real, the NHL and the owners have made SEVERAL attempts to be involved with the NHLPA...trying to get talks started as far back as last off-season..they have stayed extremely positive through this whole process...
But all people want to do is hate on Bettman and act like he is between the doorways holding out Donald Fehr and the players with his fists and not letting Hockey be played.
Plain and simple, I feel like the owners want hockey to be played, and be played successfully and fruitfully for all parties involved for a long time with little labor strife.
The NHLPA wants hockey to be successful right now, have their players not take paycuts and just worry about everything later.
Everyone wants to be pro players and anti-bettman/owners here. But let's be real, the NHL and the owners have made SEVERAL attempts to be involved with the NHLPA...trying to get talks started as far back as last off-season..they have stayed extremely positive through this whole process...
But all people want to do is hate on Bettman and act like he is between the doorways holding out Donald Fehr and the players with his fists and not letting Hockey be played.
Plain and simple, I feel like the owners want hockey to be played, and be played successfully and fruitfully for all parties involved for a long time with little labor strife.
The NHLPA wants hockey to be successful right now, have their players not take paycuts and just worry about everything later.
Sure the owners have made attempts at talking, and nobody can deny that the NHLPA hired Fehr to fight against getting the shaft, but the owners got pretty much everything they wanted last time around, and now they want even more from the players? Where's the bargaining? Nobody forced the owners to give Kovalchuk, Suter, Parise, etc. 100 million plus contracts, yet they're crying poverty. Here's a novel idea: if the league can't support these types of contracts, don't give them out... It just doesn't make a lot of sense.
Sure the owners have made attempts at talking, and nobody can deny that the NHLPA hired Fehr to fight against getting the shaft, but the owners got pretty much everything they wanted last time around, and now they want even more from the players? Where's the bargaining? Nobody forced the owners to give Kovalchuk, Suter, Parise, etc. 100 million plus contracts, yet they're crying poverty. Here's a novel idea: if the league can't support these types of contracts, don't give them out... It just doesn't make a lot of sense.
There are teams that can afford it though, and the cap is tied to their revenue. That makes it expensive for the teams that have to get to the floor. Plus, if you want the talent, you have to pay for it. If you don't keep up(which you pretty much have to do with the floor pretty close to the ceiling) with the teams that can afford it, you don't get the player, then the fans get angry, then the fans don't show up.
Everyone wants to be pro players and anti-bettman/owners here. But let's be real, the NHL and the owners have made SEVERAL attempts to be involved with the NHLPA...trying to get talks started as far back as last off-season..they have stayed extremely positive through this whole process...
But all people want to do is hate on Bettman and act like he is between the doorways holding out Donald Fehr and the players with his fists and not letting Hockey be played.
)
