HFBoards

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

2012 CBA & Re-alignment: Lockout in Effect. Thanks Gary/Donald! PART II

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-17-2012, 03:47 PM
  #276
Gooch
Registered User
 
Gooch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Coeur d'Alene Idaho
Country: United States
Posts: 13,957
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkullSplitter View Post




Also, this scares the **** out of me.
"All years of existing SPCs with terms in excess of five (5) years will be accounted for and charged against a team's Cap (at full AAV) regardless of whether or where the Player is playing. In the event any such contract is traded during its term, the related Cap charge will travel with the Player, but only for the year(s) in which the Player remains active and is being paid under his NHL SPC. If, at some subsequent point in time the Player retires or ceases to play and/or receive pay under his NHL SPC, the Cap charge will automatically revert (at full AAV) to the Club that initially entered into the contract for the balance of its term."

"• Money paid to Players on NHL SPCs (one-ways and two-ways) in another professional league will not be counted against the Players' Share, but all dollars paid in excess of $105,000 will be counted against the NHL Club's Averaged Club Salary for the period during which such Player is being paid under his SPC while playing in another professional league."

I mean, holy crap that's just vindictive against teams with anyone signed for over 5 years, especially Kovalchuk and Ovechkin with the Russia threat.


I don't know, I feel like this could be bad for the league as a whole with maybe more talented Russians staying in Russia because teams won't want to take the risk of having a KHL salary counting against their cap.


What that means is say Kovalchuk who got his long contract heavily front loaded wont get traded when he's 36 or so to a team scraping to meet the cap floor. If that wasnt in place NJ could dump him off at that age and have him play a couple of years and retire giving that team an inflated cap hit to allow them to go lower than the cap floor. It basically prevents a loophole for the big market teams to get out of their horribly front loaded contracts. It's a good thing.

Gooch is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 08:08 AM
  #277
Gooch
Registered User
 
Gooch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Coeur d'Alene Idaho
Country: United States
Posts: 13,957
vCash: 500
http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2...s-just-a-ploy/

Well Toews is ripping the proposal and combined with Fehr's letter it just seems like he has bought hook line and sinker what he read from Fehr's letter. Looks like the players BS line of "we just want to play hockey" was all PR crap that idiots bought into. They're more concerned with "winning" than playing hockey and they're just going to repeat the same mistake that the guys in 2004 did. Why do people refuse to learn from history so often? It's not like it was that long ago, it's perfectly relevant and you got guys like Modano, Guerin, and Andrechuk telling them how it wasnt worth it yet they completely disregard it and go full steam ahead over the cliff.

Do they really think sleeping in a gym while playing with the KHL is remotely better than the type of living conditions you get while playing in the NHL? What's the dispute, a little extra shaved off the top end pay that is more than likely to be paid back and if not you're still making an assload of money? It just irks the hell out of me but at least now the public sentiment has shifted and people are seeing what the NHLPA is for basically the first time now.

Gooch is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 08:17 AM
  #278
Mr Jiggyfly
Registered User
 
Mr Jiggyfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 14,380
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooch View Post
http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2...s-just-a-ploy/

Well Toews is ripping the proposal and combined with Fehr's letter it just seems like he has bought hook line and sinker what he read from Fehr's letter. Looks like the players BS line of "we just want to play hockey" was all PR crap that idiots bought into. They're more concerned with "winning" than playing hockey and they're just going to repeat the same mistake that the guys in 2004 did. Why do people refuse to learn from history so often? It's not like it was that long ago, it's perfectly relevant and you got guys like Modano, Guerin, and Andrechuk telling them how it wasnt worth it yet they completely disregard it and go full steam ahead over the cliff.

Do they really think sleeping in a gym while playing with the KHL is remotely better than the type of living conditions you get while playing in the NHL? What's the dispute, a little extra shaved off the top end pay that is more than likely to be paid back and if not you're still making an assload of money? It just irks the hell out of me but at least now the public sentiment has shifted and people are seeing what the NHLPA is for basically the first time now.
http://www.karrass.com/blog/tag/post...-negotiations/

Mr Jiggyfly is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 08:40 AM
  #279
Mr Jiggyfly
Registered User
 
Mr Jiggyfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 14,380
vCash: 500
Today is easily the most important day since these "negotiations" began.

I'm going to stay positive and stick with my "common sense has to prevail" belief. The owners came up 3% so I think the players offer may have a sliding scale and look something like:

54 52 51 50 50 50

If they pushback with an offer from their last proposal, with de-linkage, we may not see hockey this year.

However, I feel like they will be smart about this and use an offer built around the parameters above.

Mr Jiggyfly is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 08:57 AM
  #280
Shady Machine
Registered User
 
Shady Machine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 12,176
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Jiggyfly View Post
Today is easily the most important day since these "negotiations" began.

I'm going to stay positive and stick with my "common sense has to prevail" belief. The owners came up 3% so I think the players offer may have a sliding scale and look something like:

54 52 51 50 50 50

If they pushback with an offer from their last proposal, with de-linkage, we may not see hockey this year.

However, I feel like they will be smart about this and use an offer built around the parameters above.
I really hope you are right because that's the deal that makes the most sense and the deal I've been pushing for. Then the "make whole" provision won't really be necessary. I'm just not sure the players are ready to show all of their cards yet.

Shady Machine is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:29 AM
  #281
Alesle
Registered User
 
Alesle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oslo, Norway
Country: Norway
Posts: 530
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Jiggyfly View Post
Today is easily the most important day since these "negotiations" began.

I'm going to stay positive and stick with my "common sense has to prevail" belief. The owners came up 3% so I think the players offer may have a sliding scale and look something like:

54 52 51 50 50 50

If they pushback with an offer from their last proposal, with de-linkage, we may not see hockey this year.

However, I feel like they will be smart about this and use an offer built around the parameters above.
I'm with you, I still believe common sense will prevail in the end. That being said, I expect there to be some tough negotiating going on the coming week where it might appear to the public as if they are quite some way apart.

Alesle is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:35 AM
  #282
SkullSplitter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 4,845
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooch View Post
What that means is say Kovalchuk who got his long contract heavily front loaded wont get traded when he's 36 or so to a team scraping to meet the cap floor. If that wasnt in place NJ could dump him off at that age and have him play a couple of years and retire giving that team an inflated cap hit to allow them to go lower than the cap floor. It basically prevents a loophole for the big market teams to get out of their horribly front loaded contracts. It's a good thing.
Yeah but let's say Crosby gets a career ending injury and retires early. Something like that could screw over the Pens just as much as it could screw over the Devils.

SkullSplitter is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:41 AM
  #283
SkullSplitter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 4,845
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chancellor Vitale View Post
If the last CBA didn't work and 80% of the terms were the owners' ideas / in favor of the owners, then isn't that just another form of mismanagement? Any way you cut it the players gave up a lot last time and there are record revenues now yet we still have problems? Sorry but the owners should eat their own dog food this time.

At some point the owners should pay for their own mistakes (some of whom gamed the system right up to the deadline after crying foul -- the ones in trouble pretty much dig themselves into a hole). The players are the more valued commodity here. There are other places for them to go an make millions and potentially other owners to start something new with the good players. But the NHL has no prayer of replacing the players.

If they put an AHL quality product out there / tried that, it would be the end of the NHL. I sure as hell wouldn't watch / wouldn't pay for a collection of rookies + AHL type players. Life's too short. I'm either watching the very best the game has to offer or I'm not watching. That said hopefully the players take LeBrun's advice and use this proposal as the framework for a counter-offer instead of making another new proposal like they did the last time (which was almost as bad as the owners' first proposal).
That's something the owners really need to think of. Losing Ovechkin, Kovalchuk, Malkin, Datsyuk, etc to the KHL would be horrible for the NHL.

I'm hoping the players come back with a counter proposal of it still being 50/50, but with a 26 year old UFA age instead of 28 & no contract limits. If the NHL wants the players to take 50/50 the owners need to make some concessions to them.

SkullSplitter is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:43 AM
  #284
Alesle
Registered User
 
Alesle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oslo, Norway
Country: Norway
Posts: 530
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkullSplitter View Post
Yeah but let's say Crosby gets a career ending injury and retires early. Something like that could screw over the Pens just as much as it could screw over the Devils.
I assume he would do as Savard is doing with Boston and just stay on LTIR. That way he would get paid while the Pens would still be able to use (most of) his cap space. This is of course assuming LTIR continues to work s it did in the last CBA.

Alesle is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 10:20 AM
  #285
Milliardo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Zürich
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 1,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkullSplitter View Post
Yeah but let's say Crosby gets a career ending injury and retires early. Something like that could screw over the Pens just as much as it could screw over the Devils.
Yes, but that's a risk you take when signing a guy to such a long contract.

That said, there's always the LTIR, if you can still do that in the new CBA.

Milliardo is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 11:55 AM
  #286
Gooch
Registered User
 
Gooch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Coeur d'Alene Idaho
Country: United States
Posts: 13,957
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkullSplitter View Post
Yeah but let's say Crosby gets a career ending injury and retires early. Something like that could screw over the Pens just as much as it could screw over the Devils.
I am not sure it applies to situations where the IR applies which is the situation you're talking about. But say for instance if Crosby just decides to up and quit in a non injury way down the line of his current contract, we'd be liable for the cap hit under the old CBA anyways. This was purely targeted at those teams that tried to sign players in their late 20's early 30's to 10 year + type deals that were clearly designed to tack on additional years to lower the cap hit knowing that the player could retire after 35 and the cap hit disappears due to the contract being signed prior to age 35. The fact that those contracts were structured so as the player is making a tiny % of their cap hit in those final years all but openly encourages the player to retire. It's purely a loophole closer and frankly our GM has not really signed anyone to a deal that took advantage of that loophole so we're really not going to have nearly as tough of a time as say the Redwings, Devils, or even Vancouver if they decide to keep Luongo.

Gooch is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 12:00 PM
  #287
Shady Machine
Registered User
 
Shady Machine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 12,176
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooch View Post
I am not sure it applies to situations where the IR applies which is the situation you're talking about. But say for instance if Crosby just decides to up and quit in a non injury way down the line of his current contract, we'd be liable for the cap hit under the old CBA anyways. This was purely targeted at those teams that tried to sign players in their late 20's early 30's to 10 year + type deals that were clearly designed to tack on additional years to lower the cap hit knowing that the player could retire after 35 and the cap hit disappears due to the contract being signed prior to age 35. The fact that those contracts were structured so as the player is making a tiny % of their cap hit in those final years all but openly encourages the player to retire. It's purely a loophole closer and frankly our GM has not really signed anyone to a deal that took advantage of that loophole so we're really not going to have nearly as tough of a time as say the Redwings, Devils, or even Vancouver if they decide to keep Luongo.
To the bolded, is that true? I thought under the old CBA that if a player retired, so long as it wasn't a 35+ contract, that the team wasn't liable for the cap hit.

Shady Machine is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 12:10 PM
  #288
Ominous Grey
Registered User
 
Ominous Grey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Pennsylvania
Country: United States
Posts: 2,986
vCash: 500
I have work to do but I can't focus. So nervous.

Don't lowball them, players. Be reasonable.

Ominous Grey is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 12:14 PM
  #289
Alesle
Registered User
 
Alesle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oslo, Norway
Country: Norway
Posts: 530
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shady Machine View Post
To the bolded, is that true? I thought under the old CBA that if a player retired, so long as it wasn't a 35+ contract, that the team wasn't liable for the cap hit.
No the bolded part is not true. You're quite right in your interpretation.

Alesle is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 12:20 PM
  #290
Shady Machine
Registered User
 
Shady Machine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 12,176
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alesle View Post
No the bolded part is not true. You're quite right in your interpretation.
Yeah that's what I thought. It wouldn't make any sense otherwise.

Shady Machine is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 02:37 PM
  #291
Gooch
Registered User
 
Gooch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Coeur d'Alene Idaho
Country: United States
Posts: 13,957
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alesle View Post
No the bolded part is not true. You're quite right in your interpretation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shady Machine View Post
Yeah that's what I thought. It wouldn't make any sense otherwise.
I havent seen too many situations where that played out but I guess I took the Alexi Yashin thing and saw how Long Island was still on the hook for his cap hit and assumed that it applied to players who retire before age 35.

Even with me wrong on that point, I still feel teams should be held accountable for the contracts they sign players to. We all knew of Crosby's health risks before he was signed and if things don't work out then we need to be on the hook for his cap hit, thats the risk that comes with the reward. The reward is that we frankly got him at a discount because of that.

Gooch is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 03:09 PM
  #292
Shady Machine
Registered User
 
Shady Machine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 12,176
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooch View Post
I havent seen too many situations where that played out but I guess I took the Alexi Yashin thing and saw how Long Island was still on the hook for his cap hit and assumed that it applied to players who retire before age 35.

Even with me wrong on that point, I still feel teams should be held accountable for the contracts they sign players to. We all knew of Crosby's health risks before he was signed and if things don't work out then we need to be on the hook for his cap hit, thats the risk that comes with the reward. The reward is that we frankly got him at a discount because of that.
Oh I absolutely agree with you and the new proposal in the CBA regarding contracts.

Shady Machine is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 03:20 PM
  #293
Alesle
Registered User
 
Alesle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oslo, Norway
Country: Norway
Posts: 530
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooch View Post
I havent seen too many situations where that played out but I guess I took the Alexi Yashin thing and saw how Long Island was still on the hook for his cap hit and assumed that it applied to players who retire before age 35.
Yashin didn't retire, he was bought out of his contract.

Alesle is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 03:23 PM
  #294
Shady Machine
Registered User
 
Shady Machine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 12,176
vCash: 500
According to Bettman, the PA's proposals left him "extremely disappointed" and that they are still not speaking the same language.

Shady Machine is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 03:25 PM
  #295
Guins71
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 951
vCash: 500
Well that didn't go well today. See ya next year everybody.

Guins71 is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 03:29 PM
  #296
Buzzkiller
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 158
vCash: 500
Dave Molinari ‏@MolinariPG

Clearly, this is all Paul Martin's fault. #IsntEverything

Buzzkiller is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 03:38 PM
  #297
Gooch
Registered User
 
Gooch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Coeur d'Alene Idaho
Country: United States
Posts: 13,957
vCash: 500
But I thought the Players just wanna play hockey? They're finally showing their true colors with this.

I'll be honest, I sort of was already expecting the season to be lost so I am not too torn up about this. I will say though I did get a little caught up in the false optimism the last couple of days. In the end I knew that Fehr will never settle for something fair and losing a season or tarnishing the players image never matter to him. This is a guy who took players on strike right before the playoffs happened in baseball. If you want to look at all time d-bag moves, thats up there.

For all of us fans though, he needs to lose [Fehr] and he needs to lose bad. I don't want him ever poisoning any other sport like he did to baseball and he's trying to do with our sport.

Gooch is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 03:40 PM
  #298
HuskerTornado
RIP UW AlwaysBelieve
 
HuskerTornado's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Parts Unknown
Country: United States
Posts: 12,284
vCash: 500
So the PA's proposals didn't even come close to 50/50...

****, it's over.

HuskerTornado is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 03:50 PM
  #299
On Vinyl
Oh Danny Boy
 
On Vinyl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: IAVDBTR
Posts: 584
vCash: 500
Is anyone still on the players side?

On Vinyl is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 03:51 PM
  #300
vikingGoalie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 875
vCash: 500
we should get the title of this thread to thank Fehr and the players for losing the season.

The players got an unfairly biased towards them deal the last time around. Yes they will lose money on the next deal. Get over it.

Anyone have a link that details the players offers? As soon as Rossi was tweeting that the Union was going to offer up multiple offers I had a bad feeling.

Fehr has to go. I get some of the concerns that the players have on the last offer from the NHL, but over all it was a pretty damn reasonable basis for meaningful negotiations. Fehr and the players are risking alienating the hard core fans. Our only hope is this is all posturing and a deal gets done in the near term, otherwise kiss the season good bye.

vikingGoalie is online now  
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 05:55 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.