HFBoards

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

2012-13 Lockout Discussion Part V: The "Back to square one" Edition

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-20-2012, 04:59 PM
  #151
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,156
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jniklast View Post
So what exactly is the PA's problem with that "make whole" clause? The players get all their money, don't they? Is the fact they don't get all their money "on time" the big problem?
The issue is that it the make whole payments count against the cap (at least as originally proposed). So, in effect, they eat into the real cap available for new contracts in future years.

One of the things that bothers me most about the reported exchanges this past week, however, is that Bettman apparently communicated that he'd be willing to discuss the make-whole. That to me implies that it's on the table to exclude the payments in whole, or at least in part, from the future cap calculations. The fact that the PA didn't engage on that front is very troublesome to me.

As I've said already a bunch of times in this thread, as long as the players are insisting on every penny of every existing contract on time and without escrow regardless of HRR growth, then the lack of a deal is on them. They need to move off of that position to put some of those dollars at risk and/or defer them. Then you can quickly move to a deal.

BrooklynRangersFan is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 05:02 PM
  #152
jniklast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Country: Germany
Posts: 4,711
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riche16 View Post
The "make whole" is BS. The players get their full contract paid by themselves... That's the issue. They get paid the next two years by their future selves. Overall still lose that money.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the players still won't get less than their 50% over the length of the CBA, right? With the cap at 70M in the first season (i.e. 57%) they would be indeed above the split.

jniklast is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 07:47 PM
  #153
DutchShamrock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 4,964
vCash: 500
I think the "make whole" was opened to negotiation during the last meeting that Bettman walked out of. The PA hasn't had a chance to respond on it. And the league won't entertain that conversation until the PA accepts the rest of the proposal as is.

A week ago the league didn't want to discuss the secondary issues until the core economics were settled. Now they won't discuss a core economic issue until all the other things are accepted.

DutchShamrock is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 08:20 PM
  #154
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,156
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DutchShamrock View Post
I think the "make whole" was opened to negotiation during the last meeting that Bettman walked out of. The PA hasn't had a chance to respond on it. And the league won't entertain that conversation until the PA accepts the rest of the proposal as is.

A week ago the league didn't want to discuss the secondary issues until the core economics were settled. Now they won't discuss a core economic issue until all the other things are accepted.
The fact that he walked out doesn't stop the PA from engaging on it via phone, email or meeting (clandestine or public) thereafter.

You're also basing this on a quote from Fehr, so I'd take it with as many grains of salt as you would for a quote from Bettman.

In addition, the full quote is that they were also open to "tweaks" to the league's offer. What does that mean? To me, that means "you made us come back with another proposal, so we did it - but we're now negotiating off this doc, stop trying to change the entire infrastructure and negotiate the clauses we've laid out." 5 to 7 years on the max lengths of contracts could be a tweak. 7 years of service or 28 years old to UFA (from 8/28) could be a tweak.

I'm sorry, but now that I've seen the PA's unresponsive and unproductive proposals, it's on them to come back and get serious about showing a willingness to find a middle ground.

BrooklynRangersFan is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 10:18 PM
  #155
ltrangerfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 931
vCash: 500
Clearly the CBA trumps all individual contracts. The players knew it. The agents knew it or both groups should have known it.

Watching the two sides wrestle with the numbers I realize that we are not really dealing with employees but rather a loose partnership arrangement. Perhaps it's time for the PA to ask for a percentage of franchise fees, going forward or a few other perks but get this current deal done.

My read tells me the PA has a few decisions to make:

A)they can continue to play around with their own numbers and play a losing PR battle.
B)They can decide how much money they are prepared to forgo in an attempt to win "respect".
C)They can put a significantly better offer on the table using the NHL's plans and put the onus back on the league.

I still am left wondering whether the PA picked the high profile Fehr only to negotiate an October settlement? If the players fully understand where they are at a deal will be in place this week. There is a very short window open. Lose the week and I believe we are looking at a Jan start to the season.

ltrangerfan is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 10:28 PM
  #156
mrjimmyg89
'13-'14 East Champs
 
mrjimmyg89's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 2,854
vCash: 500
The owners stepped up to the table and set the date for the season to still be completed in a full 82 games. They put something on the table that was never on the table before, a 50/50 split. No matter the minute issues with the deal from the players, they could have moved a lot closer. The players decided to not give up nearly as much as the owners did with their proposal. The PA looked terrible there.

Bettman looked terrible the other day declining 3 proposals in a matter of 15 minutes. How can you go over an entire proposal, let alone 3 in that short of a span?

The players need to get closer still. The owners need to move a little more, but I feel as though they have made more strides than the PA. It's time for the players to understand that if something is not done now, they will never get a proposal from the NHL where they get 50% after the 25th. If something is not done by the 25th, I wouldn't be surprised if there is no NHL hockey this year. I'm not going to hold my breath. We've seen this before.

mrjimmyg89 is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 10:42 PM
  #157
mike14
Registered User
 
mike14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Melbourne
Country: Australia
Posts: 4,297
vCash: 500
Obviously some hockey is better than no hockey, bit once a full season can't happen, do people care as much if a season is lost? I look at the 94-95 season and think 'does half a season plus finals really count'? Before all the devils fans that lurk on here (why?) get their knickers in a twist, I'm not saying that cup doesn't count, but do people look at that season as a whole and just roll their eyes?

In people's opinion, what are the minimum games you'd accept to call it a 'season'?

mike14 is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 11:15 PM
  #158
Florida Ranger
Bring back Torts!
 
Florida Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Tampa, FLA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike14 View Post
Obviously some hockey is better than no hockey, bit once a full season can't happen, do people care as much if a season is lost? I look at the 94-95 season and think 'does half a season plus finals really count'? Before all the devils fans that lurk on here (why?) get their knickers in a twist, I'm not saying that cup doesn't count, but do people look at that season as a whole and just roll their eyes?

In people's opinion, what are the minimum games you'd accept to call it a 'season'?
When a team wins 16 playoff games.

Florida Ranger is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 11:25 PM
  #159
mschmidt64
Registered User
 
mschmidt64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan. View Post
Oh, they should take less than 50% now in the future? Give me a break.
The entire CBA should be 50-50.

So if they get more up front, they get less on the end.

Simple math.... keep up.

mschmidt64 is offline  
Old
10-21-2012, 01:04 AM
  #160
mike14
Registered User
 
mike14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Melbourne
Country: Australia
Posts: 4,297
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranger de FLA View Post
When a team wins 16 playoff games.
so you'd be cool with a 20 game season plus playoffs and wouldn't consider that cup winner different to any other past winner?

mike14 is offline  
Old
10-21-2012, 02:20 AM
  #161
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,504
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mschmidt64 View Post
The entire CBA should be 50-50.

So if they get more up front, they get less on the end.

Simple math.... keep up.
I can understand the PA not wanting that, there is no flexing under the NHL cap as it is in the NBA.

In reality 1) the owners get away from contracts signed 3 month ago or 2) you get a cap that basically is flat for 5-6 years (if the pa starts with 57 and end up with 43). The later will have many victims. Especially players who don't have long term deals. Teams would need alot of flexibility, and I very much doubt anyone would even risk 500k for 2 years on a depth player that isn't slotted to start.

Ola is offline  
Old
10-21-2012, 04:53 AM
  #162
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,791
vCash: 500
Quote:
He is telling the Rangers they can’t open the doors to the transformed money-printing Garden because of $3 million season — at most, given the negotiable nature of the NHLPA’s “50-50” proposal and the prospect of annual revenue growth well beyond the league’s conservative five-percent projections.

He is telling the Predators — who already have paid Shea Weber $13 million for this season on a signing bonus — they can’t begin to collect gate receipts or enhanced revenue sharing dollars as proposed by the union.

He is telling the Coyotes there will be no money coming into the operation. He is telling the Maple Leafs, Canadiens, Flyers, Canucks and all of the NHL’s economic powerhouses he would rather close up shop than negotiate over a difference of $3 million per year for those ownerships, which, by the way, would reap windfall gains if the PA’s latest proposal were adopted.
http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/more_...TunNVQ9lZXudCI

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
10-21-2012, 04:58 AM
  #163
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,791
vCash: 500
Bettman put conditions on discussing the make whole program with Fehr

Quote:
FEHR: "All I can tell you is that my sense in the meeting (Thursday): They reviewed our proposals. It took them 12 or 15 minutes, said they rejected them, said their offer on Tuesday was their very best offer and that outside of what he called 'minor tweaks' that was it. He said this in front of 19 players. When I said, 'So, a tweak means something small and insubstantial' or words to that effect, he said 'Yes.' That's sort of the way it ends. Except Gary said at the end of the meeting if the players were prepared to accept their offer in its entirety, minor tweaks, I could call him about the 'make whole' provision which has players paying players for the reduced salaries in the first two years. I just have to go on the basis of what I heard."
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/10/19...labour-dispute

The players accept the NHL proposal AND then Bettman will discuss the make whole.

Bettman has been doing this from day 1.

Everyone screams about the PA not willing to discuss the economic stuff. That is because Bettman puts conditions on that too. The PA has to accept the NHL's position for discussions on HRR to take place.

This is Fehr'r fault?

Fehr negotiated two CBAs in MLB without missing an inning. 2002 and 2006.

Bettman is 3 for 3 in lockouts.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
10-21-2012, 05:20 AM
  #164
BBKers
Registered User
 
BBKers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: South Koster, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 5,662
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to BBKers
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
Brooks nails this one pretty good - I must readily admit

BBKers is offline  
Old
10-21-2012, 05:40 AM
  #165
Oak
Hockey fan
 
Oak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 1,752
vCash: 50
If Bettman gets fired I will jump for joy. That is all I want for Christmas I think.

Oak is offline  
Old
10-21-2012, 06:05 AM
  #166
mike14
Registered User
 
mike14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Melbourne
Country: Australia
Posts: 4,297
vCash: 500
I find it hard to take anything Brooks rights seriously as he so incredibly biased. there's nothing wrong with being biased, but as a journo you should at least try and write for both sides instead of being a shill.

Also, isn't $90 million a season and $540 mil over 6 years a fair chunk of change. If the NHL offered the players a deal where they lost that, would people think the NHLPA should take it? Not taking sides, just curious

mike14 is offline  
Old
10-21-2012, 07:19 AM
  #167
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,791
vCash: 500
The NHLPA has proposed how much money being saved by the NHL with PA givebacks using conservative growth estimates. That's after the NHL has recorded how many years of record growth. Bettman has developed a culture where the players don't like or trust him. Craig Custance wrote about it on Friday. The never ending vicious cycle of labor turmoil. Somwhow that's the PA's fault. Another lockout will happen whenever this coming CBA expires. The PA is being asked for giveback after giveback. Are they getting anything in return? If Bettman made a bad deal and gave up too much last time and now he wants to recouped those items plus keep what he got in return for the PA gains,that's not the PAs fault.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
10-21-2012, 07:48 AM
  #168
DutchShamrock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 4,964
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
The NHLPA has proposed how much money being saved by the NHL with PA givebacks using conservative growth estimates. That's after the NHL has recorded how many years of record growth. Bettman has developed a culture where the players don't like or trust him. Craig Custance wrote about it on Friday. The never ending vicious cycle of labor turmoil. Somwhow that's the PA's fault. Another lockout will happen whenever this coming CBA expires. The PA is being asked for giveback after giveback. Are they getting anything in return? If Bettman made a bad deal and gave up too much last time and now he wants to recouped those items plus keep what he got in return for the PA gains,that's not the PAs fault.
According to Gary, he hasn't negotiated a good CBA yet. The players always get too much.

One line of thought is it's the players' fault the got the cap and 24% rollback... weak union and in fighting. But it's also their fault they have too much now. It's amazing the perception created about the players.

Gary escapes blame for over expansion, establishing weak markets in the south, weak TV deals and these "bad" CBAs. But he gets credit for the winter classic, an Edmonton idea. Its a backwards league.

DutchShamrock is offline  
Old
10-21-2012, 07:53 AM
  #169
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,791
vCash: 500
There has not been one mention the players getting anything back in return for taking less. Even the increased revenue sharing is designed to help the poorer teams. The floor isn't being raised. The NBA saw increased revenue sharing with the minimum payroll increasing. The PA proposed the floor being a % of the upper limit. The NHL proposed the same $16M range. NFL minimum also increased in the NFL. Players took a cut but the bottom teams have to spend more on payroll. Not in the NHL where the floor of $43.9M will be less than the 11-12 floor with at least $50M more in revenue sharing. The Rangers will paying $24M in revenue sharing and they can't even get a compliance buyout. The Rangers have no dersire to play Redden so they will carry $6.5M of dead cap space. Good job by the NHL. Reds will be stuck in the AHL. At least he got paid but his career is essentially over.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
10-21-2012, 08:11 AM
  #170
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,791
vCash: 500
The sides didn't talk Friday. They traded emails. They spoke yesterday and will speak today. Strang from yesterday. From: @KatieStrangESPN
Sent: Oct 20, 2012 4:22p

#CBA Fehr and Daly spoke today and plan on speaking again tmrw. No plans yet, however, on when the two sides will meet next.

sent via web
On Twitter: http://twitter.com/KatieStrangESPN/s...51583032676352

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
10-21-2012, 09:14 AM
  #171
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,791
vCash: 500
Quote:
Minnesota Wild owner Craig Leipold made a big splash this summer by signing center Zach Parise and defenseman Ryan Suter to $98 million contracts. A few months later, Leipold has been one of Bettman’s right-hand men, one of the eight or so owners who have driven these negotiations.

“Do you believe that in July … that Craig Leipold had no idea how the NHL was going to approach these negotiations?” an NHL agent said on the condition of anonymity. “I think we can safely assume that Mr. Leipold was promising money to players he knew he would not have to pay, at least not in full.”

The NHL included in its proposal a “make whole” provision that would defer the money players lost in the first year of their 50-50 proposal until two years later, when revenue growth would provide the money to make up the difference.The NHL bragged that it called for no rollbacks, but the finer points revealed aspects of the “make whole” that infuriated Fehr and the players. Such as: The deferred money would come out of players’ salaries.
http://bluejacketsxtra.dispatch.com/...o-sees-it.html



Quote:
Still no meeting set for the NHL-NHLPA to resume CBA talks. Meantime, league's Thursday deadline to make a deal creeps closer.
https://twitter.com/reporterchris/st...09622675525632

Tick,tick,tick,tick.

Quote:
The wounds inflicted now and the negotiation tactics used in an attempt to get a deal done aren't forgotten when it comes time to talk about a new deal down the road. Especially when so many of the key players are the same.

One former player who was very active in the previous negotiations between the league and the players that set up the last lockout shook his head in frustration at the news that came out of Toronto on Thursday.

"Now it sounds like it's going to be a long one, eh?" he said. "It's the same as last time, the same owners, [Jeremy] Jacobs and those guys."

The players remember these things. They'll remember that they took two days to consider the NHL's offer made earlier this week only to have their three counterproposals shot down in minutes.
http://insider.espn.go.com/nhl/blog/...rm-health-risk

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
10-21-2012, 09:25 AM
  #172
jniklast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Country: Germany
Posts: 4,711
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
There has not been one mention the players getting anything back in return for taking less. Even the increased revenue sharing is designed to help the poorer teams. The floor isn't being raised. The NBA saw increased revenue sharing with the minimum payroll increasing. The PA proposed the floor being a % of the upper limit. The NHL proposed the same $16M range. NFL minimum also increased in the NFL. Players took a cut but the bottom teams have to spend more on payroll. Not in the NHL where the floor of $43.9M will be less than the 11-12 floor with at least $50M more in revenue sharing. The Rangers will paying $24M in revenue sharing and they can't even get a compliance buyout. The Rangers have no dersire to play Redden so they will carry $6.5M of dead cap space. Good job by the NHL. Reds will be stuck in the AHL. At least he got paid but his career is essentially over.
The floor being a percentage of the upper limit will, assuming growth, be lower than the fixed difference of 15M sooner or later. That's a mathematic certainty, with the starting percentage and CBA length being the only possibly limiting factors. Right now, with the cap at 59M, the floor will be around 75% of the celing. There's no way the floor will be any higher than 80% if it was indeed a percentage, so the difference woul very soon be at least those 15M. Thus I don't see how such a concept (although certainly making much sense in general) would help the players.

jniklast is offline  
Old
10-21-2012, 09:32 AM
  #173
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,156
vCash: 500
Listen, I hate Gary Bettman. I HATE James Dolan - to the point where I switched my basketball allegiance because of him. I am the furthest thing from an owners' shill.

BUT:

We know where this needs to go to get a deal done. Both sides have admitted it off the record and the other leagues have set the precedent.

The league's initial offer was a joke and insulting, but since then they've a) made real progress and b) are much closer to where we know this is likely going.

The union isn't "owed" anything because it was in the last contract - this is a new contract.

The player's offers have ALL actually started from a starting point that IMPROVES on their current standing! Every one of them locks in every penny under a 57/43 split this year - without escrow - and then suggests that progress towards an even split will get made strictly due to leaguewide revenue growth.

The players need to get serious and start making offers that include dollars at risk and/or dollars that are deferred.

BrooklynRangersFan is offline  
Old
10-21-2012, 09:32 AM
  #174
Gatorade*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,579
vCash: 500
NHL players are sheep. They will never get back what they are about to lose. It's admirable that this is about principal for them but its about money for the owners.

There is no way possible fit the players to recoup the money they will lose. So funny how dumb they are. Another lost season. What a joke.

Gatorade* is offline  
Old
10-21-2012, 09:37 AM
  #175
Riche16
Pessimistic-Realist
 
Riche16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: FL
Country: United States
Posts: 3,437
vCash: 500
I still put it on both sides. Bettman and the NHL have gone to the player well, over and over and over again... Their STRATEGY is the lockout. The lockout is not a last resort... It's the first move on their chess board. They've screwed up the league, allowing salaries to get well out of control and swindled their way around the very rules they lost a season to last time. They ARE the embodiment of what's wrong with the league. They are their own worst enemies.

The players and Fehr tho have their own issues. They have been making well over 50/50 for how many years? How many decades? Now it's time to get to 50/50 and they want something in return. They dig in out of principle & become rigid when compromise is called for. They seem willing to cut off their noses to spite the face of the game that's given them so much. They're shunning compromise for principle with principle as their only potential gain.

At the end of the day the owners will win, the salaries will get to 50/50, the players will lose at first but down the road the contracts given out will be significant and no one will cry about what X player is making and what he would be making "IF that damned CBA was t signed".

Riche16 is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:15 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.