HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Chicago Blackhawks
Notices

And we are locked out again (No Progress ,, Talks collapse)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-24-2012, 12:27 PM
  #676
BobbyJet
Registered User
 
BobbyJet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Dundas, Ontario. Can
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,081
vCash: 500
It’s hard for me to believe that Fehr continues to play PR games at this stage. The great negotiator has nothing and seems determined to bring this game down like he did to baseball in the 90’s. If his intention is to play the waiting game, perhaps he should give Bob a call and ask him how that worked out for him in 2005. The veteran players must have that haunting memory in their minds. One of them or a back bencher needs to break away from these millionaire players running the show and wake them up. Propose a private vote among all of the players? Propose to split the difference to 53.5 percent. Do something. The owners are dug in.

BobbyJet is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 01:00 PM
  #677
UsernameWasTaken
Let's Go Blue Jays!
 
UsernameWasTaken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,703
vCash: 500
Tracey Myers ‏@TramyersCSN
Kane excited to get started in Switzerland. Mom will go with him. #Blackhawks.

I thought this was funny.

UsernameWasTaken is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 01:30 PM
  #678
xX Hot Fuss
HFBoards Sponsor
 
xX Hot Fuss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 10,394
vCash: 500
I know this is an obvious statement, but i really cant believe this is STILL going on. It really looks like the season is lost forever. Such a waste, such a slap in the face, such a disgusting use of immaturity and pettiness that i thought was reserved for 17 year olds. NHLPA and Owners are equally at fault at this point. This has gone on too long for sides to be taken and its completely ridiculous.

xX Hot Fuss is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 01:35 PM
  #679
coldsteelonice84
Registered User
 
coldsteelonice84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 24,707
vCash: 10592
Quote:
Originally Posted by xX Hot Fuss View Post
I know this is an obvious statement, but i really cant believe this is STILL going on. It really looks like the season is lost forever. Such a waste, such a slap in the face, such a disgusting use of immaturity and pettiness that i thought was reserved for 17 year olds. NHLPA and Owners are equally at fault at this point. This has gone on too long for sides to be taken and its completely ridiculous.
Agreed. Here's the silver lining for me though. And keep in mind, obviously I or anyone else didn't want this but it is what it is. Hockey is a niche sport, it was growing well but losing this season and possibly more is going to kill that growth, the popularity and most importantly, the money it makes. It's going to end up more accessible and cheaper for us diehards. They are going to have to kiss our *****. If they don't, it's dead.

coldsteelonice84 is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 02:04 PM
  #680
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,886
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyJet View Post
If his intention is to play the waiting game, perhaps he should give Bob a call and ask him how that worked out for him in 2005.
It worked out great for Bob, actually.

The players had a much better deal the longer they waited in the last lockout. Maybe Gary should ask himself how waiting worked out last time he did it.

Hawkaholic is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 02:11 PM
  #681
BobbyJet
Registered User
 
BobbyJet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Dundas, Ontario. Can
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,081
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
It worked out great for Bob, actually.

The players had a much better deal the longer they waited in the last lockout. Maybe Gary should ask himself how waiting worked out last time he did it.

Wow. … just wow. You can change history as well?

BobbyJet is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 02:42 PM
  #682
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,886
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyJet View Post
Wow. … just wow. You can change history as well?
What are you talking about?

The NHL's best offer before canceling 04-05 season was $42.5M not linked to revenue. So, cap would be $42.5M for 6 yrs. After 04-05 season cancelled, new CBA started at $39M linked to revenue and rose to $70.2M this season.

Quote:
Andy Strickland‏@andystrickland

On Tuesday's conf. call Don fehr explained to the players that the deal got better in 2004the longer the lockout went.

Hawkaholic is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 03:02 PM
  #683
IU Hawks fan
They call me 'IU'
 
IU Hawks fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: No longer IU
Country: United States
Posts: 18,243
vCash: 772
Quote:
Andy Strickland‏@andystrickland

On Tuesday's conf. call Don fehr explained to the players that the deal got better in 2004the longer the lockout went.
Just more reason to blame the players for the deal not getting done by tomorrow's deadline.

IU Hawks fan is online now  
Old
10-24-2012, 03:04 PM
  #684
HawksFan74
Tread Lightly
 
HawksFan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,227
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyJet View Post
Wow. … just wow. You can change history as well?
Um... it did favor the players in the end.

HawksFan74 is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 03:06 PM
  #685
coldsteelonice84
Registered User
 
coldsteelonice84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 24,707
vCash: 10592
Quote:
Originally Posted by IU Hawks fan View Post
Just more reason to blame the players for the deal not getting done by tomorrow's deadline.
Because they want a better deal? So if the players put out their last offer and said, "This is our final offer to save the 82 game schedule, take it or leave it", you'd be blaming the owners for not accepting it?

coldsteelonice84 is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 03:19 PM
  #686
IU Hawks fan
They call me 'IU'
 
IU Hawks fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: No longer IU
Country: United States
Posts: 18,243
vCash: 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
Because they want a better deal? So if the players put out their last offer and said, "This is our final offer to save the 82 game schedule, take it or leave it", you'd be blaming the owners for not accepting it?
It's been said for months that a 50/50 split is eminent.

The owners offered that, as they want to get this season going it seems. The players came back with 3 proposals that weren't close that, essentially delaying us even further. If they had interest in playing, they would've came with a proposal that in some way offered a 50/50 split.

Fehr's proposals basically say that they are content to wait it out, and that's bull **** for all of us.

IU Hawks fan is online now  
Old
10-24-2012, 03:48 PM
  #687
coldsteelonice84
Registered User
 
coldsteelonice84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 24,707
vCash: 10592
Quote:
Originally Posted by IU Hawks fan View Post
It's been said for months that a 50/50 split is eminent.
Not by the players, the only advantage to a 50/50 split is it makes the owners happy. The players already lost and just trying to minimize the damage. Also, the deal they had which turned out good was a loss at the time. They are tired of getting bullied and are making a stand. That sort of thing used to be commendable in this country.

coldsteelonice84 is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:18 PM
  #688
HawksFan74
Tread Lightly
 
HawksFan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,227
vCash: 500
Both sides are idiots. Both! I don't know how anyone can think anything different.

HawksFan74 is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:32 PM
  #689
hockeydoug
Registered User
 
hockeydoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HawksFan74 View Post
Um... it did favor the players in the end.
It favored the PA and some of the players AT the end, not in the end. The owners got theirs for most of the last 7 years including a wipe of 24% off of existing contracts. A large % of players never gained a thing at the end of the day.

hockeydoug is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 05:04 PM
  #690
AceintheSpace*
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 536
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UsernameWasTaken View Post
Tracey Myers ‏@TramyersCSN
Kane excited to get started in Switzerland. Mom will go with him. #Blackhawks.

I thought this was funny.

Got nothing on Derek Stepan's mom.

I just wanna know where his sisters are during the lockout.

AceintheSpace* is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 06:07 PM
  #691
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,886
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeydoug View Post
It favored the PA and some of the players AT the end, not in the end. The owners got theirs for most of the last 7 years including a wipe of 24% off of existing contracts. A large % of players never gained a thing at the end of the day.
Leaving out all the contractual negotiations, which were far better after the lockout then they were offered before the lockout.
It was better after than before no matter how you slice it.

42.5 cap with no link to revenue <<<<<<< 39 cap with link ended up being a MAJOR win for the PA. Of course the 24% rollback was a loss, and thats why there was a lockout.

And this is why we have another lockout, the players are tired of being pushed around, and the owners want to put an end to the contract terms that the PA fought for in the last lockout.

Hawkaholic is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 10:09 PM
  #692
committedindian86
Flip The Switch
 
committedindian86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chicago, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 3,984
vCash: 500
This whole thing sickens me. I can't even stand watching the AHL either, I hate no touch icing...

committedindian86 is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 11:18 PM
  #693
hockeydoug
Registered User
 
hockeydoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
Leaving out all the contractual negotiations, which were far better after the lockout then they were offered before the lockout.
It was better after than before no matter how you slice it.

42.5 cap with no link to revenue <<<<<<< 39 cap with link ended up being a MAJOR win for the PA. Of course the 24% rollback was a loss, and thats why there was a lockout.

And this is why we have another lockout, the players are tired of being pushed around, and the owners want to put an end to the contract terms that the PA fought for in the last lockout.
I think you are mistaken. The offer was not for 7 years and was not a hard 42.5 by comparison to the deal they took later.
  • They lost 750 million through the lost partial 05' season
  • They lost about 75 million from that offer in 06'
  • Another 60+ million was lost (from 05' offer, mostly escrow) in 07'
  • They PA netted + 100 million from the 05' offer after 08'
  • Escrow killed them in 09' minimizing their gains to maybe 100 million despite a huge uptick in salaries.
  • In 2010 they probably made about 200 million above the 05' offer even though they were hammered on escrow losses again
  • They made more still in 2011 with smaller escrow losses netting about 350 million ish over the 05' offer.

My numbers (I'll happily post sites to support but it's a boring enough topic) do NOT include inflation which would be 20% + based on the U.S. dollar over Feb 2005 to the end of 2011. I also did not include all the 24% wiped off of the contracts.

There is almost no way to calculate that the PA took a net gain on the second offer in total compensation through 6 years, and they lost after all adjustments made with reasonable assumptions of spending on average of a few million below the cap ceiling. I believe that's why we hear the players talk about what they gave up. The overwhelming majority of individuals took a net loss. Many never played another NHL game and any player who retired the first 5 years after the lockout did not have enough time to recoup their losses.

Had the players taken the first offer, not only would their negotiating position had been stronger for the next CBA (last year) but they would have kept more money overall.

On a different note, I guess loosely relevant because of the lockout, I can't believe Verlander was chased so early tonight.

hockeydoug is offline  
Old
10-25-2012, 05:15 AM
  #694
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 23,923
vCash: 500
today is the day guys. I don't care who is to fault, I will blame them all for not playing this year. They all took away what we love and love to see

Bubba88 is offline  
Old
10-25-2012, 09:10 AM
  #695
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,886
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeydoug View Post
I think you are mistaken. The offer was not for 7 years and was not a hard 42.5 by comparison to the deal they took later.
  • They lost 750 million through the lost partial 05' season
  • They lost about 75 million from that offer in 06'
  • Another 60+ million was lost (from 05' offer, mostly escrow) in 07'
  • They PA netted + 100 million from the 05' offer after 08'
  • Escrow killed them in 09' minimizing their gains to maybe 100 million despite a huge uptick in salaries.
  • In 2010 they probably made about 200 million above the 05' offer even though they were hammered on escrow losses again
  • They made more still in 2011 with smaller escrow losses netting about 350 million ish over the 05' offer.

My numbers (I'll happily post sites to support but it's a boring enough topic) do NOT include inflation which would be 20% + based on the U.S. dollar over Feb 2005 to the end of 2011. I also did not include all the 24% wiped off of the contracts.

There is almost no way to calculate that the PA took a net gain on the second offer in total compensation through 6 years, and they lost after all adjustments made with reasonable assumptions of spending on average of a few million below the cap ceiling. I believe that's why we hear the players talk about what they gave up. The overwhelming majority of individuals took a net loss. Many never played another NHL game and any player who retired the first 5 years after the lockout did not have enough time to recoup their losses.

Had the players taken the first offer, not only would their negotiating position had been stronger for the next CBA (last year) but they would have kept more money overall.

On a different note, I guess loosely relevant because of the lockout, I can't believe Verlander was chased so early tonight.
I still don't see how this makes a 42.5mil cap with no link to revenue better than 39mil linked to revenue.

The players took home more money at the end of the last CBA by waiting until after the lockout than they would of if they took the NHL's last offer before cancelling that season. I'm not talking about the players that only played a couple more seasons, I am talking about the future NHLers, the ones these guys are fighting for now.

Actually, before the lockout (not cancellation) the owners offered a 31mil cap with no link to revenue.

The players got a better deal by waiting, there is no debating it.

Hawkaholic is offline  
Old
10-25-2012, 09:12 AM
  #696
Chris Hansen
Team Tyrion
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,158
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubba88 View Post
today is the day guys. I don't care who is to fault, I will blame them all for not playing this year. They all took away what we love and love to see
I feel the same way.

Chris Hansen is online now  
Old
10-25-2012, 09:45 AM
  #697
BobbyJet
Registered User
 
BobbyJet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Dundas, Ontario. Can
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,081
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
I still don't see how this makes a 42.5mil cap with no link to revenue better than 39mil linked to revenue.

The players took home more money at the end of the last CBA by waiting until after the lockout than they would of if they took the NHL's last offer before cancelling that season. I'm not talking about the players that only played a couple more seasons, I am talking about the future NHLers, the ones these guys are fighting for now.

Actually, before the lockout (not cancellation) the owners offered a 31mil cap with no link to revenue.

The players got a better deal by waiting, there is no debating it.


Actually there is room for debate. It would be interesting to see what the final salary sums were for ALL the active NHL players since 2003, compared to what they would have earned with no lockout.

I think it would be a shocker to find out which of the active players ended up with less money in the long run after losing a year’s salary due the stupidity that we are seeing again.

Your statement should read:

The players got a better deal for future NHL’ers by the waiting, there is no debating it.

That is water under the bridge. Hopefully there will be some private discussions between Fehr and Bettman today. This PR crap coming from both sides is pathetic.

BobbyJet is offline  
Old
10-25-2012, 09:52 AM
  #698
coldsteelonice84
Registered User
 
coldsteelonice84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 24,707
vCash: 10592
10 years ago, top players made about the same as they do now, think about that. Paul Kariya made 10M in 2002-03.

coldsteelonice84 is offline  
Old
10-25-2012, 10:02 AM
  #699
IU Hawks fan
They call me 'IU'
 
IU Hawks fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: No longer IU
Country: United States
Posts: 18,243
vCash: 772
10 years ago the top players were getting I think it was 76% of revenue. Think about how absurd that.

IU Hawks fan is online now  
Old
10-25-2012, 12:00 PM
  #700
hockeydoug
Registered User
 
hockeydoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
I still don't see how this makes a 42.5mil cap with no link to revenue better than 39mil linked to revenue.

The players took home more money at the end of the last CBA by waiting until after the lockout than they would of if they took the NHL's last offer before cancelling that season. I'm not talking about the players that only played a couple more seasons, I am talking about the future NHLers, the ones these guys are fighting for now.

Actually, before the lockout (not cancellation) the owners offered a 31mil cap with no link to revenue.

The players got a better deal by waiting, there is no debating it.
For 6 years (length of Feb 2005 offer), adjusted for escrow subtraction, inflation, and total rollback losses, there is no metric that puts the players ahead in total adjusted earnings at the end of 2011 with the 2006 season offer compared to the Feb 2005 offer.

I'm talking about the PA as a whole. On the individual level, it's much much worse overall except for a handful of players that hit a big payday or signed a FA contract.

This is actually an argument that favors the players, but they dropped the ball selling that since signing the last CBA. The owners robbed them and the players sat on their hands instead of preparing for the next round, and those are major reasons both sides are to blame.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyJet View Post
The players got a better deal for future NHL’ers by the waiting, there is no debating it.
This is a true statement. It works for the PA and the individuals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyJet View Post
Actually there is room for debate.
Factoring in escrow losses, inflation, existing salary rollback, and using more conservative average salary assumptions, I don't come up with numbers through 2011 that puts the players ahead on the 2006 offer compared to the Feb 2005 offer unless the partial 2005 season is ignored, which it can't be.

It's also far more likely more teams would have spent closer to the cap than I assumed because all existing sponsor contracts would have generated revenue, and future contracts would have risen much quicker from a higher bidding price. The more I look at individual contracts the worse it would have been for players through 2011.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyJet View Post
It would be interesting to see what the final salary sums were for ALL the active NHL players since 2003, compared to what they would have earned with no lockout.

I think it would be a shocker to find out which of the active players ended up with less money in the long run after losing a year’s salary due the stupidity that we are seeing again.
For starters, almost every top 6/ top4 skater and goalie over 31 lost money. There are only a small handful of exceptions like a Selanne who really saw a benefit from the lockout (including full knee rehab).

Even Lidstrom ended up losing by the end of things for example. He lost 10 million plus for 05, lost 2.4 (rollback) for 06' and had to take a paycut to stay in Detroit when he signed his next 2 year deal. I think his next 2 year was close to what he would have had since it was signed in 08', and his next one year deals were appropriate regardless of the cap. Pronger was mauled because he had to sign a contract in his prime with a low cap in place. After time and inflation, even Holmgren can't get him all his money back. Roenick, Sakic, Yzerman, Belfour, Hasek, etc. all lost a fortune and never had a chance gain their money back. Recchi may have lost more than he made his last 5 seasons. Most veteran 3rd and 4th line players saw a monster hit too.

More than 200 players never signed another NHL contract again and most never suited up again.

Only young stars or highly rated young players in 2004 came out ahead through 2011. The list grows slightly through 2012.

http://www.hockeyzoneplus.com/menu_e.htm

That site has a few errors I've seen over the last couple seasons but most of the info is reliable. It doesn't have the exact list you were looking for but you can look up salary history for individuals, and unlike capgeek, it has many more of the 90s and pre-lockout contracts listed.

Players like Richards, LeCavalier, Hossa, Havlat, Briere, and a number of other franchise-type players may have ended up ahead, mostly because of expanded FA rules (and associated negotiating leverage) more than because of any improved revenue split.

hockeydoug 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 11:14 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.