The Business of HockeyDiscuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Franchise sales, valuations, TV contracts, ratings, expansion, relocation, the CBA and work stoppage discussion goes here.
Make Whole, Not War (CBA & Lockout Discussion) XIX
Fehr has to represent the interest of professional hockey players bargaining with the NHL. As such, he represents an entity that values and wants certain things. At this point in time, from their messages, I would glean that those things are:
It's not just about the figures this year (mossey), it's about the ability of each player who has yet to negotiate a new contract to do so under as few restrictions and income-suppressing options as possible ----- within the constraints of a cap system.
As the owners have their cap and cost certainty, they shouldn't care one iota about the other things--- as a group.
While I agree the players deserve little limits on things. Some kind of contract limits are a must, they are in other leagues and these long, 12 year+ contracts are just silly(and not every GM gives them, only a few do.). The problem with NO limits is free agency, guys like parise and suter come out and say "i will not accept an offer unless it's 12 years 80 mil+" and bam the small markets are gone, some of the big markets dont want them and it just makes it a whole lot less interesting. I would gladly take parise, but I dont want 35 year parise with 4 years left of 8 million on the team.
10 year limits is fine, I'm hoping the players accept something like that, as well as variation limitations. Both NBA and MLB have contract limits.
In exchange what do they want though? a lower UFA age might not be a good thing, although they could offer a 2 year ELC straight up. that would be an improvement.
@andystrickland: Talking to players...if #NHL moves on contract rigjts that dont hurt young or future players it could lead to #NHLPA vote
But the whole point is that if the NHLPA had gone in there already on a linked framework, they likely could have gotten movement on contract rights A LONG TIME AGO.
Seriously, this deal was there in the summer. Major fail by both sides, but I'd give Fehr 60% blame.
@andystrickland: Talking to players...if #NHL moves on contract rigjts that dont hurt young or future players it could lead to #NHLPA vote
I don't think the NHL will budge on 5 year contract max, and all one way contracts count on the cap. (even if playing in Europe or the AHL) The loopholes.
But entry level contracts and free agency age the league should be flexible.
Fehr has to represent the interest of professional hockey players bargaining with the NHL. As such, he represents an entity that values and wants certain things. At this point in time, from their messages, I would glean that those things are:
*50/50 split of current HRR definition as long as the legacy contracts are honored
*As few restrictions and take-backs on things important to every single player in his attempt to maximize his career earnings and potential, ergo contract term limits, UFA age, ELC and arbitration matters.
It's not just about the figures this year (mossey), it's about the ability of each player who has yet to negotiate a new contract to do so under as few restrictions and income-suppressing options as possible ----- within the constraints of a cap system.
As the owners have their cap and cost certainty, they shouldn't care one iota about the other things--- as a group.
0
Almost every nhl player on twitter has been espousing their support (and their unions support) for a 50/50 split as long as current contracts are not affected. Sorry, your noble idea that players are willing to lose money in order to safeguard the interests of future players has not not only been proven wrong, the exact opposite has been proven.
As for player specifics not directly related to salary or cap percentages, perhaps if the NHLPA was so concerned about them they should start negotiating for them...instead of Fehr continuing his attempt to de-link revenue from the cap.
But the whole point is that if the NHLPA had gone in there already on a linked framework, they likely could have gotten movement on contract rights A LONG TIME AGO.
Seriously, this deal was there in the summer. Major fail by both sides, but I'd give Fehr 60% blame.
Why do you ignore the first NHL proposal? Redefining HRR and 10 yrs of service to UFA status? Those are critical issues for the PA.
I don't think the NHL will budge on 5 year contract max, and all one way contracts count on the cap. (even if playing in Europe or the AHL) The loopholes.
But entry level contracts and free agency age the league should be flexible.
I suspect that the NHLPA could push that to 6 or 7 years, but I agree that it is something the NHL seems to want in the new CBA.
Darren Dreger @DarrenDreger For the record, it was a player related source who provided the tip and the NHL reluctantly confirmed the story just before 6pm Fri.
"player related"
I would bet serious money this source is Donald Fehr.
I suspect that the NHLPA could push that to 6 or 7 years, but I agree that it is something the NHL seems to want in the new CBA.
The teams may come to rue this point themselves. I think 7 yrs minimum, if you wish to cite insurance, but maybe ten yrs max is more fair. I don't like the lifetime deals myself. With the new share level and adding no greater than 5% variation year to year in contract value should close the other loopholes.
So.....Dave Nonis is a "player related" source?... There's always a chihuahua involved.
... could be, maybe he made a few calls, whatever, and ya, theres always a lap dog involved. You just have to figure out who that might be, who's lap their sitting in, who pays for the freight. Who their indebted to, where their loyalties really lie. When it comes to anyone & everyone at TSN or Sportsnet, not hard to identify their owners, and it sure aint the NHLPA.
The teams may come to rue this point themselves. I think 7 yrs minimum, if you wish to cite insurance, but maybe ten yrs max is more fair. I don't like the lifetime deals myself. With the new share level and adding no greater than 5% variation year to year in contract value should close the other loopholes.
I agree with this. Isn't there a 7 year insurance limit?
Players will still push for 10 years though IMO, but that's an okay limit. the Variation is extremely important as well.
I agree with this. Isn't there a 7 year insurance limit?
Players will still push for 10 years though IMO, but that's an okay limit. the Variation is extremely important as well.
From what I've read in Gatehouse's book so far GMs (Judging by their offers to free agents anyway) seem to like the 5-6 year terms. If I were the PA I'd go with the 7 years (Because of the insurance thing) and move on to something else.
