HFBoards

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

All CBA talk. A deal? A deal!!!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-04-2012, 04:02 AM
  #51
heartsabres*
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Budapest
Country: Hungary
Posts: 1,790
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dixon Ward View Post
If that's the case it makes you wonder to what extent a "personality" conflict between d. Fehr and Bettman might have been freaking the process up to this point
Huh? That´s just silly.


On another note I think this movement really shows who cares about money(the players) and who cares about hockey(the owners). I hope when those greedy little ..... get back to playing the HRR drops and they lose a ton of money. I will still watch hockey though because I love the sport and not the players.


Last edited by joshjull: 11-04-2012 at 06:19 AM.
heartsabres* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 09:04 AM
  #52
Dixon Ward
Fire SOMEONE
 
Dixon Ward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: District of Columbia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,030
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by heartsabres View Post
Huh? That´s just silly.
it may sound silly, but, in my experience it happens occasionally. i've seen it first hand. in one case it took 2 years to settle a contract because the two principles couldn't be in the same room without screaming. they were basically 1% apart on the money and couldn't get it done because they refused to deal with each other. lack of respect, mutual dislike, and/or a battle of egos can cause communication breakdowns and entrenched positions. i'm not saying that explains the entire lockout; but, it is curious that one of the longest bargaining sessions thus far was between s. fehr and daly in a neutral location.

Dixon Ward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 10:34 AM
  #53
Zman5778
Registered User
 
Zman5778's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cressona/Reading, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,766
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Zman5778 Send a message via MSN to Zman5778 Send a message via Yahoo to Zman5778
https://twitter.com/DarrenDreger

Quote:
NHL and union will meet again early this week.

https://twitter.com/Real_ESPNLeBrun

Quote:
Steve Fehr and Bill Daly concluded their meeting around 1 am ET last night
Quote:
Hard to gauge these things and there's still a long ways to go, but my guess is last night's talks produced some slight traction...

Zman5778 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 05:14 PM
  #54
Bosswally
Registered User
 
Bosswally's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Johnson City, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 378
vCash: 500
don't want to get anybodies' hopes up but Thomas Vanek just tweeted this


I can only infer good things

Bosswally is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2012, 05:21 PM
  #55
dugman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 254
vCash: 500
Vanek's contract in Austria expired today. I'm hoping for good things, too, but this was decided before the recent talks.

dugman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2012, 10:38 AM
  #56
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 17,116
vCash: 50
Interesting article in the Globe and Mail regarding how some of the more moderate owners in the mid- and smaller-smarkets and minor-league players may not like some of the provisions in the NHL's standing offer, including (1) not permitting teams to count potential bonuses--that, more times than not, never get paid or only paid in small part--towards their salary cap in order to get to the cap floor, and (2) counting all salaries in excess of $105,000, even those on the minor league roster, against a team's NHL cap.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...rticle4912113/

On the player bonus-cap floor issue:

Quote:
Under the old agreement, a club such as the Islanders routinely made sure there were several entry-level players on its roster whose cap hit was much larger than their actual salary thanks to several bonuses. For example, in the 2011-12 season, rookie Nino Niederreiter’s entry-level contract paid him $900,000 in actual salary but nearly $2-million in bonuses brought his cap hit to just under $2.8-million. The 20-year-old was on the NHL roster for 55 games and scored exactly one goal, which meant almost all of that bonus money was never paid, a huge saving for the cash-strapped Islanders.

But under Bettman’s proposal, that would no longer be allowed. Instead of declaring $2-million they wouldn’t spend, the Islanders and other teams would have to cough up that cash in player salaries.
A boon for the players because teams would have to put up real cash rather than "fake" bonus money that's likely never to be paid out to the younger players on ELC's. But I can't imagine teams like Florida, Colorado, or Anaheim, to name a few, would be too happy about that, as some of their increased revenues in a 50-50 split may be negated by the additional "real money" that has to be spent on the roster.

On the issue of putting salaries in excess of $105,000 on the team's NHL cap, including salaries of minor-league players:

Quote:
In the case of the minor-league players, the NHL could find itself in court. Following the 2004-05 lockout, the Professional Hockey Players’ Association, which represents minor-league players, sued the NHL because the labour agreement decreed any team that had a player with a salary of $75,000 or more claimed by another team on NHL re-entry waivers would have to pay half of the salary, which would count against their own payroll. This effectively capped salaries for AHL veterans at $75,000 and the PHPA managed to have the limit scrubbed.

Now that Bettman proposed to include all salaries above $105,000 in a team’s cap count, the PHPA could move again. At present, NHL teams often like to pay some veterans as much as $300,000 to serve on their AHL teams as mentors for the young players but this means teams would not be willing to pay more than $105,000. It would also mean the AHL would quickly lose those players, who are often fan favourites, to Russia’s Kontinental Hockey League or the European leagues.
I, too, would anticipate a legal battle there. I'd imagine some owners would be upset with that rule too, because, as the article says, they may have difficulty retaining AHL vets to mentor youngsters if their salaries are effectively capped at $105,000. Given that the PHPA is not a party to any CBA entered into by the NHL and NHLPA, I'd imagine an antitrust suit would be forthcoming, alleging that the CBA between those parties constitutes a restraint of trade, and artificially keeps salaries down. That's an interesting issue to watch.

Finally, the interplay between those two issues could get interesting. Would cap floor teams sign a few $300,000 minor-league players to get to the cap floor that way?

Zip15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2012, 11:32 AM
  #57
Sabresfansince1980
Registered User
 
Sabresfansince1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: from Wheatfield, NY
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,614
vCash: 500
That article a yet another example of how the owners have a ton of in-house issues they need to resolve in order to form a viable, long-term CBA with the NHLPA. Until owners can find consensus on the financials, there will always be a group of owners on one end or the other that are unhappy and will risk another work stoppage with the next CBA expiration date.

I don't expect that to happen, no consensus that works for everybody, no revenue sharing plan that works for everyone, no single policy on finer aspects of salaries, parking and luxery box revenue, etc. In the meantime, the owners should (which SHOULD have been two months ago) be willing to agree with the players on a salary reduction schedule that reduces player HHR% over time without reducing actual dollars or reneging on recently signed contracts. I know the effect of an expired CBA on all these things, but if the owners want to get where they feel they need to be, they should have a common sense approach to it. Trying to hammer the players again after hammering them in 2005 and finding out their cap plan didn't work out well enough, knowing the players feel like they got screwed, is not common sense approach to these talks.

Come up with a 57%-50% timeline that doesn't cut actual dollars and doesn't cut into other areas like ELCs and FA eligibility and there is no reason the NHLPA doesn't sign. The revenue sharing plan has already been tweeked so the NHLPA should be happy enough with that. A 60 game schedule won't feel official, but it may actually allow for some better hockey, and I can't be too upset with Buffalo in a transition stage right now. Get it done.

Sabresfansince1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2012, 12:21 PM
  #58
brian_griffin
Measured Intangibles
 
brian_griffin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Z4QQQ batman symbol
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 6,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by heartsabres View Post
On another note I think this movement really shows who cares about money(the players) and who cares about hockey(the owners). I hope when those greedy little ..... get back to playing the HRR drops and they lose a ton of money. I will still watch hockey though because I love the sport and not the players.
Greed is not mutually exclusive. Both sides can be Gordon Geckos.

Quote:
Originally Posted by heartsabres View Post
Huh? That´s just silly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dixon Ward View Post
it may sound silly, but, in my experience it happens occasionally. i've seen it first hand. in one case it took 2 years to settle a contract because the two principles couldn't be in the same room without screaming. they were basically 1% apart on the money and couldn't get it done because they refused to deal with each other. lack of respect, mutual dislike, and/or a battle of egos can cause communication breakdowns and entrenched positions. i'm not saying that explains the entire lockout; but, it is curious that one of the longest bargaining sessions thus far was between s. fehr and daly in a neutral location.
Agree it happens. Long before negotiations begin, strategies are set with individual roles and responsibilities. IMHO, a personal impasse between Bettman and D. Fehr is a real possibility.

Another reason for having the second-in-commands from each side talk, is it allows both sides to have an "out" that since the principal / lead people were not involved, an "unofficial" tag can be attached to the discussions. There can be a lot more probing of potential positions / "what ifs", etc., if Bettman & D. Fehr aren't involved.

brian_griffin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2012, 03:13 PM
  #59
Woodhouse
Global Moderator
 
Woodhouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 7,552
vCash: 666
Some details from Russo's blog:
Quote:
But this is huge concession because players have made very clear in the last little bit that they are willing to go to a 50-50 split as long as all their contracts mutually negotiated in good faith under the previous collective bargaining agreement are honored in full.

If that’s true, and there’s indeed no strings attached to this owner proposition, this would be a huge step toward a new CBA and then moving on to negotiating the other systematic changes the league wants to make that the players have had issues with (moving free agency to age 28 or eight years of service, five-year max contracts, year to year salary variability of 5 percent, dropping entry-level deals from three years of length to two, etc).

There has been a lot of headway in negotiations that really has not been spelled out to date, but because the owners are looking to reduce the players’ share from 57 to 50 in a new CBA, there seems to be a perception that the players would get nothing in a new CBA.

That’s not entirely true.

Among other things, the owners have proposed to 1) artificially inflate the salary cap in Year 1 so teams don’t have to trade or release players; 2) trade player salary and cap charges in trades (this is something both teams and players have wanted); 3) eliminate re-entry waivers; 4) Increase revenue sharing with further increases as revenues grow, and the top grossing teams making the biggest contributions (revenue sharing is something Don Fehr is passionate about; wants it so the teams that really need assistance are assisted); 5) Introduction of appeal rights to a neutral third-party arbitrator in cases involving on- and- off-ice discipline (player-proposed wish).

Some other things that the players should like:

1) Joint NHL/NHLPA Health and Safety Committee with equal representation by the league and union; 2) Establishment of a “standard of care” and “primary allegiance” obligations between the team medical staff and players (this is directly due to the tragic Derek Boogaard situation that remains ongoing); 3) Offseason rehab activities would no longer be required in the team’s home city; 4) Players have access to second medical opinions at the club expense; 5) Ice time restrictions and days off during training camp; 5) Improved facility standards in visiting locker rooms; 6) Ice condition improvements and standards; 7) More player friendly rules for parent-son trips, teams would have to pay for parents travel and lodging to first-ever games, other milestones; 8) Different standards for rent and mortgage reimbursements from teams; 9) increased access to tickets for visiting players and also a game ticket policy that minimizes the tax impact on players; 10) And also, the league has agreed to consider a player proposal for single rooms for all players on the road, which would be thousands of extra dollars spent on travel. Typically, players share rooms on the road unless you’re a longstanding player (600 games), or in a lot of cases, goaltenders.

Woodhouse is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2012, 09:25 AM
  #60
heartsabres*
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Budapest
Country: Hungary
Posts: 1,790
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by brian_griffin View Post
Greed is not mutually exclusive. Both sides can be Gordon Geckos.





Agree it happens. Long before negotiations begin, strategies are set with individual roles and responsibilities. IMHO, a personal impasse between Bettman and D. Fehr is a real possibility.

Another reason for having the second-in-commands from each side talk, is it allows both sides to have an "out" that since the principal / lead people were not involved, an "unofficial" tag can be attached to the discussions. There can be a lot more probing of potential positions / "what ifs", etc., if Bettman & D. Fehr aren't involved.
Naivety - to think 30 million-billionaires and 300-400 millionaires voices mean nothing when it comes to two personalities. Get real when Billions of dollars are at stake the only thing that matters is the agreement. If you think that Bettman´s personality stands in the way of the owner´s needs then you really don´t know what is going on or why Bettman makes $8,000,000. Sure personalities get in the way of your mom and dad getting a divorce but lets not be stupid here. Moves are calculated and discussed(aside from the odd player lashing out) The goals are discussed. Let´s move on from this point I think it is a waste of time to discuss.

heartsabres* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2012, 09:33 AM
  #61
WhoIsJimBob
Circle the Bandwagon
 
WhoIsJimBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 15,973
vCash: 500
http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2...ays-cba-talks/

Quote:
“I think every time there is a layoff where there’s no talks and then talks resume, there’s always optimism in the air,” Biron told ESPN. “Obviously, everybody is cautiously optimistic with some of the exchanges that Steve and Bill had, even though it was more brainstorming than anything concrete. But to be able to schedule some meetings and get larger groups involved again is going to be a good thing. Still, as with every case in the last little while when people got too optimistic, it’s just part of the process and we’ll see where it goes.”
Stay medium.

WhoIsJimBob is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2012, 09:34 AM
  #62
SackTastic
Embrace The Suck
 
SackTastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 5,061
vCash: 500
They're talking. That's all I want at this point. Keep talking, and eventually it will work itself out.

SackTastic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2012, 09:32 PM
  #63
McTank
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,820
vCash: 500
Talks still ongoing... Great sign

McTank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 07:56 AM
  #64
Silence Of The Plams
All these feels
 
Silence Of The Plams's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Lancaster, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 17,369
vCash: 500
Is this while buttman isn't in the room? Is Fehr there either?

Silence Of The Plams is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 09:32 AM
  #65
Dubi Doo
Registered User
 
Dubi Doo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 6,458
vCash: 2225
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThatCrazyRangerFan View Post
Is this while buttman isn't in the room? Is Fehr there either?
They were both there.

Next meeting is today no earlier then 1pm.

Dubi Doo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 06:07 PM
  #66
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 17,116
vCash: 50
Larry Brooks tweeting that NHL not committed to contract term-limit, but is committed to rule against heavily frontloaded deals. Brooks also tweeted that amnesty buyouts are on the table.

I'd link but I'm on my phone.

Zip15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 08:10 PM
  #67
Dubi Doo
Registered User
 
Dubi Doo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 6,458
vCash: 2225
Another meeting is already set for tomorrow. The silence continues.

Even if they're disagreeing a bit atleast they're putting in some work. Both sides want a deal now.

Dubi Doo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 08:36 PM
  #68
5 Minute Major
Registered User
 
5 Minute Major's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Binghamton, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 2,577
vCash: 500
Hopefully we are talking Sabres hockey at this time next week and not the business of hockey.

5 Minute Major is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 10:07 PM
  #69
McTank
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,820
vCash: 500
I have a very good feeling about this. Best case ceneraio we get to watch our leino-less sabres play in a few weeks

McTank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 03:30 AM
  #70
Luceni
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Austria
Country: Austria
Posts: 3,658
vCash: 500
I just hope this BS ends now.

Luceni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 07:32 AM
  #71
Rob Paxon
⚔Z E M G U S⚔
 
Rob Paxon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: corfu, ny
Country: United States
Posts: 17,181
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rob Paxon
Assuming the optimistic and that things get done soon, it's a shame (and a big loss to the league and thus the players as well) that the Winter Classic has already been cancelled. Due to the logistics involved, it would seem there's no chance of that being reversed. Anyone have thoughts or information on that?

Rob Paxon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 10:07 AM
  #72
JPurp26
Registered User
 
JPurp26's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 5,223
vCash: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5 Minute Major View Post
Hopefully we are talking Sabres hockey at this time next week and not the business of hockey.
Would this be the new clause to remove a contract?

JPurp26 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 10:44 AM
  #73
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 17,116
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheyAreGoodScaryGood View Post
I have a very good feeling about this. Best case ceneraio we get to watch our leino-less sabres play in a few weeks
Even if an amnesty provision finds its way into the CBA, I don't think the Sabres would buy out Leino immediately. I believe they'd give him another year or two to mesh with the team, and if things still aren't working out at that point they'll consider a buyout.

Zip15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 10:57 AM
  #74
struckbyaparkedcar
Zemgus Da Gawd
 
struckbyaparkedcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Upstate NY
Country: Cote DIvoire
Posts: 10,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zip15 View Post
Even if an amnesty provision finds its way into the CBA, I don't think the Sabres would buy out Leino immediately. I believe they'd give him another year or two to mesh with the team, and if things still aren't working out at that point they'll consider a buyout.
Yeah, no reason to burn a one-shot provision when Leino isn't screwing your salary structure.

struckbyaparkedcar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 11:25 AM
  #75
JPurp26
Registered User
 
JPurp26's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 5,223
vCash: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zip15 View Post
Even if an amnesty provision finds its way into the CBA, I don't think the Sabres would buy out Leino immediately. I believe they'd give him another year or two to mesh with the team, and if things still aren't working out at that point they'll consider a buyout.
I agree they might not do it, but they should as it might be there only chance.

JPurp26 is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 01:42 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.