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 VI: The "What Comes Before Square One?" Edition

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-11-2012, 05:39 PM
  #676
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,890
vCash: 500
Quote:
Areas where NHL moved toward them the PA according to Don Fehr: Union guarantee of Escrow, Union discretion to set the Escrow rate...
Quote:
...minimum salaries, Playoff Pool increase, roster minimums in emergency conditions (playing below 18 and 2)..
Quote:
...no trade clauses in the case of contract extensions, elimination of Re-Entry Waivers, adjustments to current Waiver rules...
Quote:
...Performance Bonus Cushion in every year of CBA, revamp of critical date calendar...
Quote:
...Interview period of Unrestricted Free Agents, like in the NBA. On that matter I feel the July first date will move.
https://twitter.com/RenLavoieRDS

These aren't the make or break issues.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 05:41 PM
  #677
BBKers
Registered User
 
BBKers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: South Koster, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 5,823
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to BBKers
Looks like the cattle may go hungry soon - Ranchers do not wanna bring out the hay from the barn ... Muuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

BBKers is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 05:41 PM
  #678
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,890
vCash: 500
Fehr is the new player to this game. Bettman is on his 3rd lockout. Case closed.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 05:42 PM
  #679
Jabroni
The People's Champ
 
Jabroni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 6,829
vCash: 500
So what's the next step?


Jabroni is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 05:50 PM
  #680
Blueshirt Believer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 6,565
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jabroni1994 View Post
So what's the next step?

Well, an arbitrator/mediator is becoming a must at this point. This is becoming too contentious.

We are absolutely coming to the point where we will lose the entire season. Its maybe another week or two right now.

They need a third party asap.

Blueshirt Believer is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:09 PM
  #681
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,890
vCash: 500
The next step is to continue meeting. The NHL needs to back off on some of the contract issues.

The NBA had a long laundry list of demands but

Quote:
League sources said the players' union viewed the following three aspects of the owners' previous offer as the most unappealing:

• An escrow system that assured owners would be fully reimbursed in subsequent years if they spent too much on player salaries in any given season.

• The inability of teams under the salary cap to use a mid-level exception if it took a team's player payroll over the cap and teams over the cap to have use of any exceptions at all.

• Prohibition of teams over the salary cap from making sign-and-trade deals.

The players won concessions on two of the three issues, league sources said.
Quote:
The owners also apparently relented on several other demands in the previous offer that were not mentioned in the summary proposal the league made available to various media outlets. According to a source, the owners also wanted to eliminate the opt-out clauses for players making above the league average salary.

The owners also abandoned reducing minimum salaries and the first year of rookie contracts by 12 percent in the handshake agreement, sources said.
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/72...ral-key-issues

The NBA owners got

Quote:
The league wanted an overhaul of its $4-billion-a-year enterprise, and it got it, with a nearly $300 million annual reduction in player salaries and a matrix of new restrictions on contracts and team payrolls. The changes mean a $3 billion gain for the owners over the life of the 10-year deal.

Before finally agreeing to those sacrifices, the players’ negotiators won a handful of concessions that will allow the richest teams to keep spending on players, ensuring a more competitive free-agent market.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/27/sp...pagewanted=all

Quote:
Still the major issues for PA on contracts are: Maximum 5 year contract. Arbitration and UFA push one year. That's what the NHL want.
https://twitter.com/RenLavoieRDS/sta...62032844079104

McKenzie wrote about this today

Quote:
Back-diving is a huge issue for the league -- a legitimate one, too -- but using the 5 per cent variance provision it proposed (year to year salary fluctuations on a contract can't be more or less than 5 per cent) would instantly correct that situation and not cause the players' real hardship. There is, however, no desperate need for the league to have a term limit of five years if the 5 per cent variance rule is in place.

As for second contracts, the NHL proposed a potent combo of reducing the entry level phase to two years (instead of three) and delaying salary arbitration and unrestricted free agency by one year in each circumstance. That would unquestionably make it difficult for a player coming out of entry level to hit a home run on his second contract (Steven Stamkos, Drew Doughty, Taylor Hall, Jordan Eberle et al). But in a salary cap system, when there's a defined benefit of 50 per cent, these measures aren't likely to actually take money away from the players as much as they would simply re-allocate it. One thing the players can always count on, the owners will spend as much as they can, it's really just a matter of who gets it.

Of course, that cuts both ways. The players could say the NHL shouldn't worry about how the dollars are allocated. But the war against second contracts is one the general managers have asked for because it would assist them, within the salary cap system, in building their teams. Besides, truth be told, some veteran NHL players wouldn't be opposed to the youngsters having to wait to the third contract to hit their home run.
http://www.tsn.ca/blogs/bob_mckenzie/?id=409277

The players keep the gains they made in free agency and arbitration. The NHL should get contract restrictions with the stupid dummy contracts. LeBrun and McKenzie have written the players are willing to play ball with the NHL on the 5% increase or decrease. As McKenzie pointed out,the NHL doesn't need contract term limits with the 5%. No more 50% dives. The NHL wants 2 year ELCs. Throw the kids under the bus. Two years of non-eligible years before being arb eligible after year 4.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:22 PM
  #682
haveandare
Registered User
 
haveandare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 6,456
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canon1990 View Post
I guess it depends on who's side your favoring. I hate both, but Bettman is just a moron. He's no hockey guy, he's a lawyer. From all accounts he is more concerned with screwing the PA as much as he can despite if there is a season or not, he's done it once already. I'll never get over how he thinks is ok and fair to tell the players that they won't be getting what their signed contract, from the league and team says. Nobody, either making $10 an hour or 10 million a year would ever agree on that, nor should they.

Bill Daly on the other hand is who should be the commissioner. Guy is a hockey guy, interacts with the fans, cares about the sport. If he was running the show they would be playing hockey right now.
I don't get this. Bettman is arguing that a lot of teams are losing money. He wants the PA to take a cut in their HRR % so that those teams can be profitable. That is not him focusing exclusively on "screwing the PA," that's him trying to make the league sustainable for owners. Also, the last lockout wasn't about "screwing the players" either - they were making a TON of money, and since then their salaries have doubled on average. I fail to see how that amounts to them getting screwed. They want more than players in any other sport get even though their sport is by far the least successful financially.

Lastly, this has been said a million times but their contracts were signed to be contingent on the future CBAs they're played under. Nobody - not the players, not their agents, not the owners ever thought that players were going to get the exact amount of money they signed for.

haveandare is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:31 PM
  #683
Thirty One
portnor, pls
 
Thirty One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,682
vCash: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
Fehr is the new player to this game. Bettman is on his 3rd lockout. Case closed.


Good to see the case has been declared closed. Now we can move on to better things.

Thirty One is online now  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:36 PM
  #684
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,229
vCash: 500
"Playoff pool increase"??

Over 50% of the league already qualifies for the playoffs.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:39 PM
  #685
Kane One
HFB Partner
 
Kane One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brooklyn, New NY
Country: United States
Posts: 29,187
vCash: 823
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
"Playoff pool increase"??

Over 50% of the league already qualifies for the playoffs.
Do players get bonuses for making the playoffs like how they have it in the MLB? If so, I think that's what they are referring to.

__________________
Kane One is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:40 PM
  #686
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15,111
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by -31- View Post


Good to see the case has been declared closed. Now we can move on to better things.
Agreed. Fehr's reputation when it comes to collective bargaining is just sterling.


Last edited by Bleed Ranger Blue: 11-11-2012 at 07:35 PM.
Bleed Ranger Blue is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:46 PM
  #687
KreiMeARiver*
Have Confidence
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UES
Posts: 6,621
vCash: 500
For the 2nd time in my life, I'm ridiculously tired of hearing the name "Don Fehr".

I think the next deal should include a fan-driven contest for the chance to kick Fehr and Bettman in the nuts. You know, to act as the obligatory "I'm Sorry!" bouquet of flowers.

KreiMeARiver* is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 07:17 PM
  #688
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 12,178
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
"Playoff pool increase"??

Over 50% of the league already qualifies for the playoffs.
It's about the money the players might make from the playoffs, not how many teams get there.

Tawnos is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 07:34 PM
  #689
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,229
vCash: 500
Re: playoff pool.

Ah. I see.

Thanks for clearing that up.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 04:02 AM
  #690
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,826
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
The next step is to continue meeting. The NHL needs to back off on some of the contract issues.

The NBA had a long laundry list of demands but

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/72...ral-key-issues

The NBA owners got

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/27/sp...pagewanted=all

https://twitter.com/RenLavoieRDS/sta...62032844079104

McKenzie wrote about this today

http://www.tsn.ca/blogs/bob_mckenzie/?id=409277

The players keep the gains they made in free agency and arbitration. The NHL should get contract restrictions with the stupid dummy contracts. LeBrun and McKenzie have written the players are willing to play ball with the NHL on the 5% increase or decrease. As McKenzie pointed out,the NHL doesn't need contract term limits with the 5%. No more 50% dives. The NHL wants 2 year ELCs. Throw the kids under the bus. Two years of non-eligible years before being arb eligible after year 4.
Great point(-s) RB.

Put in any kind of perspective, the NHL and the PA are extremely close on the core economic issues. The diffrence over the term of a new CBA amounts to like, I don't know, what 10 rounds of regular season hockey? If the player share is 1.6b. 1/8 (or like 10 of 82 rounds of hockey) of that is 200m.

The NHL get what they want in the core economic issues. They wanted 50/50. They get 50/50. But not from y1. But very few could realistically have expected that.

The 5% issue is as much a PA issue as a NHL issue. If the PA could write their own CBA, in a cap environment, why would the majority of memembers want a system in which a few basically cheats the other members? The money made in additional to the AAV on a frontloaded contract is basically recovered by the league through escrow from all members.

28/8 and later arbitration is definitely a luxury problem for the league as a whole, but, I am sure these issues are pushed for really hard by a small but determined group of owners. And who would those owners be?

Take Edmonton for example. A great team will be able to keep a great roster as long as they are great basically. Pittsburg could have been situated in Columbus, but they would still have been attractive if having won a cup and been a look to be a contender year after year. Playing on that team, no matter where its located, is attractive. Pittsburgh hit jackpot with Sid and Evg. For every Pittsburgh there is a Atlanta. Atleast one. With 7/25, and if you get good players but maybe not a Sid or Malkin, you have a relatively small window to contend. These players will start to cost money pretty soon, and if you face adversity all of a sudden you start to loose your core when they hit 25 y/o...

So it seems obvious that teams that are in the position of EDM right now, or envisions to go down that road in the near future, put it forth to Bettman as basically a deal breaker in the BOG vote that Bettman get something for them on these issues.

The PA shouldn't underestimate the impact of the above. IE, yes, its a luxury problem for the league as a whole and from the PA's point of view, it does really limit their options. Its a big issue for them. But, while its a luxury problem for the league as a whole Bettman must get a deal that is accepted by whatever majority he needs and in that equation this could be a diffrencemaker...

Ola is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 04:31 AM
  #691
jniklast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Country: Germany
Posts: 4,787
vCash: 500
I also agree that the NHL needs to back off on most of the contract issues. Fixing the cap circumventing retirement contracts is a given, and the PA has no valid reason to object it, but other than that I'm mostly on the PA side on those matters.

On the other hand, assuming the NHL agrees to the former, the PA should accept the NHL's offer on most of the economical issues. The 50:50 split with the make whole paid by the league, to me seems like a pretty reasonable offer.

jniklast is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 07:20 AM
  #692
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,890
vCash: 500
The NHL won't be able to get everything they want. It doesn't work that way. The NFL and NBA owners didn't get everything they want.

NFL owners didn't get

Quote:
Another $1 billion off the top of all revenue. The league went into negotiations in March looking for an additional $1 billion of credit off the top of the $9.2 billion the game generates, but it never happened. In fact, that $1 billion the league took off the top last season? That's gone, too.

An 18-game season. OK, the league said, "until at least 2013." But here's the key: "Any subsequent increase in the number of regular-season games," owners said in a prepared statement, "must be made by agreement with the NFL Players Association." Uh-oh. Prepare the battlefield for 2013.

Rights of first refusal for this year's unrestricted free agents. That would have limited the movement of players and, essentially, made them transition players. Players stood fast and won. Under the schedule proposed last week by owners, teams would've had a 72-hour window to negotiate with their unrestricted free agents. Now it's not clear what that schedule will be.
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/1...turning-points

The NFL players made gains. The NHL players are making no gains. The grabbing hand wants more and more.

NFL players are unrestricted after 4 years. 6 years in MLB. Its 7 or 27 in the NHL and they want to roll it back one year. NBA players are unrestricted after 5. That's for players who have their options picked up in years 3 and 4 and there is 5th year where the team can match an offer sheet.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 08:14 AM
  #693
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,890
vCash: 500
Someone in the players union says the two sides aren't far apart on the economic issues. Its the contract stuff.

Quote:
But lost amid the gloom is the progress the league and union have made in six straight days of talks. They are fairly close on the critical issue of honoring existing contracts, according to the union delegate.

The issue of finding a way to pay players with existing contracts in full under a lower salary cap — or settling on a “make whole” provision, in the language of the negotiations — had been a stumbling block in previous weeks. But by Sunday, the two sides were $2 million to $3 million apart per team, per year, an amount the delegate described as “within spitting distance.”

The league and union are even closer to agreement on revenue sharing among clubs, with a plan described as basically done except for administrative details. The system will be significantly expanded compared with the N.H.L.’s current system, with more teams qualifying for revenue sharing and more money distributed.

The system will include a small fund, similar to baseball’s industry growth fund, that Bettman can specially earmark for the neediest franchises — presumably teams like Phoenix, the Islanders, Columbus and Florida.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/12/sp...s&emc=rss&_r=0

They are close to a deal on the economic stuff. A few more weeks of seeing who breaks first. Mind numbing.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 08:18 AM
  #694
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,826
vCash: 500
I saw that someone that had participated in the mettings described the distance between the league and the PA on the economic issues as the parties are within spitting distance (I think it was in the NYT).

Bettman don't like to be pragmatic and to make comprimises. I kind of like that about him from a technical point of view. A bunch of exemptions left and right, and what not, is just messy and hard to overview what you actually achive with them.

But it does kind of seem like a typical comprimize could solve the deadlock on contractual issues.

For example:
-give a team a chance to protect 2-3 players and have them hit UFA at 28/8 if they are paid like atleast twice the league avg or whatever. Call it the RNH-rule or whatever.
-let a RFA go to arbitration as under the old CBA, unless the said player is paid twice the league avg. Or whatever... Call it the RNH-rule II.

Ola is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 08:23 AM
  #695
jniklast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Country: Germany
Posts: 4,787
vCash: 500
With the economic issues more or less solved, it really is on the league's side now to end the lockout. They got their desired 50/50 split of the revenue and there really is no reason to get 28/8 UFA as well. Fix the retirement contracts either by a contract term limit or a cap on the variance between the years (I don't see the PA having a problem with that) and drop the puck already.

jniklast is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 08:54 AM
  #696
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15,111
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jniklast View Post
With the economic issues more or less solved, it really is on the league's side now to end the lockout. They got their desired 50/50 split of the revenue and there really is no reason to get 28/8 UFA as well. Fix the retirement contracts either by a contract term limit or a cap on the variance between the years (I don't see the PA having a problem with that) and drop the puck already.
In what world are the economic issues solved? Both sides agree that there needs to be a 50/50 split, but they cant decide when - and the make-whole issue is hundreds of millions of dollars apart.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 08:54 AM
  #697
WhipNash27
Quattro!!
 
WhipNash27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westchester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 15,594
vCash: 500
If you were to do a 5% drop in contract and did a 20 year contract from 7M per year, it would average out to $4.5M per year. At 10 years, it would work out to $5.6M per year.

I say 5% drop max per year and 10 year max. I think that'd be a pretty decent way to do it.

WhipNash27 is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 08:57 AM
  #698
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haveandare View Post
I don't get this. Bettman is arguing that a lot of teams are losing money. He wants the PA to take a cut in their HRR % so that those teams can be profitable. That is not him focusing exclusively on "screwing the PA," that's him trying to make the league sustainable for owners.
Why are the players solely the ones responsible for making the other teams profitable? Why can't there be more revenue sharing?
Quote:
Nobody - not the players, not their agents, not the owners ever thought that players were going to get the exact amount of money they signed for.
I could not disagree more. Players sign a contract and expect that they will get paid what the contract stipulates.

True Blue is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 09:03 AM
  #699
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jniklast View Post
The 50:50 split with the make whole paid by the league, to me seems like a pretty reasonable offer.
I am just curious. Why is it a concession to have the owners pay the contracts that they rushed out and signed?

True Blue is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 09:07 AM
  #700
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 21,036
vCash: 500
Not surprising, and IMO probably means the "outrageous" demands we've heard from the NHLPA have been more like "look Gary, we agree on a lot of the economic stuff, but if you expect us to accept these contract rules as is, then our stance on the economic stuff is going to change to this", not that the NHLPA just wildly decided to ask for the moon when they were close on economic stuff

Each part doesn't happen in a vacuum...it's all related, and the NHLPA wants a gain on the owners side to be offset by a gain somewhere else by the players

edit: it's also pretty funny that if you took some kind of poll before the lockout started, most people would have probably been saying that a split more like 52 or 53% for the players would have been fair and should get the job done. Now suddenly 50-50 is fair and the players are lucky to even be getting that because they should be grateful to be playing hockey. Just goes to show how little people care about fair bargaining when it impacts their hobbies, and to a larger extent, how much this country doesn't give a **** about things like unions and workers rights

Levitate 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 11:37 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.