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.
Lockout II - Moderated: Talk about your plenty, Talk about your ills...
Appears that Bettman and Fehr will be joining the party today. Glad I didn't get my hopes up.
With these two egos in the room, this thing is doomed to fail
This deal doesn't get to the finish line without them in there. I'm actually viewing this as a positive. Still cautious, but not out of the realm of possibility for there to be a deal in principle tonight with them in there.
I think you see a 10 year CBA with an earlier opt-out clause in year 6 or 7. The PA will be hesitant to exercise the opt out if the league continues to do well, but at least they get the comfort of knowing its there.
If what Shannon reported is true, I don't see how the leagues proposal is unfair to players.
10 year CBA
$300M make whole
Unchanged UFA and arbitration rules
5% contract variance
5 year contract length (7 for own players)
If the players manage to screw this one up, they deserve what they have coming.
Everyone has seemed to say this about each offer since the mid-October one. And then the players stage such a spectacular crying fit that, within a week, people are back to saying "how could the owners be so callous!"
If what Shannon reported is true, I don't see how the leagues proposal is unfair to players.
10 year CBA
$300M make whole
Unchanged UFA and arbitration rules
5% contract variance
5 year contract length (7 for own players)
If the players manage to screw this one up, they deserve what they have coming.
This whole process has been a political game on both sides, with the 'fairest' portions conveniently leaked in every offer so far. For all we know, HRR went to 47-53 and hasn't been agreed to since that's been left out of the leaked stuff.
Sources tell TSN that the owner-player only dynamic has been terminated as the players have insisted the negotiations once again be opened up to anyone they want to bring in. As a result, both Fehr and Bettman are expected to formally rejoin the talks.
This whole process has been a political game on both sides, with the 'fairest' portions conveniently leaked in every offer so far. For all we know, HRR went to 47-53 and hasn't been agreed to since that's been left out of the leaked stuff.
Sorry no way they'd still be in the room if that was the case.
The fact the Owners need to negotiate a contract length stipulation is ****ing stupid.
It's like an obese person mandating that supermarkets only permit them to buy 1 "unhealthy" thing a week. If you DON'T want to eat more than that then DON'T eat more than that. If you don't WANT to sign players to terms longer than FIVE years then don't OFFER longer than that.
Why do the Owners need to restrict term lengths and include a 5% variance as well? Should be one, or the other.
Term lengths = insurance, largely.
Variance = cap hit.
I think it's pretty clear these are deal-breakers for the owners; they've been present in every league offer. The owners can't insure those mega-long deals, nor do they want to leave open any possible loophole that could lead to cap circumvention. They got burned on those loopholes and they will not leave them open any longer. The players had it good with those cap-busters for a while but the party's over.
The fact the Owners need to negotiate a contract length stipulation is ****ing stupid.
It's like an obese person mandating that supermarkets only permit them to buy 1 "unhealthy" thing a week. If you DON'T want to eat more than that then DON'T eat more than that. If you don't WANT to sign players to terms longer than FIVE years then don't OFFER longer than that.
Actually I believe this is about maintaining a competitive balance between the teams. Not that I necessarily agree with the idea but I understand the thought process behind it. And of course the insurance issue posted by optimus2861 above.
Actually I believe this is about maintaining a competitive balance between the teams. Not that I necessarily agree with the idea but I understand the thought process behind it. And of course the insurance issue posted by optimus2861 above.
Is there any company anywhere that currently offers a term length on contracts? That'd be interesting to note.
The fact the Owners need to negotiate a contract length stipulation is ****ing stupid.
It's like an obese person mandating that supermarkets only permit them to buy 1 "unhealthy" thing a week. If you DON'T want to eat more than that then DON'T eat more than that. If you don't WANT to sign players to terms longer than FIVE years then don't OFFER longer than that.
It's not that simple. As an owner who has some control over my GM, he may show some restraint by offering my star player a 5-year contract; but there is some idiot GM out there that has been told to do whatever to get my star player. And they will offer some ridiculous 15 year front loaded contract to take him away.
So I show some responsibility and as a result lose my star player. And for the player.. who wouldn't take the long term contract?
Apologies if already posted.. TSN believes the league proposal breaks down like this.
1) 10 year CBA
2) UFA and Arbitration to remain status quo from previous CBA
3) Contract limits at 5 years but teams can resign their own players to 7 year terms
4) Make Whole increased to 300M which is half way between previous offer and PA request.
No word on HRR split.
No word on PA proposal.
Interesting. That's pretty much the way I figured the contractual stuff would come to. Drop the FA and arbitration and get the contract limits. Affects less of the PA, and does more for each team.
__________________ "It’s not as if Donald Fehr was lying to us, several players said. Rather, it’s as if he has been economical with information, these players believe, not sharing facts these players consider to be vital."
Is there any company anywhere that currently offers a term length on contracts? That'd be interesting to note.
Work almost anywhere in the I.T. business. There are term length contracts all over the place. I know someone in I.T. that has been working for 20 years, all of it under term contracts.
It's not that simple. As an owner who has some control over my GM, he may show some restraint by offering my star player a 5-year contract; but there is some idiot GM out there that has been told to do whatever to get my star player. And they will offer some ridiculous 15 year front loaded contract to take him away.
So I show some responsibility and as a result lose my star player. And for the player.. who wouldn't take the long term contract?
What about franchise tags like in the NFL? Would that solve the issue of losing players to that type of poaching?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judge Smails
The NBA.
Is that why every year there's 3-4 big name players leaving small market teams to join the Lakers and Heat?
The fact the Owners need to negotiate a contract length stipulation is ****ing stupid.
It's like an obese person mandating that supermarkets only permit them to buy 1 "unhealthy" thing a week. If you DON'T want to eat more than that then DON'T eat more than that. If you don't WANT to sign players to terms longer than FIVE years then don't OFFER longer than that.
Owners compete for players. Players have agents playing teams against each other. That drives up contract length.
Ken Holland offered Suter and Parise shorter contracts. He was responsible. Didn't do much good, did it?
Most players weren't signing longer contracts anyway before GM's started figuring backdoor ways around the cap and used longer deals as the wedge to get through the backdoor. Take away variance/backdiving deals and limit signing bonuses and you don't have the need for contract limits. Contract limits are just a way of running up the score and saving the owners insurance money.
Yes, because not having those limits costs the owners, and takes away from parity. Philly can afford to take a chance on Weber's contract (even if it's paying ridiculous amounts in year 13) because they're rich. They can afford to take the chance that years 6 to 14 are not insured because they're rich. Nashville is taking that chance, but they can't really afford to have it back fire on them. It's not just the insurance costs (Crosby's 5 years is 400k a year), but the fact that it's only the first 5 years that are insured. The rest the team would have to cover.
It's not that simple. As an owner who has some control over my GM, he may show some restraint by offering my star player a 5-year contract; but there is some idiot GM out there that has been told to do whatever to get my star player. And they will offer some ridiculous 15 year front loaded contract to take him away.
So I show some responsibility and as a result lose my star player. And for the player.. who wouldn't take the long term contract?
Alex Semin, he gets better deals on short term contracts.
some limit on contracts seems wise as the circumvention seems easy on long term contracts. I think the best thing would be to limit the contracts to 5 years, with each team allowed two exceptions of up to 7 years.
That's a good point. A longer CBA means a longer time for the economic environment to drift, and for one side or the other to start suffering. Thus a bigger adjustment needed, and more entrenched opponents at the negotiating table in 2022.
TSN originally stated there was an out clause after 6 years. Not sure if that's still in there.
This deal doesn't get to the finish line without them in there. I'm actually viewing this as a positive. Still cautious, but not out of the realm of possibility for there to be a deal in principle tonight with them in there.
I think you see a 10 year CBA with an earlier opt-out clause in year 6 or 7. The PA will be hesitant to exercise the opt out if the league continues to do well, but at least they get the comfort of knowing its there.
I hope you're right. So far nothing good has come out of those two being in the same room at the same time. But at some point if this thing ever gets done - they will have to put up with each other for awhile...
