HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

NHL Lockout XXVI: 57 Hockey Channels (And Nothin' On)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-11-2012, 06:45 PM
  #801
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boltsfan2029 View Post
I thought the point was that a 5-year contract doesn't mean players won't be undeservedly overpaid, it means they wouldn't be undeservedly overpaid for 10, 11, 15 years. The team can get out from under a bad contract (which may not be "bad" except that the player doesn't live up to it) sooner.
They'll likely settle on 7 years (or maybe 6) which coincidentally was exactly Scott Gomez's contract length so I doubt that teams get much of a break. Some of the longer 10 year deals for players like Crosby, Stamkos etc would have ended up being better than two five year deals for the teams. Again, I can see protecting teams from handing out retirement type contracts as that in effect increased the cap. I doubt that you can write a deal that stops the Gomez deals though.
Maybe give Bettman a "WTF" veto. As in WTF were you thinking!

vanwest is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 06:48 PM
  #802
onlyalad
Registered User
 
onlyalad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 4,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyCrazed101 View Post
How do you come to the conclusion that they're being paid 300M to do nothing?
The 300 mil i would think would be prorated based on an 82 game season. So every game lost would lower that number as well.
The amount would depend on how much would have been paid out this year as well.

onlyalad is online now  
Old
12-11-2012, 06:48 PM
  #803
McRib
2nd Rate Fan
 
McRib's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Saskatoon
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,804
vCash: 500
I agree with Strickland. They ARE so close they could spit on each other.

In fact, I bet you they WILL spit on each other tomorrow.

McRib is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 06:50 PM
  #804
5 Minute Major
Registered User
 
5 Minute Major's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Binghamton, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 2,656
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winger23 View Post
Man is it selfish of me to just want to finally see our first Stanley cup champions banner raised?
Nah, I have had the same feeling for almost 40 years.......

5 Minute Major is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 06:52 PM
  #805
bishop12
Ovyously
 
bishop12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,708
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by YogiCanucks View Post
Next Free Agent Loop Hole.

Sign a guy to a 1 year deal for Max money, resign him for 7 years on lower terms in January.

Though I believe the 7 year deals can only apply to a teams owns RFA so maybe not
That's not a loop hole. Said player would stink or get injured.

bishop12 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 06:54 PM
  #806
Boltsfan2029
Registered User
 
Boltsfan2029's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In deleted threads
Country: United States
Posts: 6,289
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanwest View Post
Some of the longer 10 year deals for players like Crosby, Stamkos etc would have ended up being better than two five year deals for the teams. Again, I can see protecting teams from handing out retirement type contracts as that in effect increased the cap. I doubt that you can write a deal that stops the Gomez deals though.
Nit-picking here, admittedly, but Stamkos' contract is for only 5 years. Yzerman didn't need help to keep him from handing out a retirement or exorbitant length deal!

Boltsfan2029 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 06:57 PM
  #807
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boltsfan2029 View Post
Nit-picking here, admittedly, but Stamkos' contract is for only 5 years. Yzerman didn't need help to keep him from handing out a retirement or exorbitant length deal!
Not sure I'd call a 10 year deal for Stamkos a retirement contract. If I was Yzerman I'd want him locked up at today's prices. In any event, I think the NHL just really needed to go after the longer contracts for the mid to older players. I don't see any abuse with the younger guys. I think they would have been smarter to go after retirment contracts and push for one franchise type contract per team.

vanwest is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 06:57 PM
  #808
LickTheEnvelope
6th Overall Blows
 
LickTheEnvelope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 28,192
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boltsfan2029 View Post
Nit-picking here, admittedly, but Stamkos' contract is for only 5 years. Yzerman didn't need help to keep him from handing out a retirement or exorbitant length deal!
And it could have been 7 under the NHL's proposal...

LickTheEnvelope is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 06:58 PM
  #809
CN_paladin
Registered User
 
CN_paladin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westeros
Posts: 2,693
vCash: 500
Fehr knows that he still has a couple of weeks left to try to squeeze more from the owners. Anyone expecting him to stop stalling is overly optimistic.

CN_paladin is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 06:58 PM
  #810
McRib
2nd Rate Fan
 
McRib's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Saskatoon
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mind_the_gap View Post
That's not a loop hole. Said player would stink or get injured.
I don't think a player would ever sign a 1 year contract because what if they suffer a career ending injury during the one year contract? It doesn't benefit them. The team, maybe, but the player is going to want his money, even if it is 5, 6 or however many years the max is.

McRib is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 06:59 PM
  #811
LickTheEnvelope
6th Overall Blows
 
LickTheEnvelope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 28,192
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scoobs View Post
I don't think a player would ever sign a 1 year contract because what if they suffer a career ending injury during the one year contract? It doesn't benefit them. The team, maybe, but the player is going to want his money, even if it is 5, 6 or however many years the max is.
? Lots of players sign 1 year contracts.

LickTheEnvelope is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 07:01 PM
  #812
Stewie Griffin
Moderator
Driving a Bandwagon
 
Stewie Griffin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Calgary
Posts: 7,349
vCash: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by LickTheEnvelope View Post
? Lots of players sign 1 year contracts.
I think the intent was sign the player to the 1 year contract, then they become "your UFA" so then can re-sign them for 7 years.

Risky though.

Stewie Griffin is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 07:01 PM
  #813
swimmer77
Post Oates
 
swimmer77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: in water
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,404
vCash: 500
Well I'm tired of hearing they are "close". I'm not so optimistic because of Bettman's presser I guess. Not that I believe everything there either. I just don't think make whole is going to be that same 300m especially with more games canceled. I just don't see how they are "close". They are only close IMO because that's what fans, media and whomever WANT to be believe because of that make whole that Bettman took off of the table but that Fehr claims is still there I guess. That just seems like a little bit of a quandary to me.

The mediators will probably last for a half hour and say there is no more here to see than what we saw the last time which actually would be true.

swimmer77 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 07:05 PM
  #814
molsonmuscle360
Registered User
 
molsonmuscle360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Ft. McMurray Ab
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,516
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stewie Griffin View Post
I think the intent was sign the player to the 1 year contract, then they become "your UFA" so then can re-sign them for 7 years.

Risky though.
The way I had interpreted what the NHL was saying was that if a team had drafted a player then they could do the 7 year extension. I didn't think it was for a players second or third teams.

molsonmuscle360 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 07:08 PM
  #815
bishop12
Ovyously
 
bishop12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,708
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by molsonmuscle360 View Post
The way I had interpreted what the NHL was saying was that if a team had drafted a player then they could do the 7 year extension. I didn't think it was for a players second or third teams.
You'd prolly see a situation where teams would trade these UFAs to be to other teams on the deadline just so that players is eligible to be resigned at 7 years to the new team. Would be a nice premium for a player you're about to lose.

bishop12 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 07:11 PM
  #816
Penalty Kill Icing*
Fire Carlyle
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by YogiCanucks View Post
You know what I'm not looking forward to?

When the two sides reach a deal, they are going to come storming towards the fans saying "We had to get a deal done so we could do right by the fans", "Our great fans deserve to watch hockey", "All we wanted this whole time was to play in front of our fans".

Get a deal done, gets some games going, save the BS.
Quite true. But if they really cared about fans, they'd 've never cancelled the games in the first place.

But yeah, pure unadulterated BS is what I expect.

Penalty Kill Icing* is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 07:13 PM
  #817
Shrimper
Trick or ruddy treat
 
Shrimper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Essex
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 72,582
vCash: 50
Anyone know what time the meeting is tomorrow?

Shrimper is online now  
Old
12-11-2012, 07:14 PM
  #818
McRib
2nd Rate Fan
 
McRib's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Saskatoon
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LickTheEnvelope View Post
? Lots of players sign 1 year contracts.
You're right, but put it this way... Is anyone that your team is going to want to sign for 7 years going to sign for one year initially so they can get that long second contract? I doubt it.

I think you'll see more sign-and-trades like in the NBA. Players current team signs player to a 7 year deal and sends him to another team for slightly more because he's signed for 7 years.

McRib is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 07:17 PM
  #819
S E P H
@Krzysztof_WHL
 
S E P H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Avs Country!
Country: Poland
Posts: 5,191
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
https://twitter.com/andystrickland/s...35827607764992

The only outstanding contract right/issue is the term limits.
I haven't been that optimistic, but if true then this is good news.

S E P H is online now  
Old
12-11-2012, 07:17 PM
  #820
mossey3535
Registered User
 
mossey3535's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlyalad View Post
The 300 mil i would think would be prorated based on an 82 game season. So every game lost would lower that number as well.
The amount would depend on how much would have been paid out this year as well.
Well, since revenues next year are probably not going to grow compared to last year (not this year), the league will probably have to put $200M or so into make whole for next year's players.

However, the players this year who get the Make Whole pro-rated and have no more years left on their contract are getting the short end of the stick - and there are 257 of them....

mossey3535 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 07:17 PM
  #821
BostonBruins92
Closer to the Sun
 
BostonBruins92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Brookline, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,753
vCash: 500
Not to jump ahead, but does anyone else think that this will be the last lockout for the next couple of CBA negotiations? Since the 1994-1995 lockout, the owners have pushed slowly but surely to take what they want, and I do not see what else they could want after this (hopefully) agreement that would be worth losing time over. The only thing that the owners could do that could conceivably get in the way of labor peace would be to try and implement NFL style non-guaranteed contracts imo.

BostonBruins92 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 07:23 PM
  #822
MacOfNiagara
Blue&Gold from birth
 
MacOfNiagara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Niagara Falls
Country: United States
Posts: 2,819
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crows View Post
Terrific.

@KatieStrangESPN: #CBA Via email, NHL's Bill Daly says circumstances different this week than last. "I'm not sure it can help, but I guess we will find out."

https://twitter.com/katiestrangespn/...94890206687233
When Fehr reportedly told the players that they could get more if they held out longer I dont think he had in mind 1 week. I suspect he was thinking more like a month.

I think the PA bringing the mediation back in is simply a stall tactic to continue to look productive without actually accomplishing anything other than winding down the clock.


Last edited by MacOfNiagara: 12-11-2012 at 08:52 PM.
MacOfNiagara is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 07:25 PM
  #823
Boltsfan2029
Registered User
 
Boltsfan2029's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In deleted threads
Country: United States
Posts: 6,289
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanwest View Post
Not sure I'd call a 10 year deal for Stamkos a retirement contract.
That's why I said "or exorbitant length deal."

Quote:
If I was Yzerman I'd want him locked up at today's prices. In any event, I think the NHL just really needed to go after the longer contracts for the mid to older players. I don't see any abuse with the younger guys. I think they would have been smarter to go after retirment contracts and push for one franchise type contract per team.
Hey, as a Lightning fan I would have loved to have seen a longer contract, believe me. But Yzerman doesn't go for those 10-15 year deals.

Boltsfan2029 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 07:26 PM
  #824
MacOfNiagara
Blue&Gold from birth
 
MacOfNiagara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Niagara Falls
Country: United States
Posts: 2,819
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColePens View Post
This will not be a good week. The owners are taking (my opinion) make-whole off the board and will refuse to bring it back. Fehr wanted to play games, and the owners are going to play hardball. This will NOT end well.

And we are near the point (or 2 months past it) where these games are a bit asinine. All around.
I think that is a really good read of the situation this week.

MacOfNiagara is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 07:28 PM
  #825
Heisenberg77
Registered User
 
Heisenberg77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 13,088
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacOfNiagara View Post
When Fehr reportedly told the players that they could get more if they held out longer I dont think he had in mind 1 week. I suspect he was thinking more like a month.

I think the PA bringing the mediation back in is simply a stall tactic to continue to look productive without actually accomplishing anything other than winding out the clock.
God I hope not. If we're still at this stage of tactics and posturing then there's something seriously wrong. Enough of this crap. Get a ******* deal done already.

Heisenberg77 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 02:34 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.