HFBoards

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

CBA Negotiations III: Why Can't We All Just...Get Along?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-11-2012, 10:04 PM
  #501
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beefitor
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 37,496
vCash: 156
If anything Hartnell has helped Hamrlik by drawing attention to it. Anyone who throws a hard hit or goes after him is going to get heavily scrutinized now.

It's not like players weren't talking about Hammer and Neuvy "betraying" them before Hartnell said anything. I'd be shocked if they weren't. Instead, people get all indignant over Hartnell acknowledging a simple reality: Hamrlik has spoken out against the grain, and that pisses off unions.

__________________
Down in the basement, I've got a Craftsman lathe. Show it to the children when they misbehave.
Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 10:10 PM
  #502
Flyerfan808
Registered User
 
Flyerfan808's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Honolulu, HI
Country: United States
Posts: 2,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jtown View Post
There is no Amnesty, There is no Hiding contracts overseas and in the AHL, and there is no more front loaded deals. Or years tacked on To bring down the AAV.

All of those things have been used by the flyers to make them competitive.

The flyers , as well as other large market teams, have essentially lost their advantage over the smaller markets. This makes this league much more balance in terms of competitiveness.

So add Pronger and Add matt walker to your original cap and see how it comes out now.

This Deal will screw the flyers and big money teams for a long time. Gone are the days that teams with money have an advantage.
No, Chris Pronger is not being hid away in the AHL or overseas. He is on the LTIR and for as long as he remains on the LTIR (does not retire or attempt a comeback) his salary will not count against the salary cap.

Matt Walker is an UFA in 2013-2014 (next summer) and will be off the books.

I was under the impression from Bill Daly's press statements days ago that the NHL is considering having "compliance buyouts" (similar to 05') when the new CBA takes effect. I am simply saying IF the league allows buyouts that I would consider buying out Briere.

You're absolutely right about the five year contract limits will level the playing field in terms of money. As it should be. Those days are gone and it was fun while it lasted.

I don't believe that Philadelphia has completely lost its edge over some of the smaller market teams:
- Solid Young Core
- Consistently makes the playoffs (19 of 20 years?)
- Limited Travel
- Large fanbase (sold out stadiums)

Flyerfan808 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 11:23 PM
  #503
Jtown
Registered User
 
Jtown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Fairfax, Virginia
Posts: 10,372
vCash: 539
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyerfan808 View Post
No, Chris Pronger is not being hid away in the AHL or overseas. He is on the LTIR and for as long as he remains on the LTIR (does not retire or attempt a comeback) his salary will not count against the salary cap.

Matt Walker is an UFA in 2013-2014 (next summer) and will be off the books.

I was under the impression from Bill Daly's press statements days ago that the NHL is considering having "compliance buyouts" (similar to 05') when the new CBA takes effect. I am simply saying IF the league allows buyouts that I would consider buying out Briere.

You're absolutely right about the five year contract limits will level the playing field in terms of money. As it should be. Those days are gone and it was fun while it lasted.

I don't believe that Philadelphia has completely lost its edge over some of the smaller market teams:
- Solid Young Core
- Consistently makes the playoffs (19 of 20 years?)
- Limited Travel
- Large fanbase (sold out stadiums)

The most attractive thing about the franchise is the money they can offer. Now where we once had an advantage we no longer do.

Don't kid yourself. WE got Bryz, Briere and others by offering them huge front loaded deals. Deals that many other teams cant offer. WE have a solid core now, but in 4 years? HOw much will this cba change the complexion of the league. I shudder to think about the offer that Giroux will get, and shudder at the thought of losing young talent because of his huge contract.

This CBA is really destined to make the salary cap era even more fair, and the smaller market teams...every single one of them will benefit greatly from it.

Jtown is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 05:44 AM
  #504
SeanCWombBroom
DownieFaceSoftener
 
SeanCWombBroom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,739
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MsWoof View Post
He's 38 years old. He's at the end of his career, it doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out what he means.

Also, seems he's backtracking: http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=411364

Big shock there.
It's speculative what his motivations are. It's also possible for him to be selfishly interested for himself and genuinely care about the state of hockey for others.

Of course he is backtracking.

SeanCWombBroom is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 06:49 AM
  #505
Pantokrator
Who's the clown?
 
Pantokrator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Semmes, Alabama
Country: Guatemala
Posts: 4,319
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=Jtown;56470939]

This CBA is really destined to make the salary cap era even more fair, and the smaller market teams...every single one of them will benefit greatly from it.[/QUOTE]

Until the large markets find some loophole. The owners need to be protected from themselves.

Pantokrator is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 12:51 PM
  #506
achdumeingute
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NorCal
Posts: 2,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jtown View Post
The most attractive thing about the franchise is the money they can offer. Now where we once had an advantage we no longer do.

Don't kid yourself. WE got Bryz, Briere and others by offering them huge front loaded deals. Deals that many other teams cant offer. WE have a solid core now, but in 4 years? HOw much will this cba change the complexion of the league. I shudder to think about the offer that Giroux will get, and shudder at the thought of losing young talent because of his huge contract.

This CBA is really destined to make the salary cap era even more fair, and the smaller market teams...every single one of them will benefit greatly from it.
Top end FA will be somewhat reduced, but there will still be hartnell/timonen type trades. Those may actually rise a bit.

achdumeingute is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 12:56 PM
  #507
Flyerfan808
Registered User
 
Flyerfan808's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Honolulu, HI
Country: United States
Posts: 2,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jtown View Post
The most attractive thing about the franchise is the money they can offer. Now where we once had an advantage we no longer do.

Don't kid yourself. WE got Bryz, Briere and others by offering them huge front loaded deals. Deals that many other teams cant offer. WE have a solid core now, but in 4 years? HOw much will this cba change the complexion of the league. I shudder to think about the offer that Giroux will get, and shudder at the thought of losing young talent because of his huge contract.

This CBA is really destined to make the salary cap era even more fair, and the smaller market teams...every single one of them will benefit greatly from it.
I've already conceded that the Flyers have lost their monetary advantage over the small market teams. I'm also not thrilled about it... fair is fair... but you shouldn't kid yourself either. It's not ALL about money not for every player. Briere was offered more money from a few teams and he turned them down to play for us because he thought we had a solid young core (Richards, Carter, Giroux) and because he knew that the Flyers would be contenders.

Giroux is a RFA (Schenn & Couturier too) and is still eligible for team elected salary arbitration if it comes to that, which means he is protected from offer sheets. So, I'm not worried about that.

If it goes to arbitration, I could see him getting 7M-7.5M, but I don't see it getting that far. I think the Flyers will lock him up during the 2013-2014 season for somewhere between 6.25M - 6.75M and for the five year max.

Flyerfan808 is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 01:25 PM
  #508
CanadianFlyer88
Moderator
Knublin' PPs
 
CanadianFlyer88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Van City
Posts: 14,019
vCash: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
Hamrlik is just mad because he is at the end of his career and this lockout may end it. It is somewhat selfish to act the way he is acting. He doesn't give a crap about the new CBA because it will affect him very little. The guys it will affect are the guys with years to play under the CBA. Anyone (not just Hamrlik) who whines about not having a deal done just to get a deal done is silly. That is how you screw your fellow players (and potentially yourself). The point of the Union is to get the best deal possible, not just sign any deal in order to get back on the ice. I hate this lockout as much as the next, but just signing a deal because it will get people on the ice is silly.

For fans, it sucks to see this and sucks that it seems like Fehr is just playing hardball for no reason. But you have to look at the big picture. He is fighting to give the players a better deal. He isn't doing it to make a name for himself and he isn't doing it to piss of the owners or the fans. The players wanted a guy who will bargain hard for them and get them the best deal. Just giving in for the sake of getting the game back on the ice would be great for the fans, but not a smart move for the players. Hence, the lockout is still ongoing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MsWoof View Post
I agree with this. Hamrlik is thinking only of himself. Fehr and the players have to stay united and think of the big picture.
The point of the union is to get 'the best deal possible'? In the players' collective opinions, sure... but the best deal possible in a 'big picture' sense, would likely be a fair deal for both sides, no?

Hamrlik is one of the few guys that have been through all three of the Bettman era work stoppages. I'd guess that he has a pretty good perspective about what a lost season means to all players, not just himself. With a union of 700+ members, it's not surprising to see dissenting opinions. No deal will appease all NHLPA members and the owners.

__________________
I deride your truth handling abilities
CanadianFlyer88 is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 04:31 PM
  #509
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,406
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianFlyer88 View Post
The point of the union is to get 'the best deal possible'? In the players' collective opinions, sure... but the best deal possible in a 'big picture' sense, would likely be a fair deal for both sides, no?
Yes and no. It would be hard to come to any deal that wasn't fair for both sides (that's what this whole process is for). But you want the best deal possible. You can have an agreement that is fair that is not the best deal. You can also get the best deal possible and have it fair to both sides. This agreement is going to govern the entire league for years. You really can't leave anything on the table or it is gone until the next CBA comes up. Obviously you have to give up some things, but on both sides, you want the absolute best deal for yourself.

Quote:
Hamrlik is one of the few guys that have been through all three of the Bettman era work stoppages. I'd guess that he has a pretty good perspective about what a lost season means to all players, not just himself. With a union of 700+ members, it's not surprising to see dissenting opinions. No deal will appease all NHLPA members and the owners.
There's gonna be dissenting opinions, but Hamrlik's opinion (a guy who likeley has 1-2 years tops) is irrelevant. He wants to play now and I get that, but by signing a deal just to get it done would impact the rest of the league for years to come, not just this season. Not to mention the precedence it sets for future negotiations.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 04:36 PM
  #510
Krishna
Registered User
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,048
vCash: 50
Why is his opinion any less relevant than the players supporting the union no matter what they do?

Krishna is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 04:39 PM
  #511
CootaRoo
Registered User
 
CootaRoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 258
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
Obviously you have to give up some things, but on both sides, you want the absolute best deal for yourself.
And he was saying, rightfully so, that the best deal for the players is also a good deal for the owners, particuliarly in a linked cap structure - there are diminsihing returns for "putting the screws" to the owners (the people whom pay them) for the players.

The same; however. cannot be said for the owners... if player's share offered somehow dropped from 50->40% (most likely after a scenario which saw Fehr lead them blindly through a 2 year lockout) there would be no negative impact to the owners whatsoever.

CootaRoo is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 04:47 PM
  #512
SuchySays
Registered User
 
SuchySays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Poconos
Country: United States
Posts: 2,203
vCash: 50
And that's the season..

cya next season... doubtful but maybe

SuchySays is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 04:54 PM
  #513
Krishna
Registered User
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,048
vCash: 50
Tim Panaccio ‏@tpanotchCSN
so as it stands, the LAST offer from the NHL is still there for the taking, but nothing new and neither side met together ...

Tim Panaccio ‏@tpanotchCSN
NHL still wants total compliance from those 3 "yes/no" issues of last week. nothing changes here.

Krishna is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 05:05 PM
  #514
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beefitor
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 37,496
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
Why is his opinion any less relevant than the players supporting the union no matter what they do?
Because this CBA will barely impact him and it's in his interest to play immediately. His priorities are very different from the rest of the union.

Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 05:11 PM
  #515
CanadianFlyer88
Moderator
Knublin' PPs
 
CanadianFlyer88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Van City
Posts: 14,019
vCash: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
Yes and no. It would be hard to come to any deal that wasn't fair for both sides (that's what this whole process is for). But you want the best deal possible. You can have an agreement that is fair that is not the best deal. You can also get the best deal possible and have it fair to both sides. This agreement is going to govern the entire league for years. You really can't leave anything on the table or it is gone until the next CBA comes up. Obviously you have to give up some things, but on both sides, you want the absolute best deal for yourself.
Bob Goodenow and Trevor Linden were raked over the coals for a deal that was perceived to be heavily in favour of the owners at the end of the last work stoppage. The deal turned out pretty well for the players in the end, much better than initially thought. Given the current situation, though, the last CBA obviously wasn't perfect.

The best deal possible is one that results in a CBA that doesn't lead to a work stoppage upon its expiration, not a deal that heavily favours either side.

Quote:
There's gonna be dissenting opinions, but Hamrlik's opinion (a guy who likeley has 1-2 years tops) is irrelevant. He wants to play now and I get that, but by signing a deal just to get it done would impact the rest of the league for years to come, not just this season. Not to mention the precedence it sets for future negotiations.
I'd say the opinion of a guy who has been through three work stoppages is far from irrelevant. You say he only has a couple seasons left, which you strangley believe invalidates his opinion, but what about all of the union members who will play less than a couple career seasons, period (probably more players than you believe)? Are their opinions worthless, as well? Or does this only apply if they don't agree with union leadership?

If all that mattered to Hamrlik was playing out his career, he'd sign a 'lengthy' contract in the KHL.


Last edited by CanadianFlyer88: 12-12-2012 at 05:57 PM.
CanadianFlyer88 is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 05:11 PM
  #516
Krishna
Registered User
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,048
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak Invictus View Post
Because this CBA will barely impact him and it's in his interest to play immediately. His priorities are very different from the rest of the union.
The average hockey player's career is about 100 or so games. So, it looks Neuvirth's comments were correct that everything is about the stars.

Krishna is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 05:31 PM
  #517
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beefitor
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 37,496
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
The average hockey player's career is about 100 or so games. So, it looks Neuvirth's comments were correct that everything is about the stars.
Not exactly. A 5 year contract limit combined with a lowered cap also affects non-stars. Without the long terms to reduce cap hits, there will be less space available for teams with expensive players to pay other guys.

On another note, I'm split on that short proposed limit (which probably won't be so short in the final deal). As a Flyers fan I go:



But as an NHL fan, it's going to stir things up a little bit and I'm kind of excited for that. The high quality "middle class" players might be less compelled to sign with teams who have high paid stars so they can get some more money elsewhere. Having those high paid stars could possibly make team building difficult for GMs, and probably would place a lot of emphasis on drafting and development. I can see it increasing parity overall.

Unless the current cap/floor structure remains unchanged and it all becomes moot in 5 years if the cap is back up to 70 million dollars.

Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 05:58 PM
  #518
Flyerfan808
Registered User
 
Flyerfan808's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Honolulu, HI
Country: United States
Posts: 2,002
vCash: 500
Two weeks ago:

"It's the owners fault we are in this mess, they were the ones spending like there's no tomorrow... handing out those front loaded retirement contracts like candy."

Owners propose 5 year max contracts (7 years max if resigned by the same team):

"5 year contracts will only hurt the mid and lower level guys."

Flyerfan808 is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 06:15 PM
  #519
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beefitor
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 37,496
vCash: 156
The owners DID shoot themselves in the foot with those long contracts. On the other hand, 5 years is on the extreme side. 7 is a happy medium. Gives GMs some slack to sign the biggest players without killing their cap too badly, but also stops something silly like the Luongo deal.

Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 06:50 PM
  #520
Flyerfan808
Registered User
 
Flyerfan808's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Honolulu, HI
Country: United States
Posts: 2,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak Invictus View Post
The owners DID shoot themselves in the foot with those long contracts. On the other hand, 5 years is on the extreme side. 7 is a happy medium. Gives GMs some slack to sign the biggest players without killing their cap too badly, but also stops something silly like the Luongo deal.
I don't think the players are entirely blameless for those long contracts since they were the ones DEMANDING them, but we've been over that one before.

I think the NHL is pushing for 5 (+2 if resigned, so 7 MAX) because they can only insure a contract for 7 years. Furthermore, I like the idea of 5 + 2 (if resigned) as opposed to the 7 year max for everyone, because it gives the "original team" the power to negotiate a longer term and potentially a better cap hit than the "poaching team."

Flyerfan808 is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 06:54 PM
  #521
Krishna
Registered User
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,048
vCash: 50
I wonder how trading for rights would work under the new proposed system.

I guess rights of players would increase in value

Krishna is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 07:05 PM
  #522
Flyerfan4life
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Richmond BC, Canada
Country: England
Posts: 12,042
vCash: 500
/sigh, no progress today..

Flyerfan4life is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 07:08 PM
  #523
Blackhawkswincup
Global Moderator
 
Blackhawkswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicagoland
Country: United States
Posts: 101,779
vCash: 340
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
I wonder how trading for rights would work under the new proposed system.

I guess rights of players would increase in value
Just have to look at sign and trades in NBA

Only difference is prospects/draft picks actually matter in NHL (Really outside of top 10 NBA draft is not that valued around league thus why draft picks are routinely traded with top 10 protection , etc)

Blackhawkswincup is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 08:01 PM
  #524
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 109,927
vCash: 5792
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyerfan4life View Post
/sigh, no progress today..
They didn't go backward though.


This ends at a point where Fehr tells the players that he thinks the best deal they'll get is on the table, and they can either take it or decertify.

GKJ is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 08:07 PM
  #525
flyershockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,710
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by GKJ View Post
They didn't go backward though.


This ends at a point where Fehr tells the players that he thinks the best deal they'll get is on the table, and they can either take it or decertify.
This is true. The players have invested so much in Fehr as their guy that any signs of them beginning to question him will be pounced on by the owners.

flyershockey 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 03:48 AM.

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.