HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Chicago Blackhawks
Notices

Lockout Thread 2: Deal reached in early morning hours

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-22-2012, 12:29 PM
  #426
HawksFan74
Tread Lightly
 
HawksFan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,227
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyJet View Post
Hmmmm .... unified you say. To vote for relieving Fehr of his duties, yet they're still behind him 100 percent. Confused yet?
LOL, you don't even know what you're talking about. You think this vote had anything to do with not wanting Fehr.

HawksFan74 is offline  
Old
12-22-2012, 12:37 PM
  #427
BobbyJet
Registered User
 
BobbyJet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Dundas, Ontario. Can
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,083
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HawksFan74 View Post
LOL, you don't even know what you're talking about. You think this vote had anything to do with not wanting Fehr.
Technically that is exactly right and why it is so amateurish (just like what most of what Fehr has done). It could very well backfire and make the player's precarious situation worse than it already is.

BobbyJet is offline  
Old
12-22-2012, 03:49 PM
  #428
Sir Psycho T
More Cowbell!
 
Sir Psycho T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Redwood City, CA
Posts: 3,628
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sketch22 View Post
No they didn't. The Owners and players signed a new CBA before any of the cases actually went to court. The only court related issue the Owners "won" was getting the specific injunction that lifted the NFL lockout overturned on appeal. The courts never ruled on the legality of the lockout.



If they go to court and win they get 3x the normal damages they would be owed because it is an anti-trust case. All it will take for the players to bend the Owners over is a single pro union decision to be held up upon appeal. Because that decision will become the basis for every single lawsuit that follows.

For the Owners to win in court they would need a clean sweep, because any pro-union judgement will provide give the players the precedent they need to bankrupt them.
That is what will happen here.

The NHLPA can't take the NHL to court over this issues because they are already in the middle of negotiating it. It's what the NFLPA was told and it's what the NHLPA will be told.

So now the NHLPA won't have a Union because they fired Fehr and his team and they won't be able to take the NHL to court of this so what's the point?

There is none, it's a stupid ploy, that the NHL knows is a stupid ploy and they will let it play out because after it does the PA will have no other moves to make but to settle.

Sir Psycho T is offline  
Old
12-22-2012, 03:54 PM
  #429
HawksFan74
Tread Lightly
 
HawksFan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,227
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyJet View Post
Technically that is exactly right and why it is so amateurish (just like what most of what Fehr has done). It could very well backfire and make the player's precarious situation worse than it already is.
Worse, how is it going to get worse. If they don't agree to something in the next three weeks it's done.

HawksFan74 is offline  
Old
12-23-2012, 04:20 AM
  #430
Sir Psycho T
More Cowbell!
 
Sir Psycho T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Redwood City, CA
Posts: 3,628
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HawksFan74 View Post
Worse, how is it going to get worse. If they don't agree to something in the next three weeks it's done.
It could get worse in terms of what the players end up accepting. If the owners call the players bluff and say, go to court, and the court, likely very will, rules that they can't get involved as this is an ongoing negotiation, then the players have lost any and all leverage with which to bargain with.

They would have disbanded their union so Fehr could no longer represent them in talks, and they would have played and lost their 1 last big trump card. The NHL could start pulling things off the table and saying the longer you wait the more stuff comes off knowing at that point the players have only 1 option which is too settle.

I hope cooler heads prevail and this doesn't go that route. However it appears the owners are sticking by the, take it or leave it, offer as just that and the players are trying to get a little more out of it.

As I said when this first broke off, that was likely the best offer the players where going to see and they and Fehr would regret not taking it, it appears as that it exactly what has happened. Fehr bit off more then he could chew and is not getting out while he still can and letting this fall on the players heads.

Sir Psycho T is offline  
Old
12-23-2012, 06:00 AM
  #431
Sir Psycho T
More Cowbell!
 
Sir Psycho T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Redwood City, CA
Posts: 3,628
vCash: 500

Sir Psycho T is offline  
Old
12-23-2012, 09:38 AM
  #432
BobbyJet
Registered User
 
BobbyJet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Dundas, Ontario. Can
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,083
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Psycho T View Post
It could get worse in terms of what the players end up accepting. If the owners call the players bluff and say, go to court, and the court, likely very will, rules that they can't get involved as this is an ongoing negotiation, then the players have lost any and all leverage with which to bargain with.

They would have disbanded their union so Fehr could no longer represent them in talks, and they would have played and lost their 1 last big trump card. The NHL could start pulling things off the table and saying the longer you wait the more stuff comes off knowing at that point the players have only 1 option which is too settle.

I hope cooler heads prevail and this doesn't go that route. However it appears the owners are sticking by the, take it or leave it, offer as just that and the players are trying to get a little more out of it.

As I said when this first broke off, that was likely the best offer the players where going to see and they and Fehr would regret not taking it, it appears as that it exactly what has happened. Fehr bit off more then he could chew and is not getting out while he still can and letting this fall on the players heads.
Exactly.

When I say worse it is in reference to the players getting what they want, or should I say not getting what they want. More than ever in the past few months, I see it going backwards for the players as the NHL holds all the cards. This season is in all likelihood lost (hope I'm wrong) - and in hindsight, that was the case the moment Fehr was hired.


Psycho T summed up this scam nicely with his statement:

"There is none, it's a stupid ploy, that the NHL knows is a stupid ploy and they will let it play out because after it does the PA will have no other moves to make but to settle"

BobbyJet is offline  
Old
12-23-2012, 11:06 AM
  #433
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,886
vCash: 500
The PA will accept whatever they want, even if this "ploy" doesn't work, they aren't going to settle for anything worse than what was already offered. Their won't be hockey until they are satisfied with what the NHL has proposed, if the NHL makes a worse offer after all of this, then we may not see the NHL for quite sometime.

Hawkaholic is offline  
Old
12-23-2012, 11:31 AM
  #434
BobbyJet
Registered User
 
BobbyJet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Dundas, Ontario. Can
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,083
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
The PA will accept whatever they want, even if this "ploy" doesn't work, they aren't going to settle for anything worse than what was already offered. Their won't be hockey until they are satisfied with what the NHL has proposed, if the NHL makes a worse offer after all of this, then we may not see the NHL for quite sometime.
Unfortunately, with Fehr there, I agree.

That pretty much decribes this mess since October 11.


Last edited by BobbyJet: 12-23-2012 at 11:41 AM.
BobbyJet is offline  
Old
12-23-2012, 11:27 PM
  #435
BBH
34|38|61|10|13
 
BBH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Chicago, IL, US of A
Country: United States
Posts: 4,206
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to BBH
Look on the bright side, at least Torres won't be playing for awhile.

BBH is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 03:05 PM
  #436
BobbyJet
Registered User
 
BobbyJet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Dundas, Ontario. Can
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,083
vCash: 500
An interesting quote from Paul Coffey when discussing the present day Oilers to the dynasty Oiler team of the past.

“And you’ve got to remember, in the eighties, we were paid on productivity back then. We weren’t paid on, ‘Here’s your money, I hope you earn it. I hope you get the numbers we think you can get to.’ You had to produce back then to get paid and your increments were 10- or 15-thousand dollar raises. That’s why, I believe, it was so exciting back then. If you wanted to get paid, you had to go.”

I guess the owners feel it would be a lost cause to try and re-implement that type of bonus system as a large part of the players pay cheques, but I'd love to see it. Guaranteed salaries suck, frankly.

BobbyJet is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 03:09 PM
  #437
coldsteelonice84
Registered User
 
coldsteelonice84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 24,716
vCash: 10592
That would be really interesting. The biggest bonuses would have to be for wins so it wouldn't turn into a sideshow but I do like the idea of it.

coldsteelonice84 is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 03:31 PM
  #438
Illinihockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 14,117
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyJet View Post
An interesting quote from Paul Coffey when discussing the present day Oilers to the dynasty Oiler team of the past.

“And you’ve got to remember, in the eighties, we were paid on productivity back then. We weren’t paid on, ‘Here’s your money, I hope you earn it. I hope you get the numbers we think you can get to.’ You had to produce back then to get paid and your increments were 10- or 15-thousand dollar raises. That’s why, I believe, it was so exciting back then. If you wanted to get paid, you had to go.”

I guess the owners feel it would be a lost cause to try and re-implement that type of bonus system as a large part of the players pay cheques, but I'd love to see it. Guaranteed salaries suck, frankly.
Ya it would be awesome to see guys playing for stats instead of trying to play to win. That sounds awesome.

Illinihockey is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 03:35 PM
  #439
BobbyJet
Registered User
 
BobbyJet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Dundas, Ontario. Can
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,083
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Illinihockey View Post
Ya it would be awesome to see guys playing for stats instead of trying to play to win. That sounds awesome.
As Coldice stated .... Wins are stats too. That could/would be a big part of the bonus system in today's game.

BobbyJet is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 03:39 PM
  #440
Illinihockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 14,117
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyJet View Post
As Coldice stated .... Wins are stats too. That could/would be a big part of the bonus system in today's game.
If you do that, players are going to only want to play for teams that are already good. Who is going to go sign in Columbus if you get paid for wins? It'll be like the NBA with 4-5 super teams.

Illinihockey is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 03:42 PM
  #441
coldsteelonice84
Registered User
 
coldsteelonice84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 24,716
vCash: 10592
Quote:
Originally Posted by Illinihockey View Post
If you do that, players are going to only want to play for teams that are already good. Who is going to go sign in Columbus if you get paid for wins? It'll be like the NBA with 4-5 super teams.
Not necessarily. A team like Columbus would likely offer more.

Example: Columbus offers 50K per player per win, Hawks offer 25K. Players would like the idea of turning Columbus around and making a ******** of money in doing so.

coldsteelonice84 is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 03:44 PM
  #442
Cullksinikers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: 'Merica
Country: United States
Posts: 14,462
vCash: 500
Or teams can just start learning how to develop their own players without having to hopefully poach other teams' good free agents with little chance of doing so and if doing so, paying the moon to bring a guy to that team.

Cullksinikers is online now  
Old
12-27-2012, 03:50 PM
  #443
Illinihockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 14,117
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
Not necessarily. A team like Columbus would likely offer more.

Example: Columbus offers 50K per player per win, Hawks offer 25K. Players would like the idea of turning Columbus around and making a ******** of money in doing so.
So what, you get a higher salary cap if you are a worse team?

Illinihockey is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 03:51 PM
  #444
BobbyJet
Registered User
 
BobbyJet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Dundas, Ontario. Can
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,083
vCash: 500
The NHL is also very close to attaining parity. There is no reason why an underdog can't surprise these days... and they do. Look what Kings and Yotes did just last season after both squeaked into the playoffs.

It's not perfect but playing for bonuses (team as well as individual) beats a guaranteed contract any day, imo. The modern day players just won't take that risk.

BobbyJet is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 03:53 PM
  #445
UsernameWasTaken
Let's Go Blue Jays!
 
UsernameWasTaken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,714
vCash: 500
incremental raises/incentive pay doesn't work well in a salary cap system

UsernameWasTaken is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 04:03 PM
  #446
Cullksinikers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: 'Merica
Country: United States
Posts: 14,462
vCash: 500
The only thing I think you can do to improve the system to make better odds of good free agents signing with under-performing clubs is lowering the salary cap. However, this is something of great debate.

Cullksinikers is online now  
Old
12-27-2012, 04:06 PM
  #447
Illinihockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 14,117
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cullksinikers View Post
The only thing I think you can do to improve the system to make better odds of good free agents signing with under-performing clubs is lowering the salary cap. However, this is something of great debate.
They need to institute caps on contracts like the NBA where teams can pay their own guys more in years and money than other teams.

Illinihockey is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 04:48 PM
  #448
coldsteelonice84
Registered User
 
coldsteelonice84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 24,716
vCash: 10592
Yeah, this plan would mean a very different cap or none at all.

coldsteelonice84 is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 09:13 AM
  #449
Illinihockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 14,117
vCash: 500
Owners made a new proposal to the NHLPA yesterday.

Darren Dreger‏@DarrenDreger

Among the changes in the new proposal, the NHL adjusted its max contract length from 5 to 6 yrs. Boosted the variance from 5% to 10%


Pierre LeBrun‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun

Also the Make Whole $$$$ stays at $300 million


LeBrun‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun

New offer sees each team afforded one compliance buyout prior to 2013-14 season. Doesn't count vs. cap but it does vs. players' share

Pierre LeBrun‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun

NHL offer calls for term limit on player contracts to be six years (7 if you're re-signing your own guys).

Illinihockey is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 09:42 AM
  #450
IU Hawks fan
They call me 'IU'
 
IU Hawks fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: No longer IU
Country: United States
Posts: 18,246
vCash: 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Illinihockey View Post
Owners made a new proposal to the NHLPA yesterday.

Darren Dreger‏@DarrenDreger

Among the changes in the new proposal, the NHL adjusted its max contract length from 5 to 6 yrs. Boosted the variance from 5% to 10%
So much for 'the hill we will die on'

IU Hawks fan 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 03:38 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.