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 X: Is There Any Hope? Edition

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-28-2012, 03:17 PM
  #501
Lundsanity30
Registered User
 
Lundsanity30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10,218
vCash: 500
Though pa were doing 3pm conference call?

Lundsanity30 is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 03:27 PM
  #502
Jaromir Jagr
New York Rangers Cup
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 6,263
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lundsanity30 View Post
Though pa were doing 3pm conference call?
There's never any legible source information here...just discussion 95% of the time.

Jaromir Jagr is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 03:28 PM
  #503
truebluegoalie
Registered User
 
truebluegoalie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,239
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lundsanity30 View Post
Though pa were doing 3pm conference call?
It was an internal conference call to discuss the offer:



"The NHLPA scheduled a 3pm et conference call to discuss the offer internally but there is no plan as yet for the two sides to meet on Friday."
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=412368


Last edited by truebluegoalie: 12-28-2012 at 03:33 PM.
truebluegoalie is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 03:41 PM
  #504
nyrpassion
Vetted.
 
nyrpassion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Washington DC
Country: United States
Posts: 4,090
vCash: 500
damn. i remember a few weeks back when the nhlpa rejected an offer and everyone was like, "that dumb, it wont get better than that! sign it!" well, it just got better. fehr is walking a THIN, thin line here, hope he knows when to stop and actually sign a deal.

nyrpassion is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 03:41 PM
  #505
Kane One
Global Moderator
🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨
 
Kane One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brooklyn, New NY
Country: United States
Posts: 27,544
vCash: 2960
I'm not cool with that $60MM cap for 2013-14. Why don't they propose something where teams could have a less cap-hit for their own RFAs?

MDZ is an RFA. Our 2013-14 payroll---not including MDZ---is about $52.4MM. That's about $7.6MM for MDZ, Sauer, Stepan, Hagelin, and McDonagh. That's not good.

__________________
Kane One is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 03:55 PM
  #506
CM PUNK
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,279
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by broadwayblue View Post
Why can't they just keep the cap where it is and not increase it until the owners are made whole on the 50-50 revenue split?
thats what players proposed and nhl argued that it never guarantees 50/50 split if revenue stops going up

CM PUNK is online now  
Old
12-28-2012, 03:57 PM
  #507
CM PUNK
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,279
vCash: 500
hopefully because a $60 mil cap next year would screw so many teams even worse than us that there will be some additional flexiblity as transition rules

CM PUNK is online now  
Old
12-28-2012, 03:58 PM
  #508
Kane One
Global Moderator
🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨
 
Kane One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brooklyn, New NY
Country: United States
Posts: 27,544
vCash: 2960
Quote:
Originally Posted by CM PUNK View Post
hopefully because a $60 mil cap next year would screw so many teams even worse than us that there will be some additional flexiblity as transition rules
I find it hard to believe that any team will have it worse.

Kane One is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 03:59 PM
  #509
CM PUNK
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,279
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleedred View Post
Shouldn't there be a rollback with the cap going down like that? Or is the buyout supposed to be the answer? I think they'll meet in the middle somewhere. Maybe a $63 million cap ceiling.
there would be a 'rollback' in the sense that contracts would be reduced, but then the $300 mil 'make whole' $$ is supposed to pay the players back the money they lose in future years...so atleast in theory those players won't actually lose anything. atleast thats how i understand it.

CM PUNK is online now  
Old
12-28-2012, 04:02 PM
  #510
CM PUNK
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,279
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaneone View Post
I find it hard to believe that any team will have it worse.
capgeek has the flyers commited to 59.81 mil next year for 16 players leaving them $190k to sign 4-7 players unless they buyout mr universe.

CM PUNK is online now  
Old
12-28-2012, 04:04 PM
  #511
Jaromir Jagr
New York Rangers Cup
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 6,263
vCash: 500
A CBA is not going to be put into place if it leaves nearly half the league without 5 or so roster players due to the cap restriction.

Most teams can't be close to that estimated cap with 5 players less so therefore it won't be put into place.

Jaromir Jagr is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 04:08 PM
  #512
BBKers
Registered User
 
BBKers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: South Koster, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 5,662
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to BBKers
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaneone View Post
I find it hard to believe that any team will have it worse.
Look on the previous page in this thread (#497). I made a very clear overview regarding each teams cap situation next year. And why the players can not and will not accept a $60M cap next year, it is impossible out of several aspects

BBKers is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 04:08 PM
  #513
turcotte8
Registered User
 
turcotte8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,870
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaromir Jagr View Post
A CBA is not going to be put into place if it leaves nearly half the league without 5 or so roster players due to the cap restriction.
Yet that is exactly what the NHL is asking for. Makes no sense to me.

turcotte8 is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 04:08 PM
  #514
Lundsanity30
Registered User
 
Lundsanity30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10,218
vCash: 500
What good is a CBA agreement going to do if no team can get under the hard cap? How many teams are at or above 60M right now?

Lundsanity30 is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 04:13 PM
  #515
BBKers
Registered User
 
BBKers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: South Koster, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 5,662
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to BBKers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lundsanity30 View Post
What good is a CBA agreement going to do if no team can get under the hard cap? How many teams are at or above 60M right now?
Look at post #497 in this thread
Sums up the entire league and how it is impossible to have a $60M cap (drop of over #10M). It is idiotic even to propose this. Gary needs to use a calculator and count the math - not just listen to a lawyer buddies script how this should play out...

BBKers is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 04:25 PM
  #516
Jabroni
The People's Champ
 
Jabroni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 6,562
vCash: 500
gary lawless ‏@garylawless
NHL source: Players and league will convene by conference call on Saturday and hope to meet in person on Sunday in New York #nhl #nhlpa #bn

Jabroni is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 04:31 PM
  #517
Bleedred
Pete still coach?
 
Bleedred's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Seminole Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 33,339
vCash: 500
So will the rollback make the cap hits for existing contracts go down? Sorry I'm still trying to understand the financial aspects of all this.

Bleedred is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 04:45 PM
  #518
Jabroni
The People's Champ
 
Jabroni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 6,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleedred View Post
So will the rollback make the cap hits for existing contracts go down? Sorry I'm still trying to understand the financial aspects of all this.
I thought I read that there are no rollbacks in this proposal?

Jabroni is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 04:49 PM
  #519
azrok22
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 9,431
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleedred View Post
So will the rollback make the cap hits for existing contracts go down? Sorry I'm still trying to understand the financial aspects of all this.
Not in the current proposal (or any recent proposals). The way those contracts would be affected would be through higher escrow payments (because the total payout to the players would be greater than their % share--players would be returning money to the owners through escrow, but the "make whole payments" would also dampen such an impact). Cap hit would remain unaffected.

azrok22 is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 05:10 PM
  #520
Bleedred
Pete still coach?
 
Bleedred's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Seminole Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 33,339
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by azrok22 View Post
Not in the current proposal (or any recent proposals). The way those contracts would be affected would be through higher escrow payments (because the total payout to the players would be greater than their % share--players would be returning money to the owners through escrow, but the "make whole payments" would also dampen such an impact). Cap hit would remain unaffected.
Alright thanks, and thanks for your patience too!

Jabroni there is no rollback in this proposal. I figured the amnesty buyout is what will be used to dump salary when the cap goes down. However I don't see every team doing it. I wish the Devils would use it on Volchenkov, but I can only see the cap ceiling teams doing it. The Devils will be a cap ceiling team though if we can keep our UFA's.

Bleedred is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 05:16 PM
  #521
BBKers
Registered User
 
BBKers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: South Koster, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 5,662
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to BBKers
Quote:
Larry Brooks ‏@NYP_Brooksie
Talk within NHL of flipping Winnipeg and Columbus for this year only pending future realignment...
Dubinsky moves back to the East to haunt us. And Terrible Tim Erixon too!!! OMG

BBKers is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 05:30 PM
  #522
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antithesis View Post
When healthy,Gaborik is unquestionably the superior player.

One of the biggest knocks people had on Gaborik was his inability to play seamlessly with Richards, after having no true #1 center his whole career. Nash is coming here in a similar situation and, quite frankly, I don't expect his production to magically explode with Broadway Brad either.

Nash was brought here to provide enough additional scoring to win us a cup. Not to be the #1 goal scoring threat. That is Marian's job.

Gaborikis one of the top 5 goal scoring threats in the league. As of right now, Nash is #12, maybe #11 is you're being harsh to Bobby Ryanafter a bad year.
Gaborik is the superior goal scorer, but an "unquestionably superior player" has a helluva lot more criteria. Nash is a better all-around player. He is a guy that can affect play not from game to game, but from shift to shift. Thats my opinion from watching both of these guys and judging them irregardless of their surroundings.

The supporting cast, especially for Nash going from the worst team in the league to one of the best, is also a big factor -- but that hasnt stopped you from completely ignoring it here.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 05:44 PM
  #523
Lundsanity30
Registered User
 
Lundsanity30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10,218
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Gaborik is the superior goal scorer, but an "unquestionably superior player" has a helluva lot more criteria. Nash is a better all-around player. He is a guy that can affect play not from game to game, but from shift to shift. Thats my opinion from watching both of these guys and judging them irregardless of their surroundings.

The supporting cast, especially for Nash going from the worst team in the league to one of the best, is also a big factor -- but that hasnt stopped you from completely ignoring it here.
Absolutely agree about supporting cast but we have seen stars here before not excel. Until Nash proves otherwise, Gaborik is our best player

Lundsanity30 is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 05:45 PM
  #524
Lundsanity30
Registered User
 
Lundsanity30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10,218
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBKers View Post
Dubinsky moves back to the East to haunt us. And Terrible Tim Erixon too!!! OMG
They must think they play then lol

Lundsanity30 is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 05:52 PM
  #525
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lundsanity30 View Post
Absolutely agree about supporting cast but we have seen stars here before not excel. Until Nash proves otherwise, Gaborik is our best player
It was almost the exact opposite situation in those years. Stars going from good/great teams to the terrible Rangers.

Look, I wish we could keep both, but its quite clear the Rangers organization has already made the decision of who they value more.

Bleed Ranger Blue 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 05:43 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.