HFBoards

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

All CBA talk goes here (NHL offers 50/50 deal - 82 game deadline passed)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-10-2012, 03:52 PM
  #176
SackTastic
Embrace The Suck
 
SackTastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 5,115
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
I agree and that doesn't require the MLB model to make it happen.
Agreed. The MLB model doesn't exactly encourage competitive balance. It simply encourages ownership because profits become guaranteed regardless of player investment or team performance.

SackTastic is offline  
Old
08-10-2012, 03:54 PM
  #177
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 34,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beechsack View Post
Part of the cap growth has been the 5% escalator clause that the players exercised, smartly, only this year.

The owners should never have given 57% of revenues to the players PLUS an escalator under their cap rules.
Well to be fair the players had roughly 75% of revenues prior to the lockout.

joshjull is offline  
Old
08-10-2012, 04:21 PM
  #178
SackTastic
Embrace The Suck
 
SackTastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 5,115
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
Well to be fair the players had roughly 75% of revenues prior to the lockout.
This is true. Giving the players 57% was likely a concession on getting the cap, as I'm sure the owners wanted it closer to 50/50 then.

The league just did a poor job putting together a revenue sharing system that would handle the HRR increase that they had. Anyone with a spreadsheet and a brain could see that the a cap floor in year 4 that was more than the ceiling in year 1 was unsustainable.

SackTastic is offline  
Old
08-10-2012, 04:26 PM
  #179
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 34,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beechsack View Post
This is true. Giving the players 57% was likely a concession on getting the cap, as I'm sure the owners wanted it closer to 50/50 then.

The league just did a poor job putting together a revenue sharing system that would handle the HRR increase that they had. Anyone with a spreadsheet and a brain could see that the a cap floor in year 4 that was more than the ceiling in year 1 was unsustainable.
I don't think the league or players envisioned the fantastic growth the league enjoyed over the last several years. They also were conservative with the first year's salary range. It was based on conservative estimates on league revenue. Whereas every year after was based on the formula established in the CBA.

joshjull is offline  
Old
08-10-2012, 04:39 PM
  #180
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 34,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beechsack View Post
Agreed. The MLB model doesn't exactly encourage competitive balance. It simply encourages ownership because profits become guaranteed regardless of player investment or team performance.
The NHL, post lockout, has had the best competitive balance its ever had since expanding from the "original 6".

7 different Cup Champs in 7 years. The MLB model would take that away.

joshjull is offline  
Old
08-10-2012, 04:52 PM
  #181
SackTastic
Embrace The Suck
 
SackTastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 5,115
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
I don't think the league or players envisioned the fantastic growth the league enjoyed over the last several years. They also were conservative with the first year's salary range. It was based on conservative estimates on league revenue. Whereas every year after was based on the formula established in the CBA.
I understand how it works.

My point is that the formula as established was flawed, and should have been noticed early. When your top revenue generating team (Toronto, $213M) is more than 4 times the bottom (Phoenix, $52M) , it should have been painfully obvious that even a modest increase in revenues would drive numbers up too high for those bottom end teams when the existing revenue sharing model was considered.

SackTastic is offline  
Old
08-10-2012, 06:25 PM
  #182
jfb392
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,119
vCash: 500
Quote:
TORONTO -- With a lockout looming larger, the National Hockey League Players' Association is quietly making plans for a series of star-studded exhibition games should the NHL shut down this fall.

Sources tell Sportsnet's John Shannon that games between a team of Russian all-stars from the Kontinental Hockey League and "world" all-stars from the NHL are tentatively set for Moscow, Halifax and Quebec City, as well as an undetermined site in Southern Ontario. Donald Fehr, the NHLPA's executive director, spoke with representatives of the Russian league while overseas last week.
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2012/...urces_lockout/

jfb392 is offline  
Old
08-10-2012, 06:32 PM
  #183
ZZamboni
Puttin' on the Foil
 
ZZamboni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Buffalo, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 10,855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
The NHL, post lockout, has had the best competitive balance its ever had since expanding from the "original 6".

7 different Cup Champs in 7 years. The MLB model would take that away.
And as fun as dynasties are to witness, I like the 7 different cup champs in 7 years better.

ZZamboni is offline  
Old
08-10-2012, 06:58 PM
  #184
drinking bleach irl
don't be so serious
 
drinking bleach irl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Country: Ras al-Khaimah
Posts: 11,683
vCash: 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfb392 View Post
Watch the players present a better product on their own .

drinking bleach irl is offline  
Old
08-11-2012, 11:55 AM
  #185
Sabretip
Registered User
 
Sabretip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 7,927
vCash: 500
Good article with a straightforward and clear breakdown of what the issues of contention are:

Quote:
The expiration of the NHL’s collective bargaining agreement is a little more than a month away. As such, the negotiating of a new labor deal will overshadow all NHL stories over the next few weeks. What issues will be most important to the players and owners? That’s the focus of this week’s THN.com Top 10.
Quote:
10. Burying unwanted player contracts in the minors or Europe
Quote:
9. Entry level contracts
Quote:
8. UFA age
Quote:
7. Maximum term for contracts
Quote:
6. Salary cap ceiling/floor
Quote:
5. Contract structure/cap hit
That financially well-to-do teams can “front-end load” a large portion of a player’s contract into the first few years of a deal is seen by small-market owners as an end-run around the spirit of the current CBA. Those owners want the entirety of a contract to be split equally on a team’s salary cap through the life of the deal, regardless of whether a large signing bonus is awarded to a player
Quote:
4. Escrow
Quote:
3. Composition of Hockey Related Revenue (HRR)
Quote:
2. Revenue Sharing
Quote:
1. Split of Hockey Related Revenue
http://www.thehockeynews.com/article...BA-issues.html

Issue # 5 is one that seems fueled in part by some of the actions the Sabres did last summer under Pegula.

Sabretip is offline  
Old
08-11-2012, 12:35 PM
  #186
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 17,910
vCash: 396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabretip View Post
Good article with a straightforward and clear breakdown of what the issues of contention are:



http://www.thehockeynews.com/article...BA-issues.html

Issue # 5 is one that seems fueled in part by some of the actions the Sabres did last summer under Pegula.
Buffalo would be hurt if they cannot frontload deals with Pegula Bucks. It's tough enough to get UFAs to Buffalo, but to then deprive the Sabres of one of the few advantages that they have could move them even farther down the list of prospective UFAs.

Zip15 is offline  
Old
08-11-2012, 12:58 PM
  #187
Sabresfansince1980
Registered User
 
Sabresfansince1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: from Wheatfield, NY
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,909
vCash: 500
Yeah that would just be too typical. As soon as Buffalo magically gains the ability to be a big time player in the UFA market, the advantage of being a big time player will disappear. Swell.

Sabresfansince1980 is offline  
Old
08-11-2012, 05:14 PM
  #188
WhoIsJimBob
Circle the Bandwagon
 
WhoIsJimBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 16,653
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
The NHL, post lockout, has had the best competitive balance its ever had since expanding from the "original 6".

7 different Cup Champs in 7 years. The MLB model would take that away.
Really?

The last 7 seasons, there have been 6 different World Series champs:

StL (11 & 06), SF (10), NYY (09), Phi (08), Bos (07), and ChiSox (06).

That's not a huge difference over the NHL if you use number of champs as a measure of competitive balance.

The NBA (5) and NFL (4) both have had fewer champions over the last 7 years with their capped systems.

WhoIsJimBob is offline  
Old
08-11-2012, 09:21 PM
  #189
WhoIsJimBob
Circle the Bandwagon
 
WhoIsJimBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 16,653
vCash: 500
http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2...en-the-owners/

Quote:
“We know what they didn’t do, they didn’t share it between the big- and small-market teams,” said a league insider Saturday. “A big percentage went into the pockets of the big-market teams who are now refusing increased revenue sharing as a means to address the disparity.

“This is not a players’ issue anymore. This is a battle between the owners and it’s time for them to settle it once and for all between themselves.”

That insider then turns to the argument that the owners hope to keep taking from the players to make up the difference.

“Many people think a 50/50 split in revenue between the owners and players is a fair resolution,” added the insider. “That means players should accept a 7% reduction in their share annually. Over six years, that’s over $1 billion. Why? The players accepted a salary cap and 24% rollback last time.

“Since then, NHL revenues are booming. Why should players give back again? What’s the justification for this?”
This is going to get interesting.....

Rolling back the cap and having a 50/50 split won't help the small market clubs as long as the revenue gap between the big revenue clubs and small revenue clubs continues to widen.

WhoIsJimBob is offline  
Old
08-12-2012, 01:52 AM
  #190
Sabretip
Registered User
 
Sabretip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 7,927
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabretip View Post
http://www.thehockeynews.com/article...BA-issues.html

Issue # 5 is one that seems fueled in part by some of the actions the Sabres did last summer under Pegula.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zip15 View Post
Buffalo would be hurt if they cannot frontload deals with Pegula Bucks. It's tough enough to get UFAs to Buffalo, but to then deprive the Sabres of one of the few advantages that they have could move them even farther down the list of prospective UFAs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabresfansince1980 View Post
Yeah that would just be too typical. As soon as Buffalo magically gains the ability to be a big time player in the UFA market, the advantage of being a big time player will disappear. Swell.
I remember hearing Elliott Friedman come on WGR, when he reported the Sabres' offers to Parise-Suter, and say that a lot of the league's owners weren't happy by Pegula's front-loading of deals last summer and generally throwing money around - which got me a little angry at the hypocrisy, since I have a feeling that some of those owners that Friedman alluded to were ones in the big-market cities (i.e. Snider in Philly, Dolan in NYC, etc.).

Sabretip is offline  
Old
08-12-2012, 11:58 AM
  #191
Sabresfansince1980
Registered User
 
Sabresfansince1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: from Wheatfield, NY
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,909
vCash: 500
If owners got cranky about Pegula, they should've directed their anger towards New Jersey and the Kovalchuk deal. Is there another player that can come close to being the poster child for jacked up contracts?

FWIW, I actually think it's the right thing to do to make annual salary and cap hits match each season. The owners need to play nice in their own sandbox without running over and taking sand out of the player's box, and matching salary with cap hit levels the field for small markets. Then the owners need to figure out a revenue sharing plan that actually works. Even if it meant a lockout, I wouldn't blame the players one bit for not budging and forcing the owners to solve their own f-ing problem. This is one CBA dispute (across all sports) where I feel very strongly in the players' favor. The owners have little to no solid ground to stand on, but public opinion won't make them crack and do the right thing. It will have to hit them in the bank account first.

Sabresfansince1980 is offline  
Old
08-12-2012, 12:08 PM
  #192
struckbyaparkedcar
Zemgus Da Gawd
 
struckbyaparkedcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Upstate NY
Country: Cote DIvoire
Posts: 10,772
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
Its not about buyouts. They want to limit the length of contracts AND make the cap hit the same for all years to put a drag on actual salaries. Those two ideas need to be paired when debating this. In the last few years the actually salaries in these front loaded deals has skyrocketed. We have two of them (Ehrhoff and Myers). This puts enormous financial pressure on smaller markets that set their budgets based on actual salaries and not cap hits.
Unless you're pushing back UFA to 30, limiting contract length is bad for small markets. The only way teams like Tampa, Columbus and Carolina got to keep their stars (even if Nash demanded a trade later on) was long term, high cap deals. Now, this eventually became irrelevant because big teams got to have their cake and eat it too via frontloaded deals, but five year contract limits are going to turn into the NBA, where role players are cyclically overpaid because they turn into valuable expiring contracts in 2-5 years and there's no incentive for the best players to do anything other than go to the best teams.

Cut down on the ability to go from 14 million to 1 million over the course of a contract, but don't limit years, it only makes it harder for small teams to keep talent.

struckbyaparkedcar is offline  
Old
08-13-2012, 10:38 AM
  #193
Woodhouse
Registered User
 
Woodhouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 8,383
vCash: 50
...so no counterproposal from the NHLPA yet? Lame!

Woodhouse is offline  
Old
08-13-2012, 10:50 AM
  #194
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 17,910
vCash: 396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodhouse View Post
...so no counterproposal from the NHLPA yet? Lame!
The reports are one will be submitted Tuesday.

Zip15 is offline  
Old
08-13-2012, 02:51 PM
  #195
WhoIsJimBob
Circle the Bandwagon
 
WhoIsJimBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 16,653
vCash: 500
http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/more_...VeijZpbgII0lnN

I think Larry Brooks actually makes a lot of good points.

Stunning, I know!

Quote:
The NHL does not have a player cost problem. The NHL has a small-market revenue problem, one its initial parody of a collective bargaining proposal to the NHLPA doesn’t begin to address.
On Tuesday, the NHLPA will present a proposal to the league that does address this core economic issue. The document is expected to represent a far-sighted vision for the NHL rather than the myopic approach in favor on Sixth Avenue, where it seems like 2004 all over again.

Everyone — and that includes Bettman, deputy commissioner Bill Daly, chief of staff Bob Batterman and the Board of Governors — knows the disparity of revenue between the powerhouse markets and the ne’er-do-wells is the critical issue confronting the NHL, but the powers that be either don’t have the imagination or foresight or the stomach or political capital to attend to it.
Thus, it is left to the players themselves, left to the union led by Don Fehr to propose meaningful changes to the landscape that truly will benefit franchises like the Islanders, Panthers and Blues, even if at some expense to Jeremy Jacobs’ Bruins and Ed Snider’s Flyers and Rogers’ and Bell Canada’s Maple Leafs.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Imagine if the NHLPA had come to the NHL a month ago and said the players would go on strike unless all existing contracts immediately were increased by 24 percent. Imagine if Zach Parise had used his union to indirectly tell Wild owner Craig Leipold the $98 million sounded good at the time he signed as a free agent, but the winger would now require the deal be bumped to $121.52 million before he would put on a Minnesota uniform.

Imagine the outrage in all quarters if players were using this round of collective bargaining as a mechanism to engage in a mass breach of promise with the owners. No one would be pretending the responsibility lay on both sides if the NHLPA acted so unethically in the guise of labor negotiations.

Yet when the owners want to unilaterally renege on contracts into which they entered into willingly and without threat or duress, somehow this is regarded as a sound negotiating tactic. This may be a legal tactic under labor law, but it is reflective of bad faith and illustrative of the NHL’s disregard for its own word and for its owners’ own signatures.

WhoIsJimBob is offline  
Old
08-13-2012, 06:22 PM
  #196
Tra La La
Registered User
 
Tra La La's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Buffalo, New York
Country: Ireland
Posts: 4,715
vCash: 500
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2012/...gEOMGk.twitter. And the pa is going to propose scraping the cap, for a luxury tax. That's as bad as the leagues first offer. Long lock out ahead.

Tra La La is offline  
Old
08-14-2012, 01:11 PM
  #197
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 34,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Bob View Post
Really?

The last 7 seasons, there have been 6 different World Series champs:

StL (11 & 06), SF (10), NYY (09), Phi (08), Bos (07), and ChiSox (06).

That's not a huge difference over the NHL if you use number of champs as a measure of competitive balance.

The NBA (5) and NFL (4) both have had fewer champions over the last 7 years with their capped systems.
You're not quite following the point of my previous post. I was making two points actually.


1) I'm comparing the competitve balance of the NHL pre lockout to the competitive balance of the NHL post lockout. Without question there is more competitve balance post lockout.

That has nothing to do with MLB, the NFL or the NBA.

2) I also said the MLB model would take that away. I'm obviously refering to their financial model. That model, with huge differences in payrolls, would send the NHL back to the pre-lockout days. When there was much less competitive balance due to the huge difference in payrolls. Its would not be a level playing field at all.


You're also confusing different World Series winners with a level playing field. MLB does not have a level playing field. All of the teams you listed as World Series champs are big markets and none were lower than 13th in payroll in the year they won. Many teams are at a severe competitve disadvantage in MLB. That the occassional team can overcome that is a reflection of that team doing well in a tough environment not an example of an economic system with a level playing field. The NFL easily has the most level playing field. That teams don't take advantage of it is a reflection of those teams and not the economic model. The Bills being a prime example.


The NHL also isn't really comparable to MLB in terms of whats needed to win and how payroll can impact that.

The reason there is so much competitve balance in the NHL right now is the big markets can't stockpile talent like they did pre-lockout. Something they would be able to do again in a MLB economic model that has no salary cap.

In the pre-lockout days the bigger markets stockpiled players for the war of attrition that is the NHL playoffs. This did two things. 1) It massively drove up salaries making it very difficult for small market teams to keep their own talent let alone replace it after they left. 2) It also made it nearly impossible for smaller markets to have the depth needed for a deep playoff run. If a small market team made a run it was usually due to a goalie standing on his head or having a handful of players coming into their own at the same time. Only to lose most of them to bigger markets.


Right now the competitive balance in the NHL is the best its ever been. Unlike the recent MLB champs, half of the Stanley Cup winners post lockout are mid to small markets (in NHL terms); Carolina, Anaheim, Pittsburgh and LA. The playing field is pretty damn level. A switch to a MLB style model would take that all away.

I agree the main problem is revenue sharing and that needs to be worked out among the owners. I had said previously in this thread that this issue can't be fixed by the owners asking for rollbacks every time the CBA expires.


Last edited by joshjull: 08-14-2012 at 01:24 PM.
joshjull is offline  
Old
08-14-2012, 01:22 PM
  #198
WhoIsJimBob
Circle the Bandwagon
 
WhoIsJimBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 16,653
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
In the pre-lockout days the bigger markets stockpiled players for the war of attrition that is the NHL playoffs. This did two things. 1) It massively drove up salaries making it very difficult for small market teams to keep their own talent let along replace it after they left. 2) It also made it nearly impossible for smaller markets to have the depth needed for a deep playoff run. If a small market team made a run it was usually due to a goalie standing on his head or having a handful of players coming into their own at the same time. Only only to lose most of them to bigger markets.

Right now the competive balance in the NHL is the best its ever been. Unlike the recent MLB champs, half of the Stanley Cup winners post lockout are mid to small markets (in NHL terms); Carolina, Anaheim, Pittsburgh and LA. The playing field is pretty damn level. A switch to a MLB style model would take that all away.
The problem is that if the NHL doesn't address the widening gap of revenues from team to team via expanded revenue sharing, you will get a situation where the Cap to floor gap gets larger and larger and you have a lot of team struggling to get to the floor while the big revenue clubs are consistently near the cap.

Besides, as the Bills, Cowboys, Raiders, and Redskins will attest, it's about how you spend your money more than how much you spend.

Just as the NY Rangers and Toronto Maple Leafs would pre-lockout.

Looking at the pre-lockout NHL, you did have 5 SC champs the 7 seasons before the lockout (TB, NJ (2), Det (2), Col, & Dal) and 7 runners up (Cal, Ana, Car, NJ, Dal, Buf, Wash).

If you look at those 10 teams, there is a mix of big to small revenue clubs.

WhoIsJimBob is offline  
Old
08-14-2012, 02:40 PM
  #199
WhoIsJimBob
Circle the Bandwagon
 
WhoIsJimBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 16,653
vCash: 500
http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2...d-interesting/

It looks like the NHLPA's offer did include a cap and it was much better than the NHL expected.


WhoIsJimBob is offline  
Old
08-14-2012, 02:41 PM
  #200
struckbyaparkedcar
Zemgus Da Gawd
 
struckbyaparkedcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Upstate NY
Country: Cote DIvoire
Posts: 10,772
vCash: 500
Me gusta @ the preliminary signs. Especially Fehr not gunning for the cap as an early move.

struckbyaparkedcar 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 06:47 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.