HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Ottawa Senators
Notices

Free Agency & General Offseason Thread Part IV: Will there be NHL hockey this year?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-11-2012, 10:32 AM
  #26
MAK19
FreeWierciochBanAndy
 
MAK19's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Madrid
Posts: 13,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Officer Farva View Post
I don't think you know what the 5 vet limit means
Yes it goes by number of pro games played and I don't think it even applies to goalies. I didn't check if those guys are considered vets but the point is the team has enough old guys

MAK19 is offline  
Old
08-11-2012, 11:08 AM
  #27
Powdered Toast Man
Is he a ham?
 
Powdered Toast Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,561
vCash: 500
Making ordinary joes side with corporations owned by billionaires when it comes to labor relations is the greatest scam ever pulled off. I am sure they are all extatic that you people care so much about "the team" while you make them so much money.

Powdered Toast Man is offline  
Old
08-11-2012, 11:13 AM
  #28
WantEggRoll
Registered User
 
WantEggRoll's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,757
vCash: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Powdered Toast Man View Post
Making ordinary joes side with corporations owned by billionaires when it comes to labor relations is the greatest scam ever pulled off. I am sure they are all extatic that you people care so much about "the team" while you make them so much money.
What would be the reason in siding with the players in your opinion?

I think they should be treated well and get payed well because they are the source of entertainment. The current system just seems unfair in the sense that if a team spends countless hours and resources developing a player that the player has all the leverage to up and leave.

Should the league's overall health be described by how rich and easy life is for the players? Or how good the results are for the fans who watch the game.

WantEggRoll is offline  
Old
08-11-2012, 11:20 AM
  #29
Powdered Toast Man
Is he a ham?
 
Powdered Toast Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WantEggRoll View Post
What would be the reason in siding with the players in your opinion?
We have a hell of a lot more in common with them? I love hockey, but I'm not stabbing my brother to finance my addiction.

Powdered Toast Man is offline  
Old
08-11-2012, 11:26 AM
  #30
MAK19
FreeWierciochBanAndy
 
MAK19's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Madrid
Posts: 13,269
vCash: 500
Sens should pick up David Schlemko if available for cheap

MAK19 is offline  
Old
08-11-2012, 11:30 AM
  #31
WantEggRoll
Registered User
 
WantEggRoll's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,757
vCash: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Powdered Toast Man View Post
We have a hell of a lot more in common with them? I love hockey, but I'm not stabbing my brother to finance my addiction.
I probably have a lot more in common with city of Ottawa bus drivers than I do with city of Ottawa council members, but I wouldn't have sided with them during the bus strike.

I have no personal knowledge of exactly what has been proposed I just find it silly that people jump down the throats of the owners anytime they suggest something the players might not like.

WantEggRoll is offline  
Old
08-11-2012, 11:31 AM
  #32
MAK19
FreeWierciochBanAndy
 
MAK19's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Madrid
Posts: 13,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WantEggRoll View Post
I probably have a lot more in common with city of Ottawa bus drivers than I do with city of Ottawa council members, but I wouldn't have sided with them during the bus strike.
snap. Now the question is, are hockey players greedier than bus drivers??

MAK19 is offline  
Old
08-11-2012, 11:40 AM
  #33
Powdered Toast Man
Is he a ham?
 
Powdered Toast Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,561
vCash: 500
Public transportation is a government service, the Ottawa Senators are a private business. I don't think anyone would side with Walmart even if they'd shut down and force you to pay .30 more for pork chops. The NHL isn't even dying, if it was I may be more inclined to compromise but if anyone is getting an extra five percent of my money I want it to be Marc Methot, not Eugene Melynk.

Powdered Toast Man is offline  
Old
08-11-2012, 11:42 AM
  #34
WantEggRoll
Registered User
 
WantEggRoll's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,757
vCash: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Powdered Toast Man View Post
Public transportation is a government service, the Ottawa Senators are a private business. I don't think anyone would side with Walmart even if they'd shut down and force you to pay .30 more for pork chops. The NHL isn't even dying, if it was I may be more inclined to compromise but if anyone is getting an extra five percent of my money I want it to be Marc Methot, not Eugene Melynk.
If Marc Methot goes broke Eugene Melnyk buys another defenseman, where as if Eugene Melnyk goes broke everyone employed by the Ottawa Senators loses their job and the city is harmed economically. Like I said it depends on what the teams are making/losing. The league is said to be making tons of money, but how much does each individual team make?

I'm all for the owners getting more money if it is going to increase the overall stability of the league. Now if the owners were going to get an extra 5% and spend it on ladies of the night I might not be on board.

WantEggRoll is offline  
Old
08-11-2012, 12:17 PM
  #35
Philadelphia Collins
Registered User
 
Philadelphia Collins's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,126
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WantEggRoll View Post
What would be the reason in siding with the players in your opinion?

I think they should be treated well and get payed well because they are the source of entertainment. The current system just seems unfair in the sense that if a team spends countless hours and resources developing a player that the player has all the leverage to up and leave.

Should the league's overall health be described by how rich and easy life is for the players? Or how good the results are for the fans who watch the game.
From Allan Walsh's twitter:

The average NHL ticket price has increased 39% since 2004 when Gary Bettman promised fans a salary cap would lower ticket prices.

It's impossible to side with the owners who are crying about not making enough money, while also signing Zach Parise and Ryan Suter to 14-year deals worth 200million dollars. Or the Weber offersheet with 26mil in signing bonuses the first year. Basically they are the ones who made this big ****ing mess and they should quit trying to pretend the players are making too much when they're the ones who created the terrible FA market

Philadelphia Collins is offline  
Old
08-11-2012, 12:21 PM
  #36
WantEggRoll
Registered User
 
WantEggRoll's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,757
vCash: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philadelphia Collins View Post
From Allan Walsh's twitter:

The average NHL ticket price has increased 39% since 2004 when Gary Bettman promised fans a salary cap would lower ticket prices.

It's impossible to side with the owners who are crying about not making enough money, while also signing Zach Parise and Ryan Suter to 14-year deals worth 200million dollars. Or the Weber offersheet with 26mil in signing bonuses the first year. Basically they are the ones who made this big ****ing mess and they should quit trying to pretend the players are making too much when they're the ones who created the terrible FA market
Ok now how much has everything else surrounding hockey increased during that time? If the price of heating, employees, equipment, transportation all went up since 2004 then obviously ticket prices would as well. Using isolated statistics to prove a point doesn't work very well. If Walsh can provide his readers with solid fact based stats showing that the price of tickets far exceeds the cost to run the team then maybe he has a point.

To get a realistic opinion of whether or not what Bettman said was true you'd have to study ticket growth patterns before the salary cap came in and then factor in the higher modern costs to see what they would have inflated to. Only at that point can you make a judgement on whether or not current ticket prices are too expensive.

I already addressed the massive contract offers in an earlier post.


Last edited by WantEggRoll: 08-11-2012 at 12:31 PM.
WantEggRoll is offline  
Old
08-11-2012, 12:55 PM
  #37
Qward
Moderator
Because! That's why!
 
Qward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Behind you, look out
Posts: 13,284
vCash: 265
Things that I want out of the new CBA.

-Limit on length of contract (five years)
-Salary and cap hit must match. (25m over 5 years = 5m per year, not 10, 10, 3, 1, 1)
-Salary cap only increases by max percentage every season. (Going up 4-5 million every season only helps large hockey markets and hurts smaller markets)
-NTC/NMC are voided when a player files for an official trade request.
-1 way contracts still apply to cap hit when sent to minors. (no more burying players)

Also floor should be 20 million below cap ceiling.
Start of 2012/2013 is 45-65 million.

That is all I can think of at the moment.

Qward is offline  
Old
08-11-2012, 01:03 PM
  #38
Matt The Ace
LWOS Analyst
 
Matt The Ace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Carleton Place, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,052
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to Matt The Ace
Quote:
Originally Posted by MandyAlwaysKnows View Post
PEOPLE FROM THE OTTAWA SENATORS WHO READ HF READ THIS:

Gonchar + Michalek for Boyle + Clowe.

Do it.


I feel like some ''scientist'' sending radio waves into space trying to contact aliens.
If this ever went through, I'd slap Murray with a dirty diaper.

Matt The Ace is offline  
Old
08-12-2012, 01:22 PM
  #39
dan1el
Registered User
 
dan1el's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,663
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qward View Post
Things that I want out of the new CBA.

-Limit on length of contract (five years)
-Salary and cap hit must match. (25m over 5 years = 5m per year, not 10, 10, 3, 1, 1)
-Salary cap only increases by max percentage every season. (Going up 4-5 million every season only helps large hockey markets and hurts smaller markets)
-NTC/NMC are voided when a player files for an official trade request.
-1 way contracts still apply to cap hit when sent to minors. (no more burying players)

Also floor should be 20 million below cap ceiling.
Start of 2012/2013 is 45-65 million.

That is all I can think of at the moment.
I really like all these ideas, except 5 years is little short. I'd say make the max 8 years.

dan1el is offline  
Old
08-12-2012, 01:56 PM
  #40
Qward
Moderator
Because! That's why!
 
Qward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Behind you, look out
Posts: 13,284
vCash: 265
5 years means that the FA frenzy will be more exciting. Teams still have from July 1st of the final year of the current contract.

Also this forces teams to spend more money to keep some players instead of locking for 14 years. This means ceiling teams have to be more careful.

Qward is offline  
Old
08-12-2012, 02:26 PM
  #41
bert
Registered User
 
bert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,137
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marty Straka View Post
Pass... Boyle isn't going to be significantly better the Gonchar and they are relatively the same age so it isn't like we are trading an aging vet for a younger dman.. we are just doing a lateral swap for a little bit of an upgrade. I also like Michalek > Clowe.
If the sens dont make this trade they are nuts, i dont see San Jose doing it. Boyle is a massive upgrade on Gonchar. Clowe and Michalek are relatively close.


Quote:
Originally Posted by WantEggRoll View Post
I don't really understand people's general resentment towards the league in these circumstances.

One thing I keep seeing from people and the media is:
If the league wants to lower pay rolls why are they offering up giant contracts?

If a set of rules is in place at the moment then a smart GM will do everything they can within their power to make the best possible team. Obviously if you have to pay a guy 100mil for 14 years to get him to play, and you can, then you will. If you don't then some other GM will, so of course you are going to do it, but that doesn't mean it is the best thing for the game. The entire point behind the owner's push for new rules is to eliminate the ability to do this which creates a level playing field between the teams.

Another thing I don't really understand is when people get all upset because the owner's demands will "anger" the players.

The owner's proposed a plan would see:
Long-term deals eliminated; lowering the potential to handcuff a team
Longer entry-level deals; meaning if you draft well you have better kids for a longer time
Restricted free agency moved up; meaning players can't up and leave early on

All of those things mean that the "TEAM" we cheer for is going to be in a better position, so who really cares about the players?

We might buy jerseys with the name of a certain player on the back, but usually we only like them because they play for the team on the front.

Sure players are the reason that the game is exciting, but the only reason they get paid huge amounts of money to play a kid's game is because the owners have the money to do so. I'm pretty sure a lot of the owners lose money on their teams and make their actual money through other business ventures. The players are the only ones that are solely dependent on the sport itself, so I'm not sure why I should side with the weaker side of the argument when by right they have the lower position to argue from.

In these circumstances I'm fully behind the league and ownership to do whatever they feel is best to support stable and profitable teams. Of course this should be taken within reason as I'm not saying the players should play for pennies.
Well said, if the players dont recognize that 100% inflation of the cap in 8 years isnt sustainable and that they have by far the highest percentage of revenue in take then this sport is potentially doomed. Its not a fair or strong business model moving forward when its so lopsided. They are getting paid a ton of money to play a sport, not that they arent elite and that they dont work hard or perform under pressure but the way things are being done right now is dramatically in their favor and just doesnt work, they cant be so greedy.

Ottawa's unemployment reached its highest percentage its been since Dec 2011 at 6.3 and we are debatably the most stable market in North America. We're in a recession and its not getting any better if someone cant pay their mortgage do they think they are going to spend money on a hockey game? Players need to look at factors like this and get a deal done that works for everyone, this sport cant afford another work stoppage or it may never recover at such a high end operational level. Its in the players best interests to give a little here, if not it will hurt them long run. I refuse to believe they dont have information like this, something will get done.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Powdered Toast Man View Post
Public transportation is a government service, the Ottawa Senators are a private business. I don't think anyone would side with Walmart even if they'd shut down and force you to pay .30 more for pork chops. The NHL isn't even dying, if it was I may be more inclined to compromise but if anyone is getting an extra five percent of my money I want it to be Marc Methot, not Eugene Melynk.
I think you need to look into the entire situation a little more, its not on an even kiel right now. You cant just say im supporting one millionaire more than the other its not that black and white. Its about having a healthy league where everyone makes money and all teams are competitive. Right now where the league is going is not good for the small market teams, Melnyk has only made money one of the last 4 seasons while players salaries continue to escalate does that seem like a good business model to you?


Last edited by bert: 08-12-2012 at 02:47 PM.
bert is offline  
Old
08-12-2012, 02:40 PM
  #42
Ice-Tray
Registered User
 
Ice-Tray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,965
vCash: 500
Oh, they will recover no doubt about that.

Ice-Tray is offline  
Old
08-12-2012, 02:43 PM
  #43
Qward
Moderator
Because! That's why!
 
Qward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Behind you, look out
Posts: 13,284
vCash: 265
Just so I get this straight.

Michalek 27, Has broken 20g every season except twice.
Clowe 30 (when the season starts) who has broken 20g twice.

Gonchar 38 1 season left until FA
Boyle 36 2 seasons left until FA

I dont know about that trade...

is the plan just to get more Canadians?

Qward is offline  
Old
08-12-2012, 04:21 PM
  #44
Holdurbreathe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,580
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WantEggRoll View Post
If Marc Methot goes broke Eugene Melnyk buys another defenseman, where as if Eugene Melnyk goes broke everyone employed by the Ottawa Senators loses their job and the city is harmed economically. Like I said it depends on what the teams are making/losing. The league is said to be making tons of money, but how much does each individual team make?

I'm all for the owners getting more money if it is going to increase the overall stability of the league. Now if the owners were going to get an extra 5% and spend it on ladies of the night I might not be on board.
If the overall stability of the league is your concern, then you need to be asking why the owners haven't found an equitable way of dividing up their share of the revenue.

The most successful professional league in North America, the NFL, sees the owners sharing in >60% of their share of revenue, in the NHL it is ~6%.

While Bettman may have assured the owners that a cap system would provide cost certainty, any system in which the payroll of revenue weak clubs is linked to the amount of revenue generated by the league’s wealthy franchises is fatally flawed and doomed to fail, no matter how low the league wants the players to go.

The current approach by the owners is just a rinse and repeat of the last CBA, there is nothing to see about league stability, it is just about a cash grab.

Holdurbreathe is offline  
Old
08-12-2012, 04:25 PM
  #45
Karl Cowensson
Two Headed Monster!
 
Karl Cowensson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Northern Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qward View Post
Just so I get this straight.

Michalek 27, Has broken 20g every season except twice.
Clowe 30 (when the season starts) who has broken 20g twice.

Gonchar 38 1 season left until FA
Boyle 36 2 seasons left until FA

I dont know about that trade...

is the plan just to get more Canadians?
Seems like a lateral move to me as well. Ceci and Wiercoch obviously could use the extra two years of development time that Boyle would afford them, but otherwise I'd rather fill the void on D via FA or trading a young forward for the young Dman.

Karl Cowensson is offline  
Old
08-12-2012, 04:42 PM
  #46
Holdurbreathe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,580
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bert View Post
Well said, if the players dont recognize that 100% inflation of the cap in 8 years isnt sustainable and that they have by far the highest percentage of revenue in take then this sport is potentially doomed. Its not a fair or strong business model moving forward when its so lopsided. They are getting paid a ton of money to play a sport, not that they arent elite and that they dont work hard or perform under pressure but the way things are being done right now is dramatically in their favor and just doesnt work, they cant be so greedy.

Ottawa's unemployment reached its highest percentage its been since Dec 2011 at 6.3 and we are debatably the most stable market in North America. We're in a recession and its not getting any better if someone cant pay their mortgage do they think they are going to spend money on a hockey game? Players need to look at factors like this and get a deal done that works for everyone, this sport cant afford another work stoppage or it may never recover at such a high end operational level. Its in the players best interests to give a little here, if not it will hurt them long run. I refuse to believe they dont have information like this, something will get done.

I think you need to look into the entire situation a little more, its not on an even kiel right now. You cant just say im supporting one millionaire more than the other its not that black and white. Its about having a healthy league where everyone makes money and all teams are competitive. Right now where the league is going is not good for the small market teams, Melnyk has only made money one of the last 4 seasons while players salaries continue to escalate does that seem like a good business model to you?
There is so much wrong with this.

First, a cap system is based on revenue, if the league revenue rises/drops the amount available for player's salaries rises/drops... escrow is used as the withholding mechanism. There is nothing about the system that isn't sustainable as long as the owners have an effective revenue sharing system.

As far as the players being greedy, I can't disagree more. The current CBA, the definition of what consisted of hockey revenue and the division of the revenue was set by the owners. The system is working as designed by and implemented by the league.

I have no problem with the owners wanting to re-negotiate the division of revenue, but to describe it as anything but a cash grab by the owners is just wrong. The only result the current proposal will bring, the rich teams get richer.

As I posted earlier, the NHL will never truly be healthy until the billionaires share a greater percentage with each other, there isn't any other solution.


Last edited by Holdurbreathe: 08-12-2012 at 04:49 PM.
Holdurbreathe is offline  
Old
08-12-2012, 04:55 PM
  #47
MAK19
FreeWierciochBanAndy
 
MAK19's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Madrid
Posts: 13,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qward View Post
Just so I get this straight.

Michalek 27, Has broken 20g every season except twice.
Clowe 30 (when the season starts) who has broken 20g twice.

Gonchar 38 1 season left until FA
Boyle 36 2 seasons left until FA

I dont know about that trade...

is the plan just to get more Canadians?
Clowe is a playmaker.

Boyle >>> Gonchar, and Boyle can be moved for more as a rental than Gonchar

MAK19 is offline  
Old
08-12-2012, 06:34 PM
  #48
Ice-Tray
Registered User
 
Ice-Tray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,965
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MandyAlwaysKnows View Post
Clowe is a playmaker.

Boyle >>> Gonchar, and Boyle can be moved for more as a rental than Gonchar
No thanks.

Michalek is better and replacing one old dman for another does nothing for us. Boyle is not much better than Gonchar at this point, while Gonchar was by far the better player and a much better mentor for our young puck movers.

Terrible trade for us.

Ice-Tray is offline  
Old
08-12-2012, 06:42 PM
  #49
QuietOnTheFront
@QuietOnTheFront
 
QuietOnTheFront's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,508
vCash: 500
I don't think we'll see a repeat of 2004-05, but either a delayed start or shortened season seems probable right now. It seems like the NHL wants drastic and extreme changes, it all depends on the PA's counter and how much the owners are willing to bend.

From an outside perspective this whole aggressive approach by the owners makes absolutely no sense. You have a product that is generating revenue better than it ever has, why the need for radical change? Part of the reason salaries and player's rights have gotten out of control is because of owners and GM's throwing these so called "terrible" contracts at players. The owners got what they wanted the first go around at this, everyone thought they won, its time to take some of the onus on why problems in the game are the way they are. Its time to stop blaming the players.

Either way, it should be interesting to see how things develop these next few weeks.

QuietOnTheFront is offline  
Old
08-12-2012, 06:59 PM
  #50
Qward
Moderator
Because! That's why!
 
Qward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Behind you, look out
Posts: 13,284
vCash: 265
Quote:
Originally Posted by MandyAlwaysKnows View Post
Clowe is a playmaker.
So you want to put a play maker with Spezza who is a better playmaker?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MandyAlwaysKnows View Post
Boyle >>> Gonchar, and Boyle can be moved for more as a rental than Gonchar
Typically trade players as rentals in the final year of their contract.
If we don't make the playoffs this year we can move Gonchar.
We would have to keep Boyle and trade him next year at the deadline. You know, year three of our three year rebuild. I was hoping we would have made the playoffs then.

Qward 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 08:44 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.