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

2012-2013 Lockout Discussion Thread (Part II)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-20-2012, 04:55 PM
  #826
Brooklyn Ranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn, of course
Posts: 7,732
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAGLine View Post
Not everyone who is on an ELC. Hagelin is on an ELC but isn't eligible. It has to do with the waiver rules, which I can't cite of the top of my head. You can look it up in the CBA if you're interested.

As to whether they have to go, I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think they do. Several years ago the Rangers wanted to send Prucha down to work on his game, but he refused the assignment. I believe the Rangers could have fined him for that, or even terminated his contract, but they didn't. And I can't imagine any team would cause a stink if any player refused to report to the AHL during the lockout. I'm sure the NHLPA would have something to say if they did, and they don't need any more things to fight about right now.
Being waiver eligible depended on two factors: the age a player signs their professional contract and how many NHL games they've played in (including playoff games). Hagelin signed as a 22 year old and has played in 81 games--according to the chart I found on the Business of Hockey board (from the old CBA), he lost his waiver exemption because he's played in more than 60 games. McDonagh signed as a 21 year--he lost his waiver exemption after 80 games. The players from Edmonton all signed as 18 year olds. They are waiver exempt until they have played in 160 games--hence why they are still waiver exempt.

Here's a link to a thread where I have a post (#4) that has the table--I couldn't find the thread about the old CBA on the Business of Hockey board (it's probably a page or two behind the first page).

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...5#post53730465

Brooklyn Ranger is online now  
Old
09-20-2012, 06:54 PM
  #827
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,780
vCash: 500
Page 66 of the 2005 CBA has a chart for the waiver eligibility

Jeff Skinner signed his ELC as an 18 year old. Its 3 years and 160 games. He has played 146 NHL games. 14 NHL games from requiring waivers.

http://www.capgeek.com/waiver_calcul...=-1&Calculate=

The older the player signing his ELC,the fewer requirements to be waiver exempt/waiver eligible.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 07:19 PM
  #828
Dactyl
Registered User
 
Dactyl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 7,207
vCash: 500
is kreider the only guy that we have on the roster that can bypass waivers?

Dactyl is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 07:21 PM
  #829
Jabroni
The People's Champ
 
Jabroni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 6,560
vCash: 500
Not much of a surprise.

Quote:
Chris Botta ‏@ChrisBottaNHL
Expecting the cancellation of the rest of the NHL preseason by Tuesday morning.

Jabroni is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 07:30 PM
  #830
HatTrick Swayze
Tomato Potato
 
HatTrick Swayze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,297
vCash: 500
So when is the next "pressure point" when we may actually see some negotiating?

__________________
"Here we can see the agression of american people. They love fighting and guns. when they wont win they try to kill us all." -HalfOfFame
HatTrick Swayze is online now  
Old
09-20-2012, 07:37 PM
  #831
Jabroni
The People's Champ
 
Jabroni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 6,560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HatTrick Swayze View Post
So when is the next "pressure point" when we may actually see some negotiating?
One of the reliable Tweeters said he thinks around October 11th would be the next official CBA meeting.

Quote:
Dmitry Chesnokov ‏@dchesnokov
If I had to predict, the next formal round of negotiations will take place around October 11. #captainobvious #NHLlockout

Jabroni is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 07:47 PM
  #832
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HatTrick Swayze View Post
So when is the next "pressure point" when we may actually see some negotiating?
As soon as a precious dollar is about to be forfeited.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 08:21 PM
  #833
Oak
Hockey fan
 
Oak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 1,752
vCash: 50
Regardless of who is at fault here, I will never buy any NHL merchandise again. I highly doubt I will be taking any family to games anymore either. If my kids want games we will go see the Icedogs play when we're up there.

Oak is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 08:35 PM
  #834
robwrx04
Registered User
 
robwrx04's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: CT
Posts: 211
vCash: 500
Time to buy knockoff jerseys

robwrx04 is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 08:37 PM
  #835
Clowes Line
Cally's Chicken Parm
 
Clowes Line's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New Yawk
Country: United States
Posts: 12,544
vCash: 500
Ovechkin makes his debut with a bang:



Malkin makes his debut getting banged:


Clowes Line is offline  
Old
09-20-2012, 09:46 PM
  #836
NYRKING30
Registered User
 
NYRKING30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,857
vCash: 500
God this is painful, im already deep in hockey withdrawals. Oct 11thbetter not be the next official meeting. Ridiculous. I am a die hard fan but if I was a casual one, I would never watch another NHL game in my life.

NYRKING30 is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 12:25 AM
  #837
Giglio NYR15
Section 417
 
Giglio NYR15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,516
vCash: 500
The fact that they are not in a room everyday this week since monday shows neither sides really give a crap. Idc what either side says...past players, nhl writers, fans are saying go lock yourselves in a room. What an effin joke.

Giglio NYR15 is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 12:31 AM
  #838
Barbara Underhill
Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuke
 
Barbara Underhill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Montana
Country: United States
Posts: 13,120
vCash: 373
Kinda funny story apparently BoychuK hangs in my hometown sometimes. He told a guy he's one of the more overpaid players in the league and thinks a fair salary would be 200k but that the owners want to offer big contracts so that's what players sign.

Barbara Underhill is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 07:35 AM
  #839
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,008
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
I just think you're looking for excuses to shift the lack of leverage away from the players. You have to be filthy rich in the first place to buy any pro sports team. The revenue generated out of the team, for the great majority of these guys, is basically disposable. You really think they're going to be hurting by not opening the doors to their arenas for a couple of months? C'mon, get real.

Wait until you see what happens with that united players union once 3rd and 4th liners start missing paychecks.
No, I am not talking about shifting leverage to the players. I am talking about the pain being spread out between teh players and the owners.

The easiest argument that most people craft is the "filthy rich" argument. Most people see their own paychecks, then see what the owners are raking, and come up with the same exact conclusion that you do. That this is disposable income to them. They do not care becuase they make so much more than that. That cannot even be categorized as an argument. If you are working two jobs, and one of those jobs suddenly stopped giving you a paycheck, guess what? You feel it. I do not care if you make $100 million a year. If you suddenly go down to $90 million, then guess what? You FEEL it. I can even make a case that millionaires care about each basis point much more so than the main street folk.

New ownerships invested in the league. But they did not do so to take a bath in their first year of ownership with a payout that amounts to ZERO. That makes any other venture by them have to subsidize the lost income. Adn that is IF they even have another venture. Again, think that Tampa's shiny electronic new toy, purportedly one of the biggest in North America, came cheap? Do you think that the new ownership bought it out of the goodness of their heart? Owners rely on income. To say "The revenue generated out of the team, for the great majority of these guys, is basically disposable." is an utter fallacy. And, no offense, smacks of ignorance. I guarantee you that the revenue from owning an NHL team is not considered to be disposable income.

And statements like this "You really think they're going to be hurting by not opening the doors to their arenas for a couple of months? C'mon, get real." are no less ignorant. Do I think that an owner who makes ZERO for several months from not owning the NHL team is hurting? I absolutely do. I have no idea of how one could even begin to construe an argument that they do not hurt from this. It is one thing to make a case, like in 2004, that they owners loose less by not having a season. That was the case the last time. It is quite another to preach that, after having record setting revenues, that the owners feel absolutely nothing by missing several months of revenue. Revenue is not just for now. But revenue created is also for the future.

You say wait until the players start to miss checks. I agree with you. They will be hurting. But wait until the owners start to feel the joy of having generated NOTHING for an entire year. Again. And wait until the new owners, who came into the league guns blazing to spend, the first or second year of ownership without a red cent to finance their rebuild of arenas or support for the free agents or revenut to fund the future of the team.

I am not making an argument on who hurts more or who blinks first. I am simply saying that dismissing the loss that the owners will take this time out, is simply misleading and not representative of the population that knows what a business is like.

True Blue is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 09:09 AM
  #840
Hanke
Tortsless Rangers
 
Hanke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 4,185
vCash: 500
Ovie looks weird wearing #32.

Hanke is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 10:50 AM
  #841
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
No, I am not talking about shifting leverage to the players. I am talking about the pain being spread out between teh players and the owners.

The easiest argument that most people craft is the "filthy rich" argument. Most people see their own paychecks, then see what the owners are raking, and come up with the same exact conclusion that you do. That this is disposable income to them. They do not care becuase they make so much more than that. That cannot even be categorized as an argument. If you are working two jobs, and one of those jobs suddenly stopped giving you a paycheck, guess what? You feel it. I do not care if you make $100 million a year. If you suddenly go down to $90 million, then guess what? You FEEL it. I can even make a case that millionaires care about each basis point much more so than the main street folk.

New ownerships invested in the league. But they did not do so to take a bath in their first year of ownership with a payout that amounts to ZERO. That makes any other venture by them have to subsidize the lost income. Adn that is IF they even have another venture. Again, think that Tampa's shiny electronic new toy, purportedly one of the biggest in North America, came cheap? Do you think that the new ownership bought it out of the goodness of their heart? Owners rely on income. To say "The revenue generated out of the team, for the great majority of these guys, is basically disposable." is an utter fallacy. And, no offense, smacks of ignorance. I guarantee you that the revenue from owning an NHL team is not considered to be disposable income.

And statements like this "You really think they're going to be hurting by not opening the doors to their arenas for a couple of months? C'mon, get real." are no less ignorant. Do I think that an owner who makes ZERO for several months from not owning the NHL team is hurting? I absolutely do. I have no idea of how one could even begin to construe an argument that they do not hurt from this. It is one thing to make a case, like in 2004, that they owners loose less by not having a season. That was the case the last time. It is quite another to preach that, after having record setting revenues, that the owners feel absolutely nothing by missing several months of revenue. Revenue is not just for now. But revenue created is also for the future.

You say wait until the players start to miss checks. I agree with you. They will be hurting. But wait until the owners start to feel the joy of having generated NOTHING for an entire year. Again. And wait until the new owners, who came into the league guns blazing to spend, the first or second year of ownership without a red cent to finance their rebuild of arenas or support for the free agents or revenut to fund the future of the team.

I am not making an argument on who hurts more or who blinks first. I am simply saying that dismissing the loss that the owners will take this time out, is simply misleading and not representative of the population that knows what a business is like.
Theres absolutely no reason to take this and turn it into a much wider ranging standard of living argument. But, speaking of ignorance, to even compare a guy working 2 jobs just to eat and a guy making $100M is laughable. Sure, they both feel it, but which ones feels it more if their income drops?

Which brings me back to hockey. I never said that the owners wouldnt feel the effects of a work stoppage. But, considering half the teams in the NHL don't turn a profit, I dont see how you can lie your way to saying that at least some owners aren't crying that they have to keep the doors shuttered until a better deal for them is hammered out. The players, on the other hand, get paid or dont get paid - simple as that.

The owners just voted unanimously for a lockout. If they're concerned about their financial situation, they sure as hell aint showing it. And do you know why? Because they know an extended work stoppage will hurt the players far, far more than it will hurt them.


Last edited by Bleed Ranger Blue: 09-21-2012 at 10:57 AM.
Bleed Ranger Blue is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 11:00 AM
  #842
pwoz
Registered User
 
pwoz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NJ
Posts: 2,486
vCash: 500
Will NHL 14 have CBA mode so that I can just leave the game on the shelf as it collects dust?

pwoz is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 11:33 AM
  #843
dtrap
Registered User
 
dtrap's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Charleston, SC
Country: United States
Posts: 1,720
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to dtrap
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwoz View Post
Will NHL 14 have CBA mode so that I can just leave the game on the shelf as it collects dust?
To paraphrase a buddy of mine "NHL 13 already has this mode. You simply break the disc in half and no one gets to play."

dtrap is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 11:35 AM
  #844
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,008
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Theres absolutely no reason to take this and turn it into a much wider ranging standard of living argument. But, speaking of ignorance, to even compare a guy working 2 jobs just to eat and a guy making $100M is laughable. Sure, they both feel it, but which ones feels it more if their income drops?
This is not about standard of living. I believe that it is ignorant to write off a $10 loss and say that it is not felt. This is not Main St vs. Wall St. But EVERYONE feels money loss. I am not comparing a $100m guy to a blue collar, two job worker. But I am saying that who are you to say to the $100m guy that his loss of $10m is petty cash and simply disposable income?
Quote:
Which brings me back to hockey. I never said that the owners wouldnt feel the effects of a work stoppage. But, considering half the teams in the NHL don't turn a profit, I dont see how you can lie your way to saying that at least some owners aren't crying that they have to keep the doors shuttered until a better deal for them is hammered out.
It is not as simple as simply saying those that are turning a profit now vs. not turning a profit now. Again, I take Tampa and Buffalo as examples. Not sure if they made or lost money last year. But there is new ownership in both places. Both came in expecting to actually spend money, unlike the past. Those expenditures ALSO depend upon revenue. In Tampa's case, they have done work on the home rink. Without revenue to fund the expenditure, that NOW turns into a definite loss.
Quote:
The players, on the other hand, get paid or dont get paid - simple as that.
And there are more than enough owners that loose revenue - simple as that. And I challenge the thinking that what they loose is simply nothing more than discretionary income that they do not need. Or planned on utlizing based on what they have already done and planned on doing in the future.
Quote:
The owners just voted unanimously for a lockout. If they're concerned about their financial situation, they sure as hell aint showing it.
And the union has said ok, have it your way. If they're concerned about their financial situation, they sure as hell ain't showing it.
Quote:
And do you know why? Because they know an extended work stoppage will hurt the players far, far more than it will hurt them.
They, like it or not, more than likely realize that cutting off your nose to spite your face is rather foolish. This is not 2004.

True Blue is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 11:56 AM
  #845
GordonGecko
Stanley Cup 2015
 
GordonGecko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: New York City
Country: United States
Posts: 3,721
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riche16 View Post
Owners learned that locking out is THE proven method to getting what they want. It's now their strategy going in. Bettman was talking about a lockout months before it actually happened.
And it's funny because the owners can't even bring themselves to say "lockout". Here's the language from the League (note the bolded part):

"NHL Announces Cancellation of Preseason Schedule Through September 30

The National Hockey League announced Wednesday the cancellation of the 2012 preseason schedule through September 30. In addition, the 2012 Kraft Hockeyville preseason game, scheduled for October 3 in Belleville, Ontario, has been postponed to 2013.

The cancellation of the schedule was necessary because of the absence of a Collective Bargaining Agreement between the NHL Players’ Association and the NHL."

GordonGecko is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 12:01 PM
  #846
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,057
vCash: 500
Already desperate for hockey, I just sat through the Rangers Game 5 loss to the Devils on NHL Network this morning.

wolfgaze is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 12:05 PM
  #847
I Eat Crow
Fear The Mullet
 
I Eat Crow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 6,076
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Nashty View Post
Kinda funny story apparently BoychuK hangs in my hometown sometimes. He told a guy he's one of the more overpaid players in the league and thinks a fair salary would be 200k but that the owners want to offer big contracts so that's what players sign.
In a world where Jeff frickin' Finger can sign a $3 million/year contract, Boychuk deserves every penny in comparison. But he's absolutely right...it's a joke how much contracts for 3rd/4th liners and bottom pairing d-men are inflated.

I Eat Crow is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 12:55 PM
  #848
McRanger
Registered User
 
McRanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
This is not about standard of living. I believe that it is ignorant to write off a $10 loss and say that it is not felt. This is not Main St vs. Wall St. But EVERYONE feels money loss. I am not comparing a $100m guy to a blue collar, two job worker. But I am saying that who are you to say to the $100m guy that his loss of $10m is petty cash and simply disposable income?
I think you mean discretionary income. Money after taxes and personal necessities. And unless a person needs an extremely expensive robotic exosuit to survive I am pretty sure what you describes falls into discretionary income.

McRanger is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 01:20 PM
  #849
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,008
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by McRanger View Post
I think you mean discretionary income. Money after taxes and personal necessities. And unless a person needs an extremely expensive robotic exosuit to survive I am pretty sure what you describes falls into discretionary income.
Correct and I stand corrected. I thinkt discretionary was going through my head, and disposable came out.

True Blue is offline  
Old
09-21-2012, 02:09 PM
  #850
IBleedNYRBlue
Registered User
 
IBleedNYRBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 2,780
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jabroni1994 View Post
One of the reliable Tweeters said he thinks around October 11th would be the next official CBA meeting.
This has to be a joke, right?

10/11 the next meeting? Are they ****ing serious?

IBleedNYRBlue 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 09:46 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.