HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Los Angeles Kings
Notices

The lockout thread

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-16-2012, 11:45 PM
  #476
Scottkmlps
Moderator
 
Scottkmlps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Ladysmith, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,384
vCash: 500
Obviously, they'll be some negotiations on other aspects of this proposal like the UFA age/years of service, but if the NHLPA turns down the 50/50 split part of the proposal....whoah boy, will they ever receive fan backlash. It won't be pretty.

Scottkmlps is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 11:49 PM
  #477
KopitarFAN
Reno Sucks!
 
KopitarFAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Lost Wages, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 9,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottkmlps View Post
Obviously, they'll be some negotiations on other aspects of this proposal like the UFA age/years of service, but if the NHLPA turns down the 50/50 split part of the proposal....whoah boy, will they ever receive fan backlash. It won't be pretty.
That's exactly why I think this will get done, probably not this deal, but this financial structure.

Things like what you mentioned can and will be negotiated, but I have hard time seeing this not getting done by the 26th or 27th.

KopitarFAN is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 11:52 PM
  #478
KingLB
Registered User
 
KingLB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 7,157
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobafettish View Post
minnesota and new jersey lol if this happens
You do realize the Kings have a few of these deals as well....

KingLB is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 12:00 AM
  #479
bobafettish*
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,961
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingLB View Post
You do realize the Kings have a few of these deals as well....
not really, i see richards quick with maybe the exeption of carter playing out their contracts.

bobafettish* is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 12:02 AM
  #480
Quattro
Registered User
 
Quattro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 4,157
vCash: 500
$70.2M to $59.9M is a HUGE drop in one year - can't see the players agreeing to that - Actually there's quite a few OWNERS who might have a problem with that - lol

Quattro is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 12:09 AM
  #481
Holden Caulfield
Moderator
Perennial Skeptic
 
Holden Caulfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,812
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quattro View Post
$70.2M to $59.9M is a HUGE drop in one year - can't see the players agreeing to that - Actually there's quite a few OWNERS who might have a problem with that - lol
The agreement allows 70 million cap for the first year. If revenues stay flat, the players will lose in escrow. But teams will be able to operate.

I imagine the counter offer from the PA will be something like 55-53x(length of agreement). This will lessen the impact from the first year, but based on this concession I think that no matter what the cap will be 70 million this season.

__________________


Holden Caulfield is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 12:11 AM
  #482
onlyalad
Registered User
 
onlyalad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 4,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quattro View Post
$70.2M to $59.9M is a HUGE drop in one year - can't see the players agreeing to that - Actually there's quite a few OWNERS who might have a problem with that - lol
UFAs next year are going to hate it. Also i see a few albatross contracts going to the AHL or being bought out. I dont think "injured" takes them off the books.

onlyalad is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 12:35 AM
  #483
SCARFACE909
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobafettish View Post
not really, i see richards quick with maybe the exeption of carter playing out their contracts.
Well according to McKenzie; "Sorry I lied. Important note on back-diving contracts (BDC). If player traded, then later in deal retires, original club on hook for cap hit"

So does that mean technically, Philly is on the hook for their deals since they're the ones who SIGNED them to those deals and not the Kings?

SCARFACE909 is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 12:48 AM
  #484
Coach Parker
Stanley Cup Champion
 
Coach Parker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCARFACE909 View Post
Well according to McKenzie; "Sorry I lied. Important note on back-diving contracts (BDC). If player traded, then later in deal retires, original club on hook for cap hit"

So does that mean technically, Philly is on the hook for their deals since they're the ones who SIGNED them to those deals and not the Kings?
Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie

Any existing deal in excess of 5 yrs would carry cap hit in every year of contract, even if player were to retire with year(s) left.

Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie

In other words, the benefit clubs thought they were getting by reducing AAV with back-diving deals/bogus end yrs would be reduced/negated.

Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie

Sorry I lied. Important note on back-diving contracts (BDC). If player traded, then later in deal retires, original club on hook for cap hit

That is how I understood it as well. Not only would they be on the hook for Bryzgalov and Pronger but they would also be on the hook for Richards and Carter if those two retired early. Heck, I am trying to find out if they would also be on the hook for Weber because they created that contract he signed.

Coach Parker is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 01:47 AM
  #485
Chazz Reinhold
Registered User
 
Chazz Reinhold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Stanley Cup
Country: United States
Posts: 6,936
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach Parker View Post
Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie

Any existing deal in excess of 5 yrs would carry cap hit in every year of contract, even if player were to retire with year(s) left.

Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie

In other words, the benefit clubs thought they were getting by reducing AAV with back-diving deals/bogus end yrs would be reduced/negated.

Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie

Sorry I lied. Important note on back-diving contracts (BDC). If player traded, then later in deal retires, original club on hook for cap hit

That is how I understood it as well. Not only would they be on the hook for Bryzgalov and Pronger but they would also be on the hook for Richards and Carter if those two retired early. Heck, I am trying to find out if they would also be on the hook for Weber because they created that contract he signed.
That would be epically hilarious if that clause is allowed in the new CBA.

Chazz Reinhold is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 09:19 AM
  #486
Jason Lewis
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Jason Lewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,029
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chazz Reinhold View Post
That would be epically hilarious if that clause is allowed in the new CBA.
Why wouldn't it be? It protects the owners from themselves in terms of too lavish of spending and cap circumvention. It would pretty much all but stop those long term deals with incredibly low pro-rated AAVs in the final years.

I think that's really what the players were asking for all along, for the owners to be more responsible with their spending.

In all honesty I think there was some internal dissension among the GM's. There is too big a gap between the haves and the have-nots.


Full proposal got released this morning actually. This is an interesting move.


http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=643572

Jason Lewis is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 09:28 AM
  #487
tigermask48
Maniacal Laugh
 
tigermask48's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: R'Lyeh, Antarctica
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 2,777
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quattro View Post
$70.2M to $59.9M is a HUGE drop in one year - can't see the players agreeing to that - Actually there's quite a few OWNERS who might have a problem with that - lol
There is 0% of the players agreeing to that. Fehr hates salary caps in every form, and the league is asking him to have the cap reduced leaving a lot of teams having to cut trade players? Not happening.

tigermask48 is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 09:33 AM
  #488
Jason Lewis
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Jason Lewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,029
vCash: 500
Don Fehr's letter to the players, reaction from the offer.


http://www.tsn.ca/blogs/bob_mckenzie/?id=407542


The fact that the players want to take zero pay-cuts is....frustrating to say the least. I hope they actually negotiate off this and don't just turn it down.

Jason Lewis is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 09:46 AM
  #489
The Tikkanen
Pest
 
The Tikkanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Yorba Linda
Country: United States
Posts: 6,407
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to The Tikkanen
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Lewis View Post
Don Fehr's letter to the players, reaction from the offer.


http://www.tsn.ca/blogs/bob_mckenzie/?id=407542


The fact that the players want to take zero pay-cuts is....frustrating to say the least. I hope they actually negotiate off this and don't just turn it down.
The NHLPA is going to have to go on the offensive rather than just reject this offer. They will look like fools and the fans will turn on them.

The Tikkanen is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 10:06 AM
  #490
no name
Registered User
 
no name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 11,753
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottkmlps View Post
Obviously, they'll be some negotiations on other aspects of this proposal like the UFA age/years of service, but if the NHLPA turns down the 50/50 split part of the proposal....whoah boy, will they ever receive fan backlash. It won't be pretty.
Owners were smart. They made the 50/50 in bright lights so now the players have no choice but to accept that aspect. Good for them and good for expiditing negotiations.

I'm cautiously optimistic.

no name is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 10:09 AM
  #491
no name
Registered User
 
no name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 11,753
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach Parker View Post
Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie

Any existing deal in excess of 5 yrs would carry cap hit in every year of contract, even if player were to retire with year(s) left.

Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie

In other words, the benefit clubs thought they were getting by reducing AAV with back-diving deals/bogus end yrs would be reduced/negated.

Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie

Sorry I lied. Important note on back-diving contracts (BDC). If player traded, then later in deal retires, original club on hook for cap hit

That is how I understood it as well. Not only would they be on the hook for Bryzgalov and Pronger but they would also be on the hook for Richards and Carter if those two retired early. Heck, I am trying to find out if they would also be on the hook for Weber because they created that contract he signed.
This should not be the case because the trading club knowingly picked up the established contract. They should then assume all responsibility in my mind.

no name is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 10:24 AM
  #492
no name
Registered User
 
no name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 11,753
vCash: 500
"The Players' Share is reduced to 50 per cent from 57 per cent immediately -- this season. This is a reduction in the share of 12.3 per cent. On last year's revenue numbers, this would mean that players' salaries would be cut by about $231 million."


This is Fehr intentionaly misleading people. He is carefully wording this to his players and media making it look like the Players will actually be walking away from 12% due to the 7% negotiated split loss and stacking the 5% revenue bump last year. The problem is that that 5% has already been dished out with the bump in salary cap. The players will not be asked to give that money back since there are no roll backs.

The NHL owners will not be dropping the salary cap since this will create unthinkable issues on their own teams. No rollbacks, no salary cap drops makes this statement completely false and an attempt to go on an offensive sort of speak. Not a good start.

no name is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 10:50 AM
  #493
Kings4thecup
Registered User
 
Kings4thecup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 473
vCash: 500
The league's offer seems more than fair, and should be a great basis for a NHLPA counter-offer, but from Fehr's response, I'm not convinced he(the players) feel the same way. We'll see if the players come back with anything promising, but I'm not too convinced of that.

Kings4thecup is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 11:20 AM
  #494
tigermask48
Maniacal Laugh
 
tigermask48's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: R'Lyeh, Antarctica
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 2,777
vCash: 500
THis...

Quote:
"The Players' Share is reduced to 50 per cent from 57 per cent immediately -- this season. This is a reduction in the share of 12.3 per cent. On last year's revenue numbers, this would mean that players' salaries would be cut by about $231 million."
And yet this...

Quote:
Players are willing to take reduced share going forward so that the NHL can grow out of whatever problems some franchises face.
Consider also the quotes about the "Make Whole" section, and Fehr's comments on record revenues and I think it's pretty clear he nitpicking finding the samllest things to complain about.

Seriously screw Fehr. I wouldn't be shocked to see the players sign this and then simply go on strike in the playoffs or some other ridiculousness. Both Bettman and Fehr need to go.

tigermask48 is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 11:30 AM
  #495
Chazz Reinhold
Registered User
 
Chazz Reinhold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Stanley Cup
Country: United States
Posts: 6,936
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Lewis View Post
Why wouldn't it be? It protects the owners from themselves in terms of too lavish of spending and cap circumvention. It would pretty much all but stop those long term deals with incredibly low pro-rated AAVs in the final years.

I think that's really what the players were asking for all along, for the owners to be more responsible with their spending.

In all honesty I think there was some internal dissension among the GM's. There is too big a gap between the haves and the have-nots.


Full proposal got released this morning actually. This is an interesting move.


http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=643572
I 100% I agree. My comment was aimed at the fact that Richards and Carter bring us a Cup, but the flyers will be stuck with their cap hit if they retire early. Not to mention Bryzgalov and potentially Weber depending how they determine the issue of offer sheets in this instance.

Chazz Reinhold is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 11:52 AM
  #496
Ron
Bandwagon Since 1967
 
Ron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brea, California
Country: United States
Posts: 7,335
vCash: 500
So much for the optimism I felt yesterday.

Pathetic.

http://www.tsn.ca/blogs/bob_mckenzie/?id=407542

__________________
Ron is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 12:06 PM
  #497
123slam
Registered User
 
123slam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron View Post
So much for the optimism I felt yesterday.

Pathetic.

http://www.tsn.ca/blogs/bob_mckenzie/?id=407542
Breathe. We will have hockey by Nov. 2.

123slam is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 12:21 PM
  #498
Sydor25
LA Kings
 
Sydor25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: North Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 21,828
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Sydor25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron View Post
So much for the optimism I felt yesterday.

Pathetic.

http://www.tsn.ca/blogs/bob_mckenzie/?id=407542
We won't know until the NHLPA gives their counter proposal. Media rhetoric doesn't mean anything at this point, it's just a negotiating tactic. Fehr wants the owners to think they they aren't close so that they can try and get more from the owners before voting.

If most of this proposal from the owners ends up in the "final" offer to save the 82 game season, I expect the NHLPA to hold a league-wide vote.

The NHLPA has to be very careful with their counter offer or they will lose the PR war and the owners will have the backing of the majority of fans to lock them out for another full season.

Sydor25 is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 12:34 PM
  #499
alpa
Yoda+Gandalf=Sutter
 
alpa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Sweden and Slovenia
Country: Slovenia
Posts: 4,723
vCash: 500
I BELIEVE , OH LORD I BELIEVE ....that we will have hockey nov 2

alpa is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 01:10 PM
  #500
Ron
Bandwagon Since 1967
 
Ron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brea, California
Country: United States
Posts: 7,335
vCash: 500
I don't think so, but you never know.

I rather see a banner raising at night, personally.

Ron 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 03:02 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.