HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Chicago Blackhawks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

And we are locked out again (No Progress ,, Talks collapse)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-17-2012, 01:37 PM
  #301
MagicSlap*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
I'm changing my prediction yesterday of the season starting in December to no season at all and those people saying maybe part or all of next year gone actually are starting to make sense.
LOL season will start Nov 2

MagicSlap* is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 01:38 PM
  #302
Callidusblackhawk
Registered User
 
Callidusblackhawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Glen Ellyn, Illinois
Country: United States
Posts: 512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagicSlap View Post
Do all people in the U.S. agree with every bill that's passed? I'm sure a few of the owners are VERY pissed but it's about group rule.
Yeah looks like i might have overestimated the amount of teams that would get completely ****ed over like the Hawks would. Looks like it's basically just Chi, Pit, Minn, and NYR that get really ****ed.

Callidusblackhawk is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 01:39 PM
  #303
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,810
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagicSlap View Post
It's not like what is due to the player's under their existing contracts is going to change though. Hossa, Keith, etc. will still be making all their money. It just negatively impacts the teams that signed them.

"I'm having a hard time believing all of the owners wanted this deal, what does Detroit and Minn's cap look like under the new deal? Weber's cap hit is probably pretty insane too..."

Do all people in the U.S. agree with every bill that's passed? I'm sure a few of the owners are VERY pissed but it's about group rule.
Yes, but the players aren't unaware idiots either. Duncan Keith, Marian Hossa, Ryan Suter, Zach Parise, Ilya Kovalchuk, etc all know that if the highest paid years of their contracts become the actual caphit, it will be detrimental to the team they've signed with.. and part of the reason they signed those contracts, outside of long-term security, was the chance to play for a talented team, while getting paid what they think they're worth, at a reasonable caphit that works out for themselves, and the team that's trying to save capspace in order to retain/bring in other players.

I just don't think there's any chance the players will be in favor of contracts signed in the previous CBA being subject to the rules of the new CBA. We'll see, but I don't think that's unreasonable.

HockeySensible is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 01:47 PM
  #304
MagicSlap*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HossTheBoss View Post
Yes, but the players aren't unaware idiots either. Duncan Keith, Marian Hossa, Ryan Suter, Zach Parise, Ilya Kovalchuk, etc all know that if the highest paid years of their contracts become the actual caphit, it will be detrimental to the team they've signed with.. and part of the reason they signed those contracts, outside of long-term security, was the chance to play for a talented team, while getting paid what they think they're worth, at a reasonable caphit that works out for themselves, and the team that's trying to save capspace in order to retain/bring in other players.

I just don't think there's any chance the players will be in favor of contracts signed in the previous CBA being subject to the rules of the new CBA. We'll see, but I don't think that's unreasonable.
"We are proposing that all years of existing long-term contracts in excess of five (5) years be counted against a Club's Cap regardless of whether or where a Player is playing. While such contracts (and Cap charges) can be traded during their terms, in the event a Player subsequently retires or ceases to play, the effective Cap charge would revert to the Club that originally entered into the contract. This proposal is consistent with our other proposals intended to address the harmful effects of long-term, front-loaded, "back-diving" contracts."

Doesn't say anything about the cap hit becoming the highest year of actual salary.

MagicSlap* is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 01:55 PM
  #305
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,810
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagicSlap View Post
"We are proposing that all years of existing long-term contracts in excess of five (5) years be counted against a Club's Cap regardless of whether or where a Player is playing. While such contracts (and Cap charges) can be traded during their terms, in the event a Player subsequently retires or ceases to play, the effective Cap charge would revert to the Club that originally entered into the contract. This proposal is consistent with our other proposals intended to address the harmful effects of long-term, front-loaded, "back-diving" contracts."

Doesn't say anything about the cap hit becoming the highest year of actual salary.
So, are Keith's and Hossa's caphits going to be effected or not? I thought how caphits get divided up was changing, but is it or isn't it? I don't see anything in there to suggest it is.. only that, if Hossa were to retire at 38 or 39, as Chicago "planned" that his caphit would still count against Chicago, whether he reitres in Chicago or someone else... which still seems dumb to me, but as long as Chicago isn't being negatively effected today, it's not as bad.

HockeySensible is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 01:59 PM
  #306
Sir Psycho T
More Cowbell!
 
Sir Psycho T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Redwood City, CA
Posts: 3,628
vCash: 500
Fehrs letter to the players proves that

1. he is an idiot who was fired for a reason from the baseball union and the NHLPA was stupid enough to hire him. Players will lose 1.6 billion over the terms of the deal. Well, yes of the 57% deal was still in place but since there is no deal the players are making 0. I am no math wizard 50% of anything is a hell of a lot more then 0% of nothing.

2. That the NHL is dead, players are clearly more worried about what they get paid even if it harms the league they play for and the fans who pay their salaries. Screw the health of the league and the hard working people who bust their butts every day making 1/1000 of what I make, pay me 8 figures to play a game or I am leaving, meanwhile they spoon feed us this crap about only playing for the love of the game and only caring about us the fans, don't piss on me and tell me it's raining.

Sir Psycho T is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 02:02 PM
  #307
Illinihockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 14,355
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagicSlap View Post
"We are proposing that all years of existing long-term contracts in excess of five (5) years be counted against a Club's Cap regardless of whether or where a Player is playing. While such contracts (and Cap charges) can be traded during their terms, in the event a Player subsequently retires or ceases to play, the effective Cap charge would revert to the Club that originally entered into the contract. This proposal is consistent with our other proposals intended to address the harmful effects of long-term, front-loaded, "back-diving" contracts."

Doesn't say anything about the cap hit becoming the highest year of actual salary.
I think I caused this confusion because I misread a tweet when all of this was coming out yesterday. To be fair to me, I may have actually read this but it was someone on twitter that was confused. So I think maybe all of this was a lot of hand wringing caused me.

That said, the Hawks will be right at the cap if they have to include Olesz on the roster with only 18 guys signed in year 2. They will have to shed players which means you'll either be dealing core guys for picks/prospects or you will be bundling picks/prospects with bad players (Frolik, Olesz, etc) just to get rid of them.

Illinihockey is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 02:03 PM
  #308
IU Hawks fan
They call me 'IU'
 
IU Hawks fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: No longer IU
Country: United States
Posts: 18,549
vCash: 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Psycho T View Post
Fehrs letter to the players proves that

1. he is an idiot who was fired for a reason from the baseball union and the NHLPA was stupid enough to hire him.
.
Uhh...he wasn't fired by the MLBPA, he stepped down. Was ready for a new challenge...

IU Hawks fan is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 02:07 PM
  #309
MagicSlap*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HossTheBoss View Post
So, are Keith's and Hossa's caphits going to be effected or not? I thought how caphits get divided up was changing, but is it or isn't it? I don't see anything in there to suggest it is.. only that, if Hossa were to retire at 38 or 39, as Chicago "planned" that his caphit would still count against Chicago, whether he reitres in Chicago or someone else... which still seems dumb to me, but as long as Chicago isn't being negatively effected today, it's not as bad.
Correct, Chicago is on the hook for Campbell's, Hossa's and Keith's current cap hit if they retire no matter what team they play for.

MagicSlap* is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 02:11 PM
  #310
Illinihockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 14,355
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagicSlap View Post
Correct, Chicago is on the hook for Campbell's, Hossa's and Keith's current cap hit if they retire no matter what team they play for.
This is why Canuck fans think Luongo's value just went up a ton. A team can trade for him, then if he retires in 4 years, the Canucks eat his cap hit for the next 5 years.

Illinihockey is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 02:23 PM
  #311
coldsteelonice84
Registered User
 
coldsteelonice84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 25,337
vCash: 10592
Quote:
Originally Posted by Illinihockey View Post
This is why Canuck fans think Luongo's value just went up a ton. A team can trade for him, then if he retires in 4 years, the Canucks eat his cap hit for the next 5 years.
And that creates a new kind of circumvention. Trade for a player just to make life a living hell on him and force him to retire and sign a new deal in another league so the original team gets screwed. Yeah, great ****ing idea...NOT.

coldsteelonice84 is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 02:25 PM
  #312
MagicSlap*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
And that creates a new kind of circumvention. Trade for a player just to make life a living hell on him and force him to retire and sign a new deal in another league so the original team gets screwed. Yeah, great ****ing idea...NOT.
Why would the teams trade their players in this case?

MagicSlap* is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 02:31 PM
  #313
coldsteelonice84
Registered User
 
coldsteelonice84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 25,337
vCash: 10592
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagicSlap View Post
Why would the teams trade their players in this case?
To get a return of good young players / picks since they know they are going to need cheap talent to operate under the reduced cap after said player retires.

coldsteelonice84 is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 02:34 PM
  #314
MagicSlap*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
To get a return of good young players / picks since they know they are going to need cheap talent to operate under the reduced cap after said player retires.
Why would a team give up good young players and picks just to run one player into the ground and "screw over the other team?"

Seems like a pretty dumb thing to do.

MagicSlap* is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 02:38 PM
  #315
BobbyJet
Registered User
 
BobbyJet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Dundas, Ontario. Can
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,147
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagicSlap View Post
Correct, Chicago is on the hook for Campbell's, Hossa's and Keith's current cap hit if they retire no matter what team they play for.

This will slam shut a rather gaping loop hole that was being repeatedly exploited to sign top players. However, I canít see it applying to contracts that were signed under the old CBA. That sounds dumb to me. Whatís done is done, with the exception of revenue percentages (which most certainly will change in this deal)

BobbyJet is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 02:45 PM
  #316
Atomic Punk
Mean Streets
 
Atomic Punk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Panama
Country: United States
Posts: 8,775
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyJet View Post
This will slam shut a rather gaping loop hole that was being repeatedly exploited to sign top players. However, I canít see it applying to contracts that were signed under the old CBA. That sounds dumb to me. Whatís done is done, with the exception of revenue percentages (which most certainly will change in this deal)
It also seems stupid to do to one of the few money making organizations around.

Atomic Punk is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 02:53 PM
  #317
coldsteelonice84
Registered User
 
coldsteelonice84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 25,337
vCash: 10592
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagicSlap View Post
Why would a team give up good young players and picks just to run one player into the ground and "screw over the other team?"

Seems like a pretty dumb thing to do.
Obviously it wouldn't be the only reason. They would want the player too. But when Luongo is signed for another 10 years, you can use him to help your team for 5 or 6, then put the hammer down and kill Vancouver.

coldsteelonice84 is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 03:44 PM
  #318
MagicSlap*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
Obviously it wouldn't be the only reason. They would want the player too. But when Luongo is signed for another 10 years, you can use him to help your team for 5 or 6, then put the hammer down and kill Vancouver.
You're just so

MagicSlap* is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 03:48 PM
  #319
BBSeabs27
#freeseabs
 
BBSeabs27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 2,311
vCash: 500
So the consensus of the players today: **** the owners proposal. We like the 50-50 HRR split and thats it. Owners manipulating fans/media. We're probably not going to make a counter proposal and there isn't going to be a hockey season, but lets keep blaming the owners.

BBSeabs27 is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 03:51 PM
  #320
MagicSlap*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBSeabs27 View Post
So the consensus of the players today: **** the owners proposal. We like the 50-50 HRR split and thats it. Owners manipulating fans/media. We're probably not going to make a counter proposal and there isn't going to be a hockey season, but lets keep blaming the owners.
Consensus of me today: **** off NHLPA, seriously is there a bigger group of entitled cry babies than these guys?

MagicSlap* is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 03:56 PM
  #321
IU Hawks fan
They call me 'IU'
 
IU Hawks fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: No longer IU
Country: United States
Posts: 18,549
vCash: 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBSeabs27 View Post
So the consensus of the players today: **** the owners proposal. We like the 50-50 HRR split and thats it. Owners manipulating fans/media. We're probably not going to make a counter proposal and there isn't going to be a hockey season, but lets keep blaming the owners.
If they like the 50-50, they can get this done fairly quick, IMO.

IU Hawks fan is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 03:58 PM
  #322
BBSeabs27
#freeseabs
 
BBSeabs27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 2,311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagicSlap View Post
Consensus of me today: **** off NHLPA, seriously is there a bigger group of entitled cry babies than these guys?
I agree. I can see where the PA is coming from in certain aspects, but they make it seem like they are getting ***** up the ass by this proposal. David backes compared his 4.5 million dollars to that of someone making $50,000. Like wtf?! Dude, 20% pay cut for you is $900,000. Wow, so you're down to making 3.6 million. Man, sucks to be you, i dont think you can even buy groceries. Like, come on?! Seriously?! The players are comparing their MILLIONS of dollars to an average persons salary?? No wonder nothing is getting done, they cry poor when they are far from it.

The owners proposal doesn't only have the players losing SOME money, it has owners losing money as well. The players are going to lose money in the end and they need to realize this now. There is no way they can gain money from reducing their share 7%. Should the owners have made the offer public? No, its immature and is showing the NHLPA that they really aren't that serious about negotiating.

BBSeabs27 is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 04:31 PM
  #323
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,212
vCash: 500
Look at it from a players POV.

For example, Hossa makes 8.9mil for 6yrs and 3mil for another 3years, for a total of 64mil.

Now, under this new CBA proposed, Chicago only wants to sign him to a 5yr, 6.9mil contract because they are worried he will retire in 7 yrs.

So, Hossa loses out on 30mil here...how would you like to lose out on that much money?

I don't blame the players one bit for not liking the deal as a whole.

Also, the owners should of made this proposal in July..but they waited this long so the PA would look bad if they didnt take it. This proposal to an avg person looks good, because it says 50/50. But in reality, its a pretty ****** proposal.

Hawkaholic is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 05:12 PM
  #324
BobbyJet
Registered User
 
BobbyJet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Dundas, Ontario. Can
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,147
vCash: 500
/\ yeah, poor Hoss losing a fraction of his $ 64 million. Some of these players are in dreamland.. If they don't sign in the next 9 days, they will lose much more than the fraction they are sacrificing now.

TBH, I'm shocked the NHL made this move. It's all up to Fehr now, imo ..... the players will likely follow him to the promised land and his ego may rule. The NHL has pretty much gone as far as they are going to go and will have little tolerance for any wiggle room at this point. Those players that were around in 2005 should be smart enough to know what is really at stake here.


Edit:
After seeing Fehr's and the players reactions they clearly think they have the NHL on the run. Hopefully it's just part of the negotiating game ... but I am not as optimistic as I was. Disgusted in fact.


Last edited by BobbyJet: 10-17-2012 at 05:40 PM. Reason: disgusted
BobbyJet is offline  
Old
10-17-2012, 05:47 PM
  #325
MagicSlap*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
Look at it from a players POV.

For example, Hossa makes 8.9mil for 6yrs and 3mil for another 3years, for a total of 64mil.

Now, under this new CBA proposed, Chicago only wants to sign him to a 5yr, 6.9mil contract because they are worried he will retire in 7 yrs.

So, Hossa loses out on 30mil here...how would you like to lose out on that much money?

I don't blame the players one bit for not liking the deal as a whole.

Also, the owners should of made this proposal in July..but they waited this long so the PA would look bad if they didnt take it. This proposal to an avg person looks good, because it says 50/50. But in reality, its a pretty ****** proposal.
Oh yeah I really feel bad for the guy who is only going to be making $35 million, poor guy. Also, he'd likely receive a higher salary if there was a max contract length. I don't feel bad for any of these multimillionaires who play a sport for a living.

Yeah, cause the NHLPA has made ANY reasonable offers.

MagicSlap* 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 08:39 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.