There's no way in hell that his footspeed improves past age 30.
I am specificfally looking at his skating stride, which I remember to be shorter/choppier last season compared to the video. That leaves me wondering if perhaps he was injured and is now healthy? It may be wishful thinking, but I'd be very happy if his skating speed recovers to the point that he is just considered slow.
Signed today with Tappara. Playing his first game against Kärpät (Demers, Turris, J.Jokinen) next wednesday.
Thought so. That'll be interesting, I suppose. I know it's been a lot harder of late to find streams for Finnish games, but I'll be trying for that one.
Except he didn't really move "half-way", let alone more than halfway, with this week's proposal. Some of their demands are just as unreasonable as what the NHL demanded with its very first proposal.
Except he didn't really move "half-way", let alone more than halfway, with this week's proposal. Some of their demands are just as unreasonable as what the NHL demanded with its very first proposal.
That's what you took out of that article.
Demonizing labor leadership is a common anti-union practice and negotiation "dirty trick" -- people need to ask themselves if they are falling victim to that and becoming useful tools.
A Washington Post columnist taking the union side? I'm shocked.
Of course Fehr is a skilled union negotiator. That article makes it seem like that's something that's lost on the owners who are stepping right into a trap, which is a joke.
Fehr is an egomaniac who doesn't realize the fundamental economic differences between hockey and the other 3 major sports. He is leading the players to Armaggedon and when the dust has settled, most of them will hate him just as much or more than they hate Bettman.
And in the end, the players are going to get nothing more than they could have negotiated 2 months ago. In the meantime, they will have thrown away a year or more of their career.
Demonizing labor leadership is a common anti-union practice and negotiation "dirty trick" -- people need to ask themselves if they are falling victim to that and becoming useful tools.
Are you actually reading the press, because neither Bettman or Daly have 'demonized' Donald Fehr at all. In fact, they've been incredibly restrained. They're happy just leaving him twist in the wind.
Demonizing labor leadership is a common anti-union practice and negotiation "dirty trick" -- people need to ask themselves if they are falling victim to that and becoming useful tools.
I already knew the rest (who/what Fehr is and how labor negotiations work).
Fehr is hurting the players more than he is helping them, and they are too stupid to figure that out.
1) Teams in this league are by and large losing money, or at least not making any. They are not going to agree to lose MORE money, why would they?
2) The players are losing more money everyday than the owners are, a lot more, and that is money they will never recoup (because of their finite career lengths). They have lost FAR more money than they can ever hope to negotiate.
3) The players are dwindling away another year of their career, which is already short. For many players, it may be their final season they have wasted.
Beyond stupid, and frankly I am 100% on the owners side at this point. I get what the players are trying to do, but arguing on principal at your own expense is absolutely stupid.
Hockey-related revenue is defined in such a way so as to maximize the appearance of losses on the hockey side.
You could plugs "Sharks" and "SVSE" in there and probably write the same story.
That's not to say that there aren't a couple of teams who could never make a profit under the current system with a salary floor so close to the cap. But why is propping up a team in Phoenix (for example) where the numbers don't pencil out the responsibility of the players?
Hockey-related revenue is defined in such a way so as to maximize the appearance of losses on the hockey side.
You could plugs "Sharks" and "SVSE" in there and probably write the same story.
That's not to say that there aren't a couple of teams who could never make a profit under the current system with a salary floor so close to the cap. But why is propping up a team in Phoenix (for example) where the numbers don't pencil out the responsibility of the players?
A "couple" is just as bad as "by and large". Try the middle ground.
You can also look at the players offer which came after the PA had 76k pages from the NHL. Their rev sharing was targeted at 7 teams. That is 7 that are in real trouble.
Then you can go to the fact that the middle tier is more or less breaking even. That is all well and good, but investors are generally looking for a 5 to 7 per cent return on their investment. The teams won't exist without investors. We have also seen GB have trouble finding new owners. And some of his finds weren't so good. Some owners even managed to flaunt Bettman's advice for no more than 50% debt (which is not a good number in itself). An investment should be worthwhile at about 80%.
And yes, I agree with the recent article that some teams like Florida and the Sharks are gateways to the arena lease. Essentially loss leaders on something that is a moneymaker. IIRC, this past season with the $15mil loss likely resulted in a cash call for the Sharks. A bit more than their SVSE business could support. To truly find out on teams, it is better to follow the cash calls rather than profit and loss.
You know one thing I just realized I'm missing the most because of this lockout, hearing Randy and Drew call a Hockey game. I don't suppose they can call a Bulls game can they? Did they lock out the announcers too?
I just know there's more than just a hockey game when I'm listening to Randy and Drew and this year just doesn't feel the same.
Lockouts / lost seasons are hard on players at or near the end of their carriers. Who do we think on the sharks will be done as a result of this years mess?
2012 law paper on Anti-trust vs labor law by Feldman. Looks at NFL and NBA cases of decertification and the legal questions raised.
That assumes the NHL attempts to maintain status quo in the event of decertification and simply litigate, which is unlikely. One thing is for sure, if the players decertify, they will be signing their own economic death warrants.
That assumes the NHL attempts to maintain status quo in the event of decertification and simply litigate, which is unlikely. One thing is for sure, if the players decertify, they will be signing their own economic death warrants.
I get the impression the players (many of them who are filthy rich themselves) see the filthy rich team owners and think "He's making too much money" and feel entitled to more. What they apparently do not realize is that owner is filthy rich despite owning a hockey team, not because of it. He's filthy rich because he made smart investments and good business decisions, like not overpaying employees in an unprofitable business....
I am the only person that thinks the NHLPA should be like any other union where the players aren't allowed to work elsewhere while there's a strike? That would certainly up their motivation to get something done ...
I am the only person that thinks the NHLPA should be like any other union where the players aren't allowed to work elsewhere while there's a strike? That would certainly up their motivation to get something done ...
