HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Notices

CBA Negotiations III: Why Can't We All Just...Get Along?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-12-2012, 11:57 PM
  #526
FreshPerspective
We don't need one!
 
FreshPerspective's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Italy
Posts: 10,231
vCash: 500
Larry Brooks: Players Need to try Amnesty

Regardless....when this strike ends teams like the Flyers are going to have issues going forward..Meltzer had a blog post about it weeks ago and Larry Brook's summary below adds to the pain if no amnesty buyout is included

Like somebody joked ...Ed Snider better enjoy his new trophy wife b/c he won't be seeing the Stanley Cup trophy anytime soon...

Quote:
The owners are not looking to include amnesty buyouts in the new CBA. They are looking to bring the salary cap ceiling down from $70.2 to $60 million, more than a 14.5 percent drop. This could pose a big challenge to at least 10 teams. The Flyers would have $7.5 million to fill eight spots after Chris Pronger is put on LTIR. The Canucks would have $4.6 million for 10 roster spots. The Canadiens would be over the cap with seven spots to fill. The Penguins would have $7.4 million for eight spots. The Lightning would have $2.5 million for eight spots. The Bruins would be in big trouble. The Rangers would have $2.7 million for seven players if they are forced to count Wade Redden’s contract. The NHLPA could propose a “sum-zero amnesty buyout.” It could work where it wouldn’t cost the owners a dime outside of the 50-50:

"Players bought out under this program before this season at either one-third or two-thirds depending upon their age could be re-signed only for the difference between the buyout amount and the full contract. The entire amount would count against the players’ collective share but the buyout team would not be charged a cap hit."

http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/range...MHCT3Mr5VnYRLM

FreshPerspective is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 12:48 AM
  #527
Ryker
Registered User
 
Ryker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Edmonton, AB, Canada
Country: Slovenia
Posts: 2,741
vCash: 500
I'm sure something will be worked out, so there's no need to panic before anything actually happens. I don't think the owners of those "at least 10 teams" will consent to a deal that throws them into such a bind. Even if this was to happen, I'm sure we'd figure something out. It wouldn't be ideal, but so what. Having even more youngsters play for a year or two wouldn't be the end of the world.

Ryker is online now  
Old
12-13-2012, 06:08 AM
  #528
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,203
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryker View Post
I'm sure something will be worked out, so there's no need to panic before anything actually happens. I don't think the owners of those "at least 10 teams" will consent to a deal that throws them into such a bind. Even if this was to happen, I'm sure we'd figure something out. It wouldn't be ideal, but so what. Having even more youngsters play for a year or two wouldn't be the end of the world.
Exactly. I'm sure any hypothetical deal would have to include some sort of exception for teams already over the cap or something or have some sort of easing in period where the cap would come down gradually, not all at once. If not a bunch of teams, as noted above, would be devastated for this year (and possibly further, depending on the cap situation moving forward).

DrinkFightFlyers is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 08:31 AM
  #529
CootaRoo
Registered User
 
CootaRoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 258
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak Invictus View Post
Not exactly. A 5 year contract limit combined with a lowered cap also affects non-stars. Without the long terms to reduce cap hits, there will be less space available for teams with expensive players to pay other guys.
But then their escrow payments will be lower because 1/3 of the league doesn't have presenty year salaries far above the cap ceiling, so, if the mid-tier guys actually stopped to think about it (or paid someone else, other than Fehr, to do it for them) then they'd realize that everything the owners are proposing helps them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak Invictus View Post
The owners DID shoot themselves in the foot with those long contracts.
More like the owners got shot in the foot by the agents. If a certain type of circumvention is legal, a top player's agent demanded it and no team showed a willingness to provide it then there would be collusion lawsuits... it is a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation for management, which is why the league has a vested interest (along with drastically lowering insurance premiums) in doing away with it.

Honestly, I don't really understand why the players are so against the contract term limits... they should ask Mike Richards' accountant how much money he lost by taking his 'long-term cap-circumventing deal' before the league-wide salary inflation kicked into overdrive.

CootaRoo is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 10:05 AM
  #530
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 12,785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CootaRoo View Post
But then their escrow payments will be lower because 1/3 of the league doesn't have presenty year salaries far above the cap ceiling, so, if the mid-tier guys actually stopped to think about it (or paid someone else, other than Fehr, to do it for them) then they'd realize that everything the owners are proposing helps them.


More like the owners got shot in the foot by the agents. If a certain type of circumvention is legal, a top player's agent demanded it and no team showed a willingness to provide it then there would be collusion lawsuits... it is a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation for management, which is why the league has a vested interest (along with drastically lowering insurance premiums) in doing away with it.

Honestly, I don't really understand why the players are so against the contract term limits... they should ask Mike Richards' accountant how much money he lost by taking his 'long-term cap-circumventing deal' before the league-wide salary inflation kicked into overdrive.
This strikes me as a bit of a reach. It is perfectly reasonable for players to demand $11 million every year--not getting it wouldn't be a sign of collusion.

Of course the agents had a role, but the team's offered the deals because they were in the team's best interest--at least in the relatively near-term sense that motivates most GMs. Star players are lower cap hits leaves more money for other players, and thus more money to improve the team. Placing primary blame on the agents for cap-circumventing contracts seems a bit of a stretch.

To your broader point, yes and no. Richards gave up money, in hindsight, by signing the deal that he did. However, if Richards had signed a 4 or 5 year deal, then suffered a career-ending injury, he would have had only those years of compensation.

He traded long-term stability for the possibility of getting a lower-than-market rate in some of those years, no?

Jack de la Hoya is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 10:53 AM
  #531
toughfighter83*
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 563
vCash: 500
does anyone follow sam and his bogus articles:http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/...g_lockout.html

this guy is a joke and doesnt bother to read everything before he posts.

that's false report, here's the lastest on the lockout:

the talks are still going on right now:

John Shannon ‏@JSportsnet

From what I've been told, the NHL is on stand-by to meet with the Mediators...and maybe Players. No decisions yet.


sam as such a## and a complete joke of a reporter.

toughfighter83* is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 11:32 AM
  #532
GoneFullHextall
adios Holmgren
 
GoneFullHextall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in NH
Country: United States
Posts: 30,626
vCash: 50
doesnt sound like to me that they are going to get a deal as "good" as the one they had that Bettman had when he had a hissy fit when Fehr shot his mouth off.
I dont know why people think we are close. I dont think we are. Fehr and Bettman ruined that last week

GoneFullHextall is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 11:37 AM
  #533
CootaRoo
Registered User
 
CootaRoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 258
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoneFullHolmgren View Post
I dont know why people think we are close. I dont think we are. Fehr and Bettman ruined that last week
I think most optimists are pointing to the NBA negotiations - which, from what I have heard, had a deal done shortly after a similiar blow-up.

Personally, I think it is comparing apples to oranges and am considerably more pessimistic.

CootaRoo is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 11:53 AM
  #534
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Wing or Retire!
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Alexandria
Country: Liberia
Posts: 36,311
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by CootaRoo View Post
But then their escrow payments will be lower because 1/3 of the league doesn't have presenty year salaries far above the cap ceiling, so, if the mid-tier guys actually stopped to think about it (or paid someone else, other than Fehr, to do it for them) then they'd realize that everything the owners are proposing helps them.
"Good news! I'm reducing your overall salary, you'll have to pay less in taxes!"

It's a silver lining, but it's tarnished. All players will be giving less in escrow because their share of the projected earnings will be less. I'm sure they're jumping with joy.


Quote:
More like the owners got shot in the foot by the agents. If a certain type of circumvention is legal, a top player's agent demanded it and no team showed a willingness to provide it then there would be collusion lawsuits... it is a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation for management, which is why the league has a vested interest (along with drastically lowering insurance premiums) in doing away with it.

Honestly, I don't really understand why the players are so against the contract term limits... they should ask Mike Richards' accountant how much money he lost by taking his 'long-term cap-circumventing deal' before the league-wide salary inflation kicked into overdrive.
No, that wouldn't happen unless every single owner got together and decided not to offer those contracts. Being smart enough on an individual level to avoid giving out huge contracts you can't afford is not collusion. Nobody forced the owners to hand out those contracts; they could have just said "no," and then there's not a lot the players can do about it. Hell, the league could have just started nixing them from the start using their "spirit of the cap" argument. I have no pity for owners who have no self control. I have no pity for owners who gave out contracts this offseason with no intention of paying them. Let's be honest: the owners are protecting themselves from themselves, not from greedy players and agents who want 47 year deals. The owners created the last CBA, and they created the precedents for contract terms. Many of them benefitted greatly due to reduced cap hit for star players giving them more leeway to build depth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CootaRoo View Post
I think most optimists are pointing to the NBA negotiations - which, from what I have heard, had a deal done shortly after a similiar blow-up.

Personally, I think it is comparing apples to oranges and am considerably more pessimistic.
I seem to recall the NBA seeming even more hopeless (especially given their insanely convoluted cap rules), when suddenly it all came together. I still think we have an NHL season. Last week's shenanigans were, IMO, the last desperate attempt by both sides to get whatever last scrap they wanted. The players might have missed out on a larger make-whole, but it remains to be seen how much they missed out on.

I'm probably wrong though. Might as well get a subscription to the Raquetball Network when football ends.

__________________
Down in the basement, I've got a Craftsman lathe. Show it to the children when they misbehave.
Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 12:25 PM
  #535
GoneFullHextall
adios Holmgren
 
GoneFullHextall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in NH
Country: United States
Posts: 30,626
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak Invictus View Post


I seem to recall the NBA seeming even more hopeless (especially given their insanely convoluted cap rules), when suddenly it all came together. I still think we have an NHL season. Last week's shenanigans were, IMO, the last desperate attempt by both sides to get whatever last scrap they wanted. The players might have missed out on a larger make-whole, but it remains to be seen how much they missed out on.

I'm probably wrong though. Might as well get a subscription to the Raquetball Network when football ends.
and yet most were under the belief that this NHL lockout wasnt under the dire circumstances that we were in 2004/05.
Yet here we are, probably less then a month away from having another season lost.
What makes this whole thing stink is that both sides can drag their collective feet in getting a deal done because they know us fans as suckers will come back in full force like nothing happened. What can the fans do to let both sides know how ticked they are? probably nothing that will get their attention.
Most arenas league wide will be filled regardless.

GoneFullHextall is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 01:01 PM
  #536
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Wing or Retire!
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Alexandria
Country: Liberia
Posts: 36,311
vCash: 156
Pretty much. I was anticipating a cap/floor adjustment, limit on contract length, and some reduction of player salary. I wasn't expecting a huge readjustment and lockout right as the league was really building momentum.

Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 01:17 PM
  #537
GoneFullHextall
adios Holmgren
 
GoneFullHextall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in NH
Country: United States
Posts: 30,626
vCash: 50
and as a side note, I just cant go and post on the main board anymore. Its so pro-owner over there its not even funny. you cant even bring up the fact that the owners and Bettman are to blame for this as the NHLPA and Fehr.

GoneFullHextall is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 01:30 PM
  #538
CootaRoo
Registered User
 
CootaRoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 258
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak Invictus View Post
"Good news! I'm reducing your overall salary, you'll have to pay less in taxes!"

It's a silver lining, but it's tarnished. All players will be giving less in escrow because their share of the projected earnings will be less. I'm sure they're jumping with joy.
Escrow payments are made for dollars over the HRR split that players received. When a superstar is making 10M in salary in a given year with an AAV of 7M for a cap hit then everyone else in the league is, in theory (assuming players are, league-wide, over the HRR split percentage already), paying escrow on the extra 3M he made.

My point was that cap limits help the second tier players and lower by reducing escrow hits due to superstars on long term, cap-circumventing deals - I never tried to say that it wouldn't affect the superstars' bank accounts because it will.

CootaRoo is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 01:47 PM
  #539
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Wing or Retire!
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Alexandria
Country: Liberia
Posts: 36,311
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by CootaRoo View Post
Escrow payments are made for dollars over the HRR split that players received. When a superstar is making 10M in salary in a given year with an AAV of 7M for a cap hit then everyone else in the league is, in theory (assuming players are, league-wide, over the HRR split percentage already), paying escrow on the extra 3M he made.

My point was that cap limits help the second tier players and lower by reducing escrow hits due to superstars on long term, cap-circumventing deals - I never tried to say that it wouldn't affect the superstars' bank accounts because it will.

My issue with that is most players aren't going to have a salary drastically different from their cap hit, and there are other players who's salary is below their cap hit. My guess is that it mostly equals out.

Edit: where does Weber fit in? We've kind of knocked things out of balance with that one, haha. Either he's a nice discount, or other players are covering a lot of his money. I don't know how signing bonuses are classified.


Last edited by Beef Invictus: 12-13-2012 at 01:55 PM.
Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 02:11 PM
  #540
CootaRoo
Registered User
 
CootaRoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 258
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak Invictus View Post
Edit: where does Weber fit in? We've kind of knocked things out of balance with that one, haha. Either he's a nice discount, or other players are covering a lot of his money. I don't know how signing bonuses are classified.
I'd say the signing bonus is fully factored into the HRR % split since it has an affect on the cap hit.

CootaRoo is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 02:34 PM
  #541
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Wing or Retire!
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Alexandria
Country: Liberia
Posts: 36,311
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by CootaRoo View Post
I'd say the signing bonus is fully factored into the HRR % split since it has an affect on the cap hit.
Yep, finally managed to get on Capgeek and that seems like the case.

To further discuss, right now Timonen's salary is about 3 million less than his cap hit. That alone cancels out Crosby; I think it's a little short, I'm only eyeballing this, but it's close. I suspect you can line up a lot of these contracts and they largely cancel each other out. The outlier who I imagine doesn't get cancelled is probably Weber. So before that, I don't think players were getting gouged that badly on escrow due to other players' contracts. I don't know what the details of Suter and Parise are. Overall, I think escrow mostly evened out prior to this offseason when owners tried to get a bunch of big players with contracts they'd try to sneak out of. The average player is looking to lose more money thanks to the 50% split and potential contract limit than I imagine they gain with smaller escrow payments. So that might be why they're fighting it.

Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 04:13 PM
  #542
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 109,250
vCash: 5775
Before people lose it on the cap for next season, keep in mind that Brayden Schenn's cap number isn't really $3.11M.

It's likely to cost us Matt Read though.


I am pro-players as usual in this, but if the players are so concerned with star players eating up 20% of the cap on max deals, then they should offer to have the max cap lowered. Claude Giroux making $12M on a $64M cap in 2 years (just putting that out there for easy math) is going to royally screw us. Teams shouldn't be penalized for having good players.

GKJ is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 04:16 PM
  #543
Krishna
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,010
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by GKJ View Post
Before people lose it on the cap for next season, keep in mind that Brayden Schenn's cap number isn't really $3.11M.

It's likely to cost us Matt Read though.
What would it be?

Last year wasn't it 1.7m after he was sent to the AHL to make a few bonuses unachieveable?

And as for the cap in a new system, of course there would be some kind of system to help those that are currently over the limit

__________________
Krishna is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 04:21 PM
  #544
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Wing or Retire!
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Alexandria
Country: Liberia
Posts: 36,311
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by GKJ View Post
Before people lose it on the cap for next season, keep in mind that Brayden Schenn's cap number isn't really $3.11M.

It's likely to cost us Matt Read though.


I am pro-players as usual in this, but if the players are so concerned with star players eating up 20% of the cap on max deals, then they should offer to have the max cap lowered. Claude Giroux making $12M on a $64M cap in 2 years (just putting that out there for easy math) is going to royally screw us. Teams shouldn't be penalized for having good players.
I guess they want to further increase parity. If your team doesn't have one extremely good player, they'll at least be able to sign 2-3 pretty good players instead.

Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 04:25 PM
  #545
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 109,250
vCash: 5775
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
What would it be?

Last year wasn't it 1.7m after he was sent to the AHL to make a few bonuses unachieveable?

And as for the cap in a new system, of course there would be some kind of system to help those that are currently over the limit
I don't know what all of his bonuses are, but some of them are unreachable by design. I'm not sure why Dean Lombardi felt he had to do that, but he did and Schenn agreed. One of them is playing 82 games. Another is something like having to play at least 25 minutes in every game. He probably won't play 25 minute in any game.

Capgeek left the full number on the team chart, but the daily reserve list showed what it really was.


Some of these teams are the ones that rule the roost, so I find it hard to believe they'd all be on board with being left out to dry. They have to do something about the garbage 35+ rule. The Bruins and Flyers shouldn't be left with $4M/AAV players who have no intention on playing, especially since it's concussions.

GKJ is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 04:28 PM
  #546
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 109,250
vCash: 5775
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak Invictus View Post
I guess they want to further increase parity. If your team doesn't have one extremely good player, they'll at least be able to sign 2-3 pretty good players instead.
How many teams already have a player who may demand close to the max? A lot, I'd say. I don't have time at the moment to go through each team and find out, but I'd bet at least 25 teams have a guy they're deathly afraid of losing because of it. Of course, if there's 25 teams, it doesn't give that guy many places to go. But if you're the wrong team at the wrong time, you're going to get screwed. Good luck selling that to the Oilers or something.

GKJ is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 04:40 PM
  #547
Flyerfan808
Registered User
 
Flyerfan808's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Honolulu, HI
Country: United States
Posts: 2,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GKJ View Post
Before people lose it on the cap for next season, keep in mind that Brayden Schenn's cap number isn't really $3.11M.

It's likely to cost us Matt Read though.


I am pro-players as usual in this, but if the players are so concerned with star players eating up 20% of the cap on max deals, then they should offer to have the max cap lowered. Claude Giroux making $12M on a $64M cap in 2 years (just putting that out there for easy math) is going to royally screw us. Teams shouldn't be penalized for having good players.
Are you suggesting that Claude Giroux will be signed to a 12M dollar cap hit when he becomes an RFA in 2 years?

Flyerfan808 is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 04:42 PM
  #548
RussianRocket10
Registered User
 
RussianRocket10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Pennsylvania
Country: Brazil
Posts: 3,636
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyerfan808 View Post
Are you suggesting that Claude Giroux will be signed to a 12M dollar cap hit when he becomes an RFA in 2 years?
That would make NHL 13 be realistic.

RussianRocket10 is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 04:46 PM
  #549
Krishna
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,010
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussianRocket10 View Post
That would make NHL 13 be realistic.
So, after this season Leighton will ask for 6.1m over 6 years?

Krishna is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 04:46 PM
  #550
PALE PWNR
Registered User
 
PALE PWNR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: South Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 3,766
vCash: 1050
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
What would it be?

Last year wasn't it 1.7m after he was sent to the AHL to make a few bonuses unachieveable?

And as for the cap in a new system, of course there would be some kind of system to help those that are currently over the limit
The only reason they needed to do that was because there was no bonus cushion last year due to the CBA expiring. I believe his actual cap hit is 1.1 million without bonuses.

PALE PWNR 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 08:42 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.