*Official* CBA Negotiations and Lockout Thread

[DeNiro]

I'm pretty sure all of this is indicative of Bettman having a start date in mind and just delaying the proceedings until that time comes. He's made his target of 50% HRR and now he's trying to push for contract rights until the absolute drop dead date comes. I mean you don't discredit everything Don Fehr says about progress if your intent to start as soon as possible. Bettman also asked for a two week moratorium not that long ago, how exactly is that going to move things forward. Right now his objective is to save small market teams from paying player salaries for half a season, and in doing that he can delay the agreement until he gets his desired concessions from the players. Hainsey was right in saying the league's objective is a moving target. It doesn't matter if the players make such concessions on the 'make-whole', contract limit and variance, as well as the length of the deal - Bettman and his minions will ultimately ask for more.

[UFCanuck]

I kind of miss the NHL. Can't wait til they get started in January. Don't care that it will probably be only 48 games.

[DeNiro]

Not only that, but we get back Weise, who is the Patrick Kane of the dutch league.

[Drybone]

The owners wont be offering any new deals. Its over. The union had a good offer and they rejected it. They should have put it to a vote.

[Salmonberries]

Anyone here have any idea if there is a thread that tracks the whereabouts, stats and etc of our Canuck roster through this whole mess.

Seems like the kind of project that someone here might take on.

Thanks eh.

[Drybone]

I'm pretty sure all of this is indicative of Bettman having a start date in mind and just delaying the proceedings until that time comes. He's made his target of 50% HRR and now he's trying to push for contract rights until the absolute drop dead date comes. I mean you don't discredit everything Don Fehr says about progress if your intent to start as soon as possible. Bettman also asked for a two week moratorium not that long ago, how exactly is that going to move things forward. Right now his objective is to save small market teams from paying player salaries for half a season, and in doing that he can delay the agreement until he gets his desired concessions from the players. Hainsey was right in saying the league's objective is a moving target. It doesn't matter if the players make such concessions on the 'make-whole', contract limit and variance, as well as the length of the deal - Bettman and his minions will ultimately ask for more.

[elvis15]

NHL fears players will win again

(Note: Emphasis is mine.)

[SamJamIam]

The owners wont be offering any new deals. Its over. The union had a good offer and they rejected it. They should have put it to a vote.

[DarthMelvin]

Players couldn't vote on a couple pages written up by the league and a "I think we get what you mean" feeling after a couple days of talks.  The NHL has to submit a full proposal, which they didn't.  Something you'd know if you weren't retarded.

[Smashian Kassian]

None the less...the NHL is going to be done soon and hope that the next proposal will be the last to offer to the NHLPA which they have to accept by {Deadline} or the season will be cancelled...enuff messin with these greedy little turds who get crazy contracts then float around the ice....and Im sure you offend Poetica when you say the word retard... especially when you direct it at someone smarter than you Uncalled for....

[The Bookie]

Latest collapse in negotiations just another part of theatrics

Once you got past the burbling emotion of Gary Bettman’s aria in New York last week, which deputy commissioner Bill Daly occasionally turned into a duet, it was a rich tale in more ways than one. It was a tale of deceit and disingenuousness, of betrayal and intransigence, of villains and the gracious barons who are trying to reform them. Oh, what a story.

It wasn’t all true, of course, because most stories never are. But it was, like many stories, revealing.

Bettman spoke after NHL Players’ Association executive director Don Fehr had met with deputy commissioner Bill Daly and legal heavy Bob Batterman, after which Fehr delivered a carefully disingenuous speech aimed squarely at his own constituents saying the two sides were so close they could practically smell the hockey gloves. None of these things were a coincidence.

And then came Gary, raging like Lear. For something delivered from behind a worn faux-wood podium at the Westin Times Square, it sounded apocalyptic. And on further reflection, the story should probably be annotated.

Bettman’s story went like this: Much progress was made during direct owner-player talks on Tuesday and Wednesday, which is certainly true. And then late Wednesday night, Bettman said, “that sense of optimism … almost inexplicably disappeared Wednesday afternoon when the four owners returned to the bargaining process.”

Essentially, he made it sound like the ghost of Don Fehr had entered the room, rattling his chains. Bettman then spoke angrily of the refusal of the players to — what, genuflect? — when the owners made a US$100-million increase to cover existing contracts, bringing the total to US$300-million, minus US$50-million earmarked for player pensions.

“The union’s response was shockingly silent, so to speak, in terms of reaction,” said Bettman, airing his grievances. “There was almost no direct reaction — it was, “Thank you, we’ll take US$100-million, an approximate US$100-million.’ The owners were beside themselves. Some of them I had never seen that emotional. They said they don’t know what happened, but this process is over — clearly the union doesn’t want to make a deal.”

So, Bettman said, the owners then specified three conditions — a 10-year CBA, five-year term limits on contracts (seven for re-signing your own players), and no buyouts or caps on escrow — and told the players that it was a yes or no, non-negotiable offer. When the players attempted to negotiate off that proposal on Thursday, Bettman didn’t even bother showing up for the meeting. The NHL pulled all advancements off the table, which must be scuffed from all the things that have been put on and taken off and put on and taken off over the past few months.

“This collective bargaining agreement is a total package, OK?” railed Bettman. “Dollars are one element; the way the system works, player contracting, is another element … The characterization that I just heard transmitted to us, that we were close, that reminds me of the last time the union said we were close, and we were a billion dollars apart.”

Cue the lightning, the gloom, and a chill in the air. Except they are not a billion dollars apart. They are, other than escrow and buyouts issues, zero dollars apart, based on the offers made this week. They are two years apart on the length of the CBA, three years apart on term limits for contracts, and there is other housekeeping here and there. But that’s it. That’s the gap. It’s a crack in the sidewalk. Just hop across.

And that’s just one reason that Bettman’s song was an empty one. Yes, it was said that Pittsburgh’s Ron Burkle and his merry band of moderates — Toronto’s Larry Tanenbaum, Tampa’s Jeff Vinik, and Winnipeg’s Mark Chipman, the last of whom was believed to be involved partly to moderate union hardass and Jets defenceman Ron Hainsey — had to wear down Boston hardliner Jeremy Jacobs to add the money, believing it could be a magic bullet. And maybe Jacobs is back in charge of the process.

But it’s all a charade, as much of this negotiation has been. Of course Fehr tried to negotiate off the proposal, because the NHL decided to render the proposal non-negotiable on the same night they told that bringing Fehr back into the room “could be a dealbreaker” after two long days of talks. If you were leading a union, what would be your response? Accept their terms?

Of course not. One reason Bettman and Daly were so angry, aside from the theatrical element, is that Fehr has spent this entire negotiation refusing to bargain on their terms. They offer a percentage split; he offers something based on guaranteed dollars. They try to stick; he tries to move. The owners ask what is important, and what is important keeps changing. They just want him to say yes, and he won’t do it. Yet.

So of course the players didn’t jump at the US$100-million. They have been negotiating with billionaires, and they were not going to make a deal without their leader in the room, because it would be like accepting a plea bargain while your lawyer waits outside. And they know that as Bettman said in his monologue, a 48-game season is the minimum, and that means there are a few weeks left to save a season. Players worry the NHL will use term limits to create a two-tiered league, salary-wise, which could divide the union in the next negotiation, but they also want to win whatever concessions they can win.

There should be a deal this week. There should have been a deal last week. There should be peace and justice in the world, but people keep getting in the way. The league is trying to crack the players like a walnut, because this is how player unions break. Fehr is holding them together, so the owners are trying to undermine Fehr. Even Bettman acknowledged, in a relatively unguarded moment, that it was just “hard bargaining.” That’s how deals are made.

Maybe this gets pushed right to the brink, where there will be no room for an unstable interaction, no room for human error. But it’s much more likely that this is how it begins to end.

[gmen81]

Lp

[Kryten]

It's not a response to your message, I just wanted to say I love your avatar. The 'Backwards' episode of Red Dwarf is still one of the funniest things I've ever seen on TV!

[Boudrias]

*lol* I'm not a man, but you are the second person to ask me that question today.

I never said they were exploited, only that owners get rights to players in return for the guaranteed contracts (which is a bit of a misnomer since players can be bought out at any time for as little as 1/3 of their contract if the player is under 25 and at 2/3 if they're over 25 while the team gets a lowered cap hit since they get to spread the buyout lowered yearly salary over double the number of years bought out. So at best they're partially guaranteed contracts.)

I'm not sure what your point was with the UFA comment...

How can it create a "market" when players try to get their best deal, but "chaos" if players can try to get their best deal anywhere they want? That makes no sense.

But, I never said I thought removing all restrictions is what should happen. I was responding to the suggestion that guaranteed contracts should be done away with by saying if that were the case it would only be fair to take away all of the many rights owners get over players as well.

Even still, how would players being able to decide which team they will play for at all times in their NHL career create an even more "uncompetitive" league than exists now? There are only so many slots on a team and teams still have a salary cap. So, the market is already artificially controlled in the interest of parity and limits player options. How many rules for league parity do there have to be before that mythical status is finally achieved?

I think teams should be forced to live with the consequences of their actions and become self regulating, but it seems many of the NHL's proposed rules are to help them get away from facing the consequences whenever possible and give them nanny rules to regulate them whenever they can't. I don't see how that in any way strengthens the league.

As for the "make whole," we'll have to wait and see. Apparently owners wanted it pulled off the table a while back and may stomp their feet and refuse to put it back on the table again, no matter how dishonest and irresponsible that is.

I agree about the cap space being traded. (In fact, pages back I suggested a cap trade setup.) The argument against it, however, is that it creates an even greater disparity between teams. If parity is the true goal, it's probably counterproductive.

[poetica]

None the less...the NHL is going to be done soon and hope that the next proposal will be the last to offer to the NHLPA which they have to accept by {Deadline} or the season will be cancelled...enuff messin with these greedy little turds who get crazy contracts then float around the ice....and Im sure you offend Poetica when you say the word retard... especially when you direct it at someone smarter than you Uncalled for....

[poetica]

I would think the ability to trade CAP space could help teams who could receive draft pics as part of the deal. Short term pain for long term gain. No?

[RonMexico]

I didn't quote the whole thing due to length, but I just wanted to say what an excellent post!

In the interest of forcing them to negotiated with one another, I was thinking this morning that maybe the NHL should employ something similar to the fiscal cliff the US Congress dumbly put into place. In their case it was because they couldn't do their jobs and come up with a deal then, so they tried to force themselves to do it later. For the NHL it could be a clause put into every CBA to ensure that something so terrible would happen if they didn't get a new CBA in place when the old one expires without losing a single game that both sides would be forced to get a deal done.

The "Icy Cliff" Clause

In the event that a CBA expires and a new one is not in place by the date the regular season is set to start, they are forced to start the season and play all games as scheduled, BUT

• Players receive only 1/3 of their contract salary until the new CBA is signed and in place. (Those funds are lost for good.)

• Owners must DOUBLE the remaining portion of players' salaries and pay it into a supplemental pension fund for retired players. Once the CBA is signed and in place, these funds are distributed entirely among retired players (to ensure the penalized players never see any of that money).

• The payments will be pro rated to the number of years a player has been out of the league. The oldest retired players get the most. The youngest get the least. (The exact math could be determined later. I was too lazy to come up with a workable play for my fantasy solution. *lol*)

• Any retired player who played in the NHL during the previous season (when a deal should have been made) is not eligible to receive any of these funds.

• All other aspects of the old CBA remain in place until the new one is signed.

• Until a new CBA is signed, no new contracts may be signed and no trades can be made. Any players without a contract are just without a job.

• Teams are only able to call up players from the minors already under contract. If they can't ice a full team with those players, they're pucked.

I don't know if it would really make them get a deal done quickly, but at least it would force them to keep playing, thus minimizing the damage to the league with sponsors and fans, while making both sides suffer financially enough to encourage them to get a deal done.

[-Vintage Canuck-]

@SNHockeyCentral: NHL will cancel games through Dec. 30 today.

[poetica]

Below is a snippet from a SportsNet article that seems to bolster the claims of those who've been arguing the NHL orchestrated the lockout to save (or even make) money for the bottom teams. It says that Florida, in particular, is doing just fine during the lockout thanks to its sweet arena management deal (that lets them keep almost all of the profits from the arena taxpayers built) and additional concerts and shows in place of hockey games.

The SSE needs hockey to come back as soon as possible, but the organization isn't withering in its absence.

"It's a bump in the road; that's all it is," Yormark said. "But we can take this challenge and turn it into a real opportunity to strengthen our business, to diversify and to really prepare ourselves so that when the team comes back we're much stronger.

[poetica]

You don't really need this. More often than not, unions and their employers, when they feel that an agreement is within reach, can continue working while bargaining in good faith. They should have at least tried this avenue but the NHL obviously had other intentions.