D-Money Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 This is interesting: Implementation of a weighted Draft Lottery in which all non-Playoff teams compete for opportunity to choose first overall in the annual Draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gizmo2337 Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 • Flexibility-related adjustments to Payroll Range System, including (in addition to Salary/Cap Charge allocation in Player trades): 6. Creation of “interview period” for Unrestricted Free Agents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 If you knew enough about the actual legal issues, then you'd know that you don't have enough actual information to really make an assessment of who has budged, and who is playing games. You're not in the board room, and you should know that you're reacting to media rhetoric, and not actual happenings. There are so many fine details that have been bargained over, and so many back and forths. You can't possibly think you know enough of the situation to decide who is the greedier of the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugemanskost Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 This is a deal that makes sense for both sides. There is no clear "winner", although, I would give a slight edge to the players at this point. The biggest concession by the players would be the 50-50 revenue split. $1.5 B is still a good chunk of coin, though! Sign it and drop the freakin' puck already! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiDeN Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 Exactly - that's why I made that post - sorry, I should have enclosed it in [sarcasm] - just like someone can't say "amazing how the owners sign multi year contracts and then want to change them" without knowing all the details... The simple solution is pay for performance (something I doubt not one player would ever sign for - I wonder why?) Owners can't "fire" the players like your boss and mine can do if we aren't performing up to expectations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice orca Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 Right...do you hear that sound? That's me playing "Cry me a river" on the worlds smallest violin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 Come up with a reply at least instead relying on the worlds worst comeback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 From a year ago: http://ca.sports.yah...ug=ycn-10423863 "I'm surprised that NHL players make as much as they do. One of the major papers in New York City used to show the weekly ratings of sports games on TV in the New York market. NHL games were always the lowest rated of any sport, and some of the ratings were incredibly low. A Stanley Cup Finals game on NBC in 2007 was the lowest rated prime time program in NBC history." How am I contradicting myself? I said I expect both to make concessions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sapper Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 This is interesting: Implementation of a weighted Draft Lottery in which all non-Playoff teams compete for opportunity to choose first overall in the annual Draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeak Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 It's about time - call it the Oilers or Penguins rule. A team that is poorly run and plays equally poorly should not be rewarded with consecutive #1 picks over and over. I had no issue with the worst overal drafting first overal but when teams make no effort to improve and make repeat trips up at #1 they need to do something so that a businuess plan of sucking badly does not guarentee first overal all draft picks. For me I would prefer it being even more simple - a team drafting first overal can not draft any higher than Third overall for 2 years after drafting first ( unless the first draft pick is aquaired via trade ). Just my thoughts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad Marchand Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 Yep Very poorly run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeak Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 He probably meant before they got all those draft picks, cause the Penguins flat out sucked from 2002-2006. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 It's about time - call it the Oilers or Penguins rule. A team that is poorly run and plays equally poorly should not be rewarded with consecutive #1 picks over and over. I had no issue with the worst overal drafting first overal but when teams make no effort to improve and make repeat trips up at #1 they need to do something so that a businuess plan of sucking badly does not guarentee first overal all draft picks. For me I would prefer it being even more simple - a team drafting first overal can not draft any higher than Third overall for 2 years after drafting first ( unless the first draft pick is aquaired via trade ). Just my thoughts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad Marchand Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 So did LA for awhile. So did Philly for awhile. So did Florida. So did Minnesota. So did Vancouver. So did Ottawa. It's the ebs and flows of a league --- only a handful of teams will stay truly contenders for a long period of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonny_Bohonos_14 Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 It's the ebs and flows of a league --- only a handful of teams will stay truly contenders for a long period of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primal Optimist Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 the owners have given players nothing, they are just offering to take less away....Isn't that big of them? Wow...so generous.... NOT !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gizmo2337 Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 So did LA for awhile. So did Philly for awhile. So did Florida. So did Minnesota. So did Vancouver. So did Ottawa. It's the ebs and flows of a league --- only a handful of teams will stay truly contenders for a long period of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poetica Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 Definitely some interesting points to ponder in their proposal. (Try saying that 10 times fast!) Each Club will be entitled to execute up to one “Compliance Buy-Out” prior to the 2013/14 season pursuant to which payments made to the Player will not be charged against the team’s Cap, but will be charged against the Players’ Share. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted December 28, 2012 Author Share Posted December 28, 2012 @LouisJean_TVA @NHLPA has a 3pm Eastern conference call w/ executive board and negotiating committee. League offer deemed extensive. Over 300 pages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeak Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 Yes, and it takes an especially talented management team to stay non contenders for such a long period of time and not get a decent draft pick *cough* Leafs. This should be referred to as the Leafs rule lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.