Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

*Official* CBA Negotiations and Lockout Thread


Recommended Posts

The sooner the players cave, the sooner they can start playing again and we'll all be happy.

A long term locout will do nothing but make them lose even more money. They don't have enough leverage to negotiate with the owners. There's too many teams that would be more than happy to miss a season i it means not having to play under the od CBA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once again, you are missing the point, and your reading comprehension is no better than a 1st grader. Relocation takes time, and no one is asking the league to relocate 10+ team all at once, but things need to be changed, and Bettman's personal agenda should be set aside instead of hindering the franchises. I have said it a good number of times that, you don't go and ask players to take a 20% paycut when the business is profitable and revenue is rising. Poor business decision such as adding or moving teams to unmarketable location is not the fault of the players. Shutting down 1 or 2 teams that should've no business in this league will no doubt means some not too talented players will have to go play in another league, but that would also boost the quality of current teams, while cutting dead weights that hinder the growth of the league as a whole.

As for the lease agreement, is it the players fault that the idiot owner decided to sign a 20 years lease for a franchise that has been losing money like a waterfall? The right move is to stop the bleeding, negotiate a buy out of the lease, and move to a more profitable location. Just because the people in Glendale think they deserve a hockey team, that doesn't mean they should get one if they have to use their tax money to keep the team afloat.

Do you have any knowledge of economics at all? You seem absolutely clueless when it comes to numbers. The buying power of 50 mil from 4 years ago is a lot more than what you could get 50 mil nowadays. That is inflation. Comparing Russia's inflation with Canada's means you have zero idea what the argument is about. KHL is already the next best league in the world right now, and some players are already planning to join KHL in the upcoming season if there is a lock out, so I am not sure why you think it is a wild thought for players to jump to KHL if NHL screws up once again with the new CBA.

I am going to ask you this again, are you Bettman? :bigblush:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK genius. Instead of asking the players to take smaller share of revenue you are going to buy out Arena leases of all the money losing teams which will cost tens of millions of $'s. Is the union going to pay for this? What of the teams that are losing money but they own their own arenas. Only teams that don't have ownership or don't have rights to operate their arena are NYI, BUF, EDM, CLG. And the following teams operate their arena even thought they don't own it, NSH, ANA, CAR, FLD, SJS, MIN and WSH.

So you are proposing that owners move their teams to new cities while they own or operate their own Arena in the current market? Then they lose even more money to pay for an arena that sits empty? Great thinking genius.

Which cities are you going to move these teams to that could support a $70 million players salary? Name the markets and venues for 10 teams that you will move and I'm sure you will include market analysis on said markets.

As far as inflation goes. You threw out the word inflation and never provided one number to support your argument. Because 50 million is not what it was 4 years ago all the player's are going to rush to Russia? How much is that $50 million worth today? You have no freakin clue.

In Canada AAR of Inflation was 1.21% for a total of 4.92%. $50mill in 2008 is $52.4 mill now. That's a difference of $2.4 million. Hardly makes me want to move to Russia where the Inflation over the past 5 years is over 55%. And yes genius, the rate of Inflation does matter in Russia if that's where you intend to be living, earning your pay check and spending your money.

You think NHL stars would move to Russia because of a combined $2.4 million spread out between 23 players? Yeah right.

Now get this into you genius. The NHL cap was $39 mill in 2005. What is that in 2012 dollars? $44 million. Yes that's right, much less than $50 million. Did you see a mass exodus to Russia when the cap max was $39 mill ($44 mill in today's $)? I didn't.

Any ways the cap is not going to be $50 mill no matter what, no one has proposed it to be that low. but just so you know, do the math and you will see players will not be running away to Russia even with a $44 mill cap hit.

You seem like a union guy who dislikes mgmt no matter what. You have never run a business and have no clue on how to run a business. You don't have any formal business education. You continue to talk gibberish like contraction and buying out arena leases and moving almost half of the teams to some imagined hockey markets. Apparently billionaire team owners aren't smart enough to come up with your brilliant ideas.

I will guarantee you the following:

-In the new CBA the player's share of Revenue will be less than what it is in the current CBA. (players will take a cut)

-There will be no mass exodus to Russia. Players that do go over to play during the lockout will come back as soon as they can.(just like they did the last time)

-No contraction.

-All the money losing teams will not move to imaginary markets to play in imaginary arenas.

- Instead of all the nonsensical ideas you propose the major difference in this and next CBA will be the reduced percentage of revenue the players will receive in the future. This will happen because it makes sense.

After the new CBA is signed I look forward to hearing from you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are missing the point once again on the actual issue. The entire debate isn't about what will happen, but what should happen. Just because the owner will eventually get what they wanted, that doesn't mean it is the right and ethical thing to do.

I've never seen someone defend Bettman so ignorantly.

Btw, why don't Bettman take a paycut as well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Best Saves Percentage Since The Lockout:

Yesterday I began to look at goaltenders in the current NHL era. This is the time since the 2004/05 lockout which is coming to an end with the upcoming lockout this season. It is a seven year period where the NHL operated under the current CBA with a salary cap imposed for the first time. In my first look at goaltending I posted the winningest goalies in the era. This does a good job of showing the goalies who played the most games in the era. It doesn't directly show which goalies was the best one. As long as the goalie maintained his starting job he had a chance to win. The more games he played the more games he would win.

The simplest stat to look at to show how well the goalies played is saves percentage. The problem is this is a rate stat and may show that somebody who played only a handful of games was the best. I will cutoff the goalies involved in the comparison to those who played 25 or more games in the era. This prevents us from getting a list of goalies who saved the only shot they faced. It will still rank some goalies who did not play many games among the top. That is an interesting thing because it helps to show how well some goalies played in limited playing time and also shows how well the best goalies who had a significant number of games played performed.

Here are the top 20 goalies by saves percentage since 2005:

Best Saves Percentage Since 2005 (min 25 GP) Rank Player Saves Pctg

1 Cory Schneider .928

2 Tuukka Rask .926

3 Tim Thomas .922

4 Tomas Vokoun .921

5 Pekka Rinne .921

6 Henrik Lundqvist .920

7 Roberto Luongo .919

8 Niklas Backstrom .918

9 Jonas Hiller .918

10 Jaroslav Halak .918

11 Jimmy Howard .917

12 Ryan Miller .916

13 Carey Price .916

14 Jonathan Quick .916

15 Josh Harding .916

16 Ilya Bryzgalov .915

17 Craig Anderson .915

18 Antti Niemi .915

19 Semyon Varlamov 915

20 Miikka Kiprusoff .914

My first observation from this list is that our two leaders have a limited number of games played. Cory Schneider appeared in 68 games and Tuukka Rask in 102. It is unlikely if they played as many games as the third and fourth place finishers Tim Thomas (374 GP) and Tomas Vokoun (401 GP) that they would have maintained as high a saves percentage. Nevertheless they are clearly some of the best young goalies in the game and could become future stars.

Saves percentages have been slowly creeping upward in this era. Thus we tend not to have as many older goalies on this list as younger ones. In fact every goalie on this list is currently active in the NHL This is in part because of the rising saves percentages with time and in part because of selection effects. If a goalie posts a season with a poor saves percentage he is less likely to appear on this list and also less likely to remain active in the NHL.

The wins leader in the era Miikka Kirprusoff ranks 20th by saves percentage. This shows that while he may have been the goalie who played the most games in the era, it is hard to argue that he was the bestgoalie in the era.

Sorting goalies by saves percentage in the most recent era gives us a ranking of modern goalies. Because of rising saves percentages with time we tend to lose the goalies who played in the early part of our seven year period.

http://kuklaskorner.com/psh/comments/best-saves-percentage-since-the-lockout?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...