Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * - - - 3 votes

*Official* CBA Negotiations and Lockout Thread


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
6226 replies to this topic

#3031 gizmo2337

gizmo2337

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 05

Posted 21 November 2012 - 02:44 PM

So, the NHL addressed each issue individually, with explanation and said no to each one? How is that possible to discuss with 30 owners and figure out a response in a couple hours?


Pat Leonard@NYDNRangers

Asked Ron Hainsey if @NHL's answer was a "blanket 'No.'" He said no, more like NHL addressed each major issue & declined to move on each

  • 0

#3032 Dogbyte

Dogbyte

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,129 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 07

Posted 21 November 2012 - 02:49 PM

These guys really think they're something special.

Let some grade 8 class make it a project and let's start playing hockey next week. That could be the new Kraftville project. Pick a grade 8 class from Canada to settle the labour dispute.

GO NFL !!!!
  • 0

Canuckslogo160x160.jpg


#3033 RyanKeslord17

RyanKeslord17

    Canucks First-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,895 posts
  • Joined: 22-January 11

Posted 21 November 2012 - 02:53 PM

So wait, I don't get it, they didn't agree on ANYTHING? Or was it just a few things that they were apart on?
  • 0
Posted Image

#3034 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,322 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 21 November 2012 - 03:01 PM

this is just laughable at this point.

Darren Dreger ‏@DarrenDreger
Bettman says business is losing $18-20 mil per day. Says players are losing between $8-10 mil per day.

but yet, you are 182million$ apart, so you are losing that in 9 days of an extended lockout from dec1? this just makes no sense. there is no way the nhl cancels the season on 182million dollars and some contracting issues.

How do those numbers make sense? How can the NHL be losing 2 X what the players are? Even assuming the adoption of a 50/50 or going with the old CBA at 57/43 it doesn't work. Player losses are all pretty much bottom line whereas the NHL does save something on operating cost. Doesn't compute.
  • 0

#3035 gizmo2337

gizmo2337

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 05

Posted 21 November 2012 - 03:04 PM

My sense is, the NHL is firm on *all* the contracting rights, and gave a BS explanation for each change. How can they justify increasing the UFA limit when all other leagues are much shorter? This is an NHL owner vs owner fight that can't be won.

PA reaction I'd love to see:
You change your governing board rules to 50/50+1 vote, Bettman steps down, and then we will come back to the table.
  • 1

#3036 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,351 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 21 November 2012 - 03:06 PM

only thing professional about them is their ability to spew bullcrap.

Darren Dreger@DarrenDreger
Bettman now in a discussion with a fan...cameras rolling. Tells fan the union hasn't been willing to negotiate.

how do you possibly say that with a straight face and like an honest human being?


They honestly take fans for idiots it would appear. So far the NHLPA has tabled several different proposals, and the NHL has quickly responded with an outright no, each and every time. And as far as I know, the NHL hasn't moved very much from its original offer.

It seems like the NHL's idea of negotiating is that if they make one little concession, every other one of their terms should be agreed upon. Like it's such a huge deal for them to make a concession, even though the NHLPA has clearly made several big concessions during these negotiations.

Yet the NHLPA are the ones not willing to negotiate? Give me a break!

So, the NHL addressed each issue individually, with explanation and said no to each one? How is that possible to discuss with 30 owners and figure out a response in a couple hours?

Pat Leonard@NYDNRangers
Asked Ron Hainsey if @NHL's answer was a "blanket 'No.'" He said no, more like NHL addressed each major issue & declined to move on each


It's because Bettman and Daly clearly don't even discuss these proposals with the owners. They seem to have been given absolute power in this whole thing. And since Bettman has promised the owner's a "home run",he won't agree to a deal unless it gets him everything he wants. No matter what the cost.

This just shows that the NHL are the ones not willing to negotiate. They made their demands when they made their so called 50-50 proposal, and they haven't once moved off of that.
  • 2

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#3037 stexx

stexx

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,266 posts
  • Joined: 19-April 08

Posted 21 November 2012 - 03:07 PM

What am I missing? " ... players share, expressed in dollars, may not fall below its value for the prior season." That appears to be a $1.88 billion guarantee for the term of the agreement. Worse case scenario what of revenue drops below the $1.88 B. It appears that the Owners would eat the whole loss.


your missing the 2nd year part, so the first year would be the lockout year so lower revenue. basically what they are saying is if the league doesnt grow after the lockout & 50/50 split then that is the owners problem and not the players. not really a big deal.
  • 0

#3038 The-Impersonator

The-Impersonator

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,749 posts
  • Joined: 05-July 03

Posted 21 November 2012 - 03:15 PM

These guys really think they're something special.

Let some grade 8 class make it a project and let's start playing hockey next week. That could be the new Kraftville project. Pick a grade 8 class from Canada to settle the labour dispute.

GO NFL !!!!


That's the best thing you've said in all your posts. :towel:
  • 0

#3039 stexx

stexx

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,266 posts
  • Joined: 19-April 08

Posted 21 November 2012 - 03:25 PM

before i could wrap my head around these talks, the league needing the reduction in salaries so the small market teams could succeed, and the players wanted to be paid in full.

but with the players latest proposal being "no'd" across the board by the NHL without so much as a negotiation and the miniscule amount of dollars seperating them the talks have certainly got me baffled at this point.
  • 0

#3040 Shift-4

Shift-4

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,452 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 06

Posted 21 November 2012 - 03:29 PM

dutchysc: B-man says the nhl is losing between $18-20 mil per day and says players are losing between $8-10 mil per day. That makes them both losers!


:lol:
  • 0
Hockey is the only sport, the rest are just games.

#3041 Snake Doctor

Snake Doctor

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,128 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 08

Posted 21 November 2012 - 03:31 PM

The owners are the one's taking all the risk. The deal is not going to get any better from the league. Cut your losses and let's move on.
  • 0
Posted Image


#3042 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,579 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 21 November 2012 - 03:31 PM

It's because Bettman and Daly clearly don't even discuss these proposals with the owners. They seem to have been given absolute power in this whole thing. And since Bettman has promised the owner's a "home run",he won't agree to a deal unless it gets him everything he wants. No matter what the cost.


Most reports seem to indicate there's a select few owners who are in on the day-to-day negotiations. Jeremy Jacobs (Boston), Murray Edwards (Calgary) and Ted Leonsis (Washington) are the ones mentioned frequently.
  • 0

#3043 gizmo2337

gizmo2337

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 05

Posted 21 November 2012 - 03:33 PM

-Teams can now trade money. To encourage trades (and make that extra cap space that small market teams have worthwhile), NHL clubs will now be permitted to retain player salary when making trades – up to 15 percent of the upper limit in any league year. That doesn’t sound like a lot, but against a $67.5 million cap it’s a huge number, in excess of $10 million.

http://blogs.edmontonjournal.com/2012/11/21/nhl-lockout-the-players-new-proposal-is-a-curious-mix-of-give-and-take/

So Charles Wang could sign a 5-10m UFA in the summer, and then trade that player as soon as the season starts and keep the cap hit but not the salary? If I am reading that right, sounds like a pretty dangerous rule to have in play.
  • 0

#3044 Squeak

Squeak

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,474 posts
  • Joined: 21-April 03

Posted 21 November 2012 - 03:34 PM

http://blogs.edmonto...-give-and-take/

So Charles Wang could sign a 5-10m UFA in the summer, and then trade that player as soon as the season starts and keep the cap hit but not the salary? If I am reading that right, sounds like a pretty dangerous rule to have in play.


Up to 15%.

So if the upper limit is $67.5... then it would be up to $10.125M
  • 0
Posted Image

#3045 fwybwed

fwybwed

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,160 posts
  • Joined: 13-January 03

Posted 21 November 2012 - 03:40 PM

Players Face palmed once again...and twitter lights up with angry players...not much longer for them to be caving to the pied piper lol
  • 0

#3046 gizmo2337

gizmo2337

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 05

Posted 21 November 2012 - 03:44 PM

Up to 15%.

So if the upper limit is $67.5... then it would be up to $10.125M


I'm suggesting that this could have some odd trade effects. For low spending teams, the game becomes acquire the big dollar UFA at trade deadline or UFA period, and then get rid of that player at the start of next season.

It's a cap floor circumvention, where actual dollars spent could be lower than cap floor. If my calculations are correct, the NYI could be spending as little as 33.1m to hit the cap floor of 43.2m!
  • 0

#3047 J.R.

J.R.

    Rainbow Butt Monkey

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,048 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 21 November 2012 - 03:45 PM

Players Face palmed once again...and twitter lights up with angry players...not much longer for them to be caving to the pied piper lol


Hope they don't. I hope they do what was mentioned above. Go sign and play elsewhere.
  • 0
"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

Posted ImagePosted Image

#3048 fwybwed

fwybwed

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,160 posts
  • Joined: 13-January 03

Posted 21 November 2012 - 03:52 PM

Roman Hamrlik, reportedly says "I'm disgusted...time is against us. We lost 1/4 season, 425k, who's going to give it back to us, Mr Fehr"?

YUMMY~! So it Begins.....
  • 0

#3049 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,351 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 21 November 2012 - 03:58 PM

Roman Hamrlik, reportedly says "I'm disgusted...time is against us. We lost 1/4 season, 425k, who's going to give it back to us, Mr Fehr"?

YUMMY~! So it Begins.....


Mmm sweet sweet descension.

It's only a matter of time before more players start lashing out against Fehr. Bottom line is, he was brought in to be the tough guy that stands up to the NHL. But the NHL has walked all over him.

Time for the players to accept a deal, and not forefeit an average of a third of their careers. The money they're going to lose this season, will not be made up by the CBA. Time to start thinking about yourselves players, and not worrying about the future (or the past). The NHL will get what it wants, it always does.

Edited by DeNiro, 21 November 2012 - 04:02 PM.

  • 0

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#3050 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,420 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:12 PM

What am I missing? " ... players share, expressed in dollars, may not fall below its value for the prior season." That appears to be a $1.88 billion guarantee for the term of the agreement. Worse case scenario what of revenue drops below the $1.88 B. It appears that the Owners would eat the whole loss.


That rule wouldn't go into effect until year 2 of the agreement, so it would be set during this CBA, not the last. That allows their share guarantee to be determined by the post-lockout revenues under the 50/50 share rather than what they made last season under the old CBA.

But it does mean the players want their share guaranteed each year at the previous season's level. Even still, it should be a gimme. It's something the owners can agree to while likely not having to actually give anything as a result, since it's based on the new revenue and share percentage and even the NHL's latest projections show yearly revenue growth for all seasons except a lockout shortened season. Basically, they would be guaranteeing something they already believe to be a sure bet.
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#3051 Squeak

Squeak

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,474 posts
  • Joined: 21-April 03

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:12 PM

I'm suggesting that this could have some odd trade effects. For low spending teams, the game becomes acquire the big dollar UFA at trade deadline or UFA period, and then get rid of that player at the start of next season.

It's a cap floor circumvention, where actual dollars spent could be lower than cap floor. If my calculations are correct, the NYI could be spending as little as 33.1m to hit the cap floor of 43.2m!



As a player - you would steer clear of NYI (or any other team that may do that).

If I am not mistaken -- the 'bonuses' in ELC are going to be removed from the Salary Cap hit.... which is what teams like NYI were using to get to the cap floor.

Edited by Squeak, 21 November 2012 - 04:13 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#3052 Dogbyte

Dogbyte

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,129 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 07

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:13 PM

I'm suggesting that this could have some odd trade effects. For low spending teams, the game becomes acquire the big dollar UFA at trade deadline or UFA period, and then get rid of that player at the start of next season.

It's a cap floor circumvention, where actual dollars spent could be lower than cap floor. If my calculations are correct, the NYI could be spending as little as 33.1m to hit the cap floor of 43.2m!

I got that,

I was thinking just how bad of a team Wang could ice, too bad he's got all those good young players. That will defeat everything.
  • 0

Canuckslogo160x160.jpg


#3053 Lui's Knob

Lui's Knob

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,042 posts
  • Joined: 13-May 10

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:21 PM

Can anybody translate Hamrlikese?

http://isport.blesk....-pritlacit.html
  • 0

#3054 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,618 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:22 PM

http://espn.go.com/b...ffer-to-the-nhl

here is the complete offer from the PA, on paper it looks amazing. a difference of 182million sure seems silly seeing as how the NHL stated they lost 100million from the Pre-season.


Thanx for posting.
  • 0

#3055 gizmo2337

gizmo2337

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 05

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:29 PM

As a player - you would steer clear of NYI (or any other team that may do that).

If I am not mistaken -- the 'bonuses' in ELC are going to be removed from the Salary Cap hit.... which is what teams like NYI were using to get to the cap floor.


If there is a season this year, first thing to happen is Visnovsky gets unloaded to a team like Philly.
  • 0

#3056 Squeak

Squeak

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,474 posts
  • Joined: 21-April 03

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:42 PM

If there is a season this year, first thing to happen is Visnovsky gets unloaded to a team like Philly.


I doubt that - NYI traded for him for a reason.

NYI had been looking to add a D (hamhuis and Ehrhoff are prime examples) through UFA... but kept getting ignored... so they traded for a D-man.

(Even then -- Vishnovsky fought tooth and nail not to go)
  • 0
Posted Image

#3057 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,618 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:45 PM

What am I missing? " ... players share, expressed in dollars, may not fall below its value for the prior season." That appears to be a $1.88 billion guarantee for the term of the agreement. Worse case scenario what of revenue drops below the $1.88 B. It appears that the Owners would eat the whole loss.


Thank you. I've been saying Fehr wants guaranteed money but for some reason people don't read the actual proposal, they just listen to the PA talking points and believe what is said. Read the fine prints people, that's where the truth is.
http://espn.go.com/b...ffer-to-the-nhl

In years two through five of this Agreement, the players’ share in dollars may not be less than it was in the previous year.


Edited by WHL rocks, 21 November 2012 - 04:57 PM.

  • 0

#3058 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,618 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:50 PM

My sense is, the NHL is firm on *all* the contracting rights, and gave a BS explanation for each change. How can they justify increasing the UFA limit when all other leagues are much shorter? This is an NHL owner vs owner fight that can't be won.

PA reaction I'd love to see:
You change your governing board rules to 50/50+1 vote, Bettman steps down, and then we will come back to the table.


I think as Canadian hockey fans it's very beneficial to us if the UFA age was increased. Canadian teams have a hard time retaining their players after UFA or getting big ticket free agents to sign here. Most players want to play on big market, nice weather US teams.

Edited by WHL rocks, 21 November 2012 - 04:50 PM.

  • 1

#3059 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 75,300 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:51 PM

NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman says both sides are "still far apart":

NEW YORK, N.Y. - The NHL and NHL Players' Association finally seem to be speaking the same language, but they still have a gap to bridge in negotiations on a collective bargaining agreement.


The union tabled a comprehensive proposal Wednesday that generated a tepid response from the league. However, commissioner Gary Bettman acknowledged the six-page offer was a step in the right direction and the document appeared to offer a path forward in talks, with the sides now envisioning the same type of economic system.


"There was some movement in our direction and it was appreciated," said Bettman. "We're still far apart. But hopefully there's some momentum so we can bring this to a conclusion."


The union proposed a 50-50 split of revenues during the five-year deal along with $393 million in deferred make whole payments throughout the agreement. Two weeks ago, the league offered $211 million and a 50-50 split.


NHLPA executive director Donald Fehr acknowledged that his constituents are anxious to end the lockout and indicated that the new offer is "about as good" as the players are willing to make.


"(The players) are suffering right along with the fans," said Fehr. "We made an enormous move in the owners direction to try and end it — at least as of today that hasn't been successful."


Until now, the union had been pushing for a system that would see players paid a fixed amount of revenue each season rather than receiving a percentage of it. However, the new offer included some safeguards to ensure they'd be protected in the event league revenues stalled, including a clause that states the players' share can't drop from year to year.


"The players are making enormous concessions to the owners and we want some protection on the downside," said Fehr.


There is also ground still to cover on contract issues.


The new NHLPA offer included a rule that would punish teams who sign players to long-term, back-diving contracts — something the league has identified as an important issue. It also called for players making more than $1-million in the minors to have their salary count against the salary cap.


However, the union chose not adopt the NHL's proposed changes to unrestricted free agency, entry-level deals and salary arbitration, among other things.


Some of those issues were discussed when the league and NHLPA reconvened Wednesday after the NHL had a chance to study the offer.


"We went through their proposal point by point," said Bettman. "We talked about the things that were agreeable, we talked about the things that we could modify, we talked about the things that we had no more room to move on and explained our proposal on each of those elements."


With the lockout into its 10th week, the sides are attempting to reach a deal that would see a shortened schedule played this season. The labour dispute has damaged the sport's business, with Bettman saying the league is losing between $18 and $20 million every day of the labour dispute.


The commissioner indicated that he was surprised they hadn't already been able to reach an agreement.


"We made a proposal (in October) to save an 82-game season and frankly we're all mystified as to why we're not playing in light of that offer and in light of the fact that the players are losing as a group between $8 and $10 million a day," said Bettman. "We could have been playing, we could have been continuing the momentum this game had on an offer and an agreement that was long term and fair.


"So there's a lot about this process that one could scratch their head about."


The sides are expected to touch base on Friday, but no further meetings have been scheduled.


http://www.thescore....still-far-apart
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#3060 Dittohead

Dittohead

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,206 posts
  • Joined: 13-August 04

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:52 PM

This season is toast. You all get excited about a 1/2 season for the stanley Cup? F that.
  • 1




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.