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

#4651 boxiebrown

boxiebrown

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 642 posts
  • Joined: 06-May 08

Posted 09 December 2012 - 04:36 PM

It's really sad that at this point, it's only the owners' egos getting in the way of the deal.

First, they're now apparently unwilling to negotiate with the players' duly chosen legal representative. That is frankly pretty outrageous, and obviously they're egos can't handle having a smart guy like Fehr around questioning them.

Secondly, they are too proud to admit that the salary cup system they fought so hard for is actually a huge problem for them. Specifically, the salary floor is killing them. What they should do is eliminate the cap and floor completely. Go to a luxury tax, with strong revenue sharing and maybe slightly longer ELC and UFA periods. This would allow the big market teams to spend a lot and be consistently competitive while allowing small market teams to develop talent and remain profitable.

Unfortunately, the small market owners are just too proud to admit that teams like Columbus, Nashville and Tampa are not nearly as important as NYR, Toronto and Chicago. The system I described above would make the league much more popular (just look at how good TV ratings are when two premier teams are in the cup) and thus make everyone, players and owners, more money.

The funny thing is that Donald Fehr is responsible for this system in MLB, and everyone in baseball LOVES IT. They all make money hand over fist, big market and small market teams alike. But the owners ego just won't let them accept an idea from a dirty union commie. It's sad.
  • 2

#4652 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,492 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 09 December 2012 - 04:39 PM

Jeez man. What are you going to do write a book when this is all done?


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

As hard done by and exploited as all these players are I have never seen a kid cry at draft time but out of joy for being drafted or crying when not. Never seen a UFA not play the competition game to get the best contract.


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...

I don't have a problem with a player getting the best deal or management trying to talk him down either. It creates a market. Your suggestion of letting players go where ever would create kaos and a very uncompetitve league.


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?

To an extent I think if you make the teams live with their actions then it would truly become self regulating. That is why the make whole has to be there. If Parise pulls a Gomez over the next 12 years to bad Minny still has to carry the CAP space. I do however feel teams should be able to trade CAP space.


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.

Edited by poetica, 09 December 2012 - 04:42 PM.

  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#4653 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 71,001 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 09 December 2012 - 05:11 PM

NHL, union could resume labor talks this week:

NEW YORK -- NHL labor talks could be back on as early as this week after negotiations fell apart just a few days ago.


Deputy commissioner Bill Daly tells The Associated Press he has been in contact with the players' association, and the sides are working on returning to the bargaining table.


Daly says in an email on Sunday: "Trying to set up something for this week, but nothing finalized yet."


Talks broke down Thursday night after three straight days of talks at a New York hotel. Moments after players' association executive director Donald Fehr said he believed the sides were closing in on a deal to end the lockout, he was back at the podium to announce the NHL rejected the union's latest offer.


Commissioner Gary Bettman followed him and angrily stated that the sides weren't close and added he didn't know why Fehr thought they were.


http://espn.go.com/n...abor-talks-week
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#4654 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,153 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 09 December 2012 - 05:37 PM

Well at least they're not waiting two weeks this time to meet again. I guess that could be taken as a good sign. They obviously have something to build off since by all accounts they were getting closer to a deal.

I guess this is all just part of the negotiation dance that's going on between the Union and the NHL. I still think that Jan 1st is the date they wanna get things going. Otherwise the season will be cancelled.

Edited by DeNiro, 09 December 2012 - 05:38 PM.

  • 0

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#4655 Erik Karlsson

Erik Karlsson

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,776 posts
  • Joined: 24-March 09

Posted 09 December 2012 - 05:48 PM

I hope karma fracks Bettman and the owners.
  • 1

m97o1w.jpg

Credit to Parise11


#4656 Cromeslab

Cromeslab

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 841 posts
  • Joined: 16-August 10

Posted 09 December 2012 - 06:03 PM

Not getting my hopes up
  • 1
Posted Image

"Where you've been is good and gone,all you can keep is the gettin there"Townes Van Zandt

#4657 gmen81

gmen81

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,122 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 07

Posted 09 December 2012 - 06:11 PM

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.
  • 0
Posted Image

#4658 Sanj

Sanj

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 726 posts
  • Joined: 25-May 09

Posted 09 December 2012 - 06:41 PM

my hopes of a season are now at an all time low....
  • 0

#4659 SamJamIam

SamJamIam

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,900 posts
  • Joined: 27-November 11

Posted 09 December 2012 - 07:13 PM

my hopes of a season are now at an all time low....


The NHL throwing a hissy fit was their last bluff, a final feigning of apathy towards whether there would be a season. They've always wanted a season, just like the PA. They just wanted it on their terms and were willing to sacrifice the lower-profit months of fall to appear convincing in their need for a lockout.

People keep saying how the league has some internal "drop dead date" for when they call off the whole season. That's not how a lucrative organization thinks about lockouts. The drop dead date is when they take whatever gains they've made via the lockout and then just end it because it costs too much to continue. Bettman and the owners just played their last hand, unsuccessfully. Now it's time to make a new CBA, take their winnings and go home.
  • 0

#4660 6YPE

6YPE

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,663 posts
  • Joined: 25-December 04

Posted 09 December 2012 - 07:53 PM

Just cancel it already. Cancel this season, cancel next season cancel the entire league already, get on with it. They have lost me. I dont care anymore... Clearly they dont care about it any more either. The owners are idiots, the players are a bunch of stooges.... They clearly do not are about you or I or what we as fans have invested...I will be spending my money on other things. My cable has been cancelled and I'm sure the cable company likes that as well... I hope they lose the US TV rights and no one else picks them up, they dont deserve it after they way they have treated everyone involved.... The league is a joke....

/endrant
  • 0

11s35sy.png

 

Sig by -Vintage Canuck-


#4661 Ossi Vaananen

Ossi Vaananen

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,891 posts
  • Joined: 25-April 12

Posted 09 December 2012 - 08:09 PM

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.
  • 1

2d7ye0p.jpg

 

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#4662 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,153 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 09 December 2012 - 08:32 PM

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.


Good post.

There's no way that the owners sticking point is 5 year contract limits. What owners would even want that? I understand that they wanna eliminate those long term circumventing contracts, but making 5 year maximum limits is way too extreme.

My guess is that they are using this just to stall things up until they're ready to make a deal. Because I can't believe that the majority of teams would be in agreement with that. Watch them increase the max limit to 7 or 8 years in the next offer in order to get the 10 year CBA that they want.

This whole thing just seems way too orchestrated. We all know Bettman is a master spin doctor after all.
  • 1

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#4663 playboi19

playboi19

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,436 posts
  • Joined: 15-August 08

Posted 09 December 2012 - 08:43 PM

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.

48 games plus the playoffs is still plenty of hockey. It will be interesting to watch for sure. If you're the Leafs/Oilers/Columbus type of team, this shortened season could be exactly what the doctor ordered. Toronto was doing great last year until about the midpoint where they imploded.

As for us Edler, Garisson, and Kesler have been rehabbing for the entire lockout anyways. They haven't felt any pressure to step in too early.

Not only that, but we get back Weise, who is the Patrick Kane of the dutch league.
  • 1

#4664 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,153 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 09 December 2012 - 09:24 PM

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


15 points in 6 games and 39 PIM's so far.

The guy is a beast. :lol:
  • 0

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#4665 Drybone

Drybone

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 12

Posted 09 December 2012 - 10:03 PM

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.
  • 0
Posted Image

#4666 Salmonberries

Salmonberries

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,711 posts
  • Joined: 22-November 11

Posted 09 December 2012 - 10:04 PM

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.
  • 0

th_1435408476_c985b0ec75_zps489544ad.jpg


#4667 Drybone

Drybone

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 12

Posted 09 December 2012 - 10:05 PM

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.


Why do you continue to go on and on from this point of view that the players OWN half the NHL so they are entitled to half of its rights ?

Your posts are all about what Bettman is trying to 'get' . Get what? The union has no CBA, no rights nor any ownership of the league. The union had their chance, and they pooched it.
  • 0
Posted Image

#4668 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,309 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 09 December 2012 - 10:06 PM

NHL fears players will win again


(Note: Emphasis is mine.)

It's an interesting perspective to think the NHL has been on the losing end all this time. Not so much that it's made the players winners, but that the owners haven't had someone arguing in their best interests as a whole, rather than by what their individual wants are. Bettman has had objectives outside of the players/owners dynamic, some of which has been good for the game and others that haven't been, but what he doesn't have a good record of is negotiating a CBA that is good for the NHL and the game itself.

It reminds me of the talk of players underperforming while on guaranteed contracts. It certainly seems Bettman has had his contract guaranteed just the same - and even extended - despite this repeated failure to negotiate a deal that not only protects the owners, but prevents them from hurting themselves.
  • 1

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#4669 fwybwed

fwybwed

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,946 posts
  • Joined: 13-January 03

Posted 10 December 2012 - 12:07 AM

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.


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....
  • 1

#4670 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,252 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 10 December 2012 - 12:19 AM

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....


If you think that is bad what you should see what he said to me.

I'm not whining, it doesnt bother me but I'm just throwing it out there.


As for the actual post Nate was dead-on. And even if they did vote I doubt the majority of the PA would accept. If they accepted that offer it would have guarenteed a lockout next CBA.
  • 1

zackass.png


#4671 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,057 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 10 December 2012 - 01:21 AM

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.


  • 0

#4672 gmen81

gmen81

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,122 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 07

Posted 10 December 2012 - 01:27 AM

Lp
  • 0
Posted Image

#4673 Kryten

Kryten

    Aladdin

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: 02-February 12

Posted 10 December 2012 - 04:37 AM

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!


Thank you and yes that episode is great. Good to know that people still show love for Red Dwarf.
  • 0
Posted Image

#4674 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,207 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 10 December 2012 - 08:40 AM

*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.

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?
  • 0

#4675 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,492 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 10 December 2012 - 11:38 AM

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....


Oddly enough, I'm fine. But thank you for your concern about my feelings. :)
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#4676 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,492 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 10 December 2012 - 11:51 AM

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?


Oh yeah, I agree. Both teams could benefit with a cap trade system. I'm just saying the argument against it is that it increases the distance between the lower spending teams and the higher spending teams even more and as a result would likely increase disparity, especially since too many teams rely on spending rather than adequate scouting in their quest for a winning team.

Personally, I think the devotion to the idea of absolute parity is actually hurting the league. I agree there's a need to help the poorer, less well placed teams because that's in the long-term interest of the league, but doing so at the expense of the richer, well placed teams only spreads the pain rather than sharing the joy. I agree with your assessment that a cap trading system, for example (I'm sure there other possibilities), would benefit both teams by giving them what they need right now but in a temporary way so as to avoid permanently ghettoizing the poorer teams.
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#4677 RonMexico

RonMexico

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,266 posts
  • Joined: 27-July 12

Posted 10 December 2012 - 12:24 PM

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.


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.
  • 0

#4678 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 71,001 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 10 December 2012 - 12:27 PM

@SNHockeyCentral: NHL will cancel games through Dec. 30 today.
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#4679 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,492 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 10 December 2012 - 12:28 PM

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.

Read the entire article here: http://www.sportsnet...hockey_hearsay/
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#4680 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,492 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 10 December 2012 - 12:33 PM

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.


I couldn't agree with you more that that's what should have happened. Unfortunately, as they continue to prove, the NHL does not always do what is smart, which is why I suggested they force themselves to pretend to have common sense by including something like the "Icy Cliff" clause in the next CBA.
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(




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.