New CBA NHL makes initial offer

[Jester@wraiths.ca]

The KHL has imposed a HARD cap for the first time in its history for 2012/13 at $36.5 million US per team. Dividing that up among 26 players does not allow ridiculous contracts. I think even the KHL owners are tired of throwing their money away, even if a big part is proceeds from crime.

[ccc44]

Why can't Bettman just learn to do his job. If he is really accountable to the owners then his primary focus should be of weeding out non-hockey markets like Pheonix and either Florida team. This would increase revenues for the owners without having to cut player revenues and salaries.

The rest of the proposed CBA is essentially just to piss off the NHLPA. I mean 10 year RFA, 5 year ELC? Why would anyone want to be drafted by the NHL?

What Bettman hasn't realized is if there is a lockout there is now a comparable league in the KHL that players can flee to and get ridiculous contracts. If the players call his bluff I could see the NHL being changed permanently for the worse.

[Ossi Vaananen]

The KHL has imposed a HARD cap for the first time in its history for 2012/13 at $36.5 million US per team. Dividing that up among 26 players does not allow ridiculous contracts. I think even the KHL owners are tired of throwing their money away, even if a big part is proceeds from crime.

[Zamboni_14]

How many people live in the twin cities ? 3.6 million folks. I would say this is a pretty darn good size its a northern city too so hockey is important.

I think they are one of the few cities that support all 4 major sport leagues. NBA Timberwolves, MLB Twins, NFL Vikings and the Wild.

[canuckbeliever]

Found this article written by Bobby Holik to be an intriguing read on the first offer tabled by the NHL.

It is very interesting to follow the reaction to the supposedly new offer the NHL presented to the NHLPA. I enjoyed reading Larry Brooks’ article in New York Post this morning for solid information, and it is always funny to read clever comments from across Twitter. These comments, albeit often sarcastic in nature, provide good perspective on the process. Now let’s speculate.

The NHL has proudly claimed record breaking revenue growths since the end of the last lockout, which cost us players an entire year of our careers. The exponential growth has created a larger pie than anyone expected for the owners and players to divide. The problem from the players’ point of view is the owners not only want to grow the pie, they want a bigger piece of it. Some might call this phenomenon greed. I call it human nature. I can understand where the owners are coming from, having put up a lot of money for these teams to exist and they feel entitled to dictate the terms and the rules of contracts. This is all fine and dandy, until you realize the players are the product. I am no economist, but someone is going to have to really explain, perhaps publicly, what exactly should be counted as hockey related revenue, and what shouldn’t be. Last I checked, it’s all hockey related revenue.

Now, the owners came to the table last night with an offer which is probably the worst it is going to get for the players. This is part of the negotiation and it provides a starting point. If anything, it confirms this is where they are going to start and it is going to be sometime before either side comes with terms they find acceptable.

The biggest thing the NHLPA can do is to avoid anything similar to what Bob Goodenow did this early in the negotiation which was offer a 24% rollback of salaries. Once something is on the table, it is very hard to get it off of it, so both sides are going to be very careful of what they throw out there. This time around, I have confidence Donald Fehr is better suited not to repeat the mistakes of past union leadership. The players are more knowledgeable than ever before about union proceedings this time around, so we might be in for an interesting couple of months.

I am not ready to write off any part of the season yet, it is early July and the negotiation has just begun.

[Fincup13]

Star players will receive special "gifts" of suitcases of money ...

[InTo ThE WiLD]

This wouldn't be the case if the owners weren't such financially incompetent boobs in the first place, I get so sick of owners whining that the players make too much, whose fault is that? Owners, YOU are the one making the ridiculous offers so quit complaining that the players accept them. I have no sympathy for the owners, their greed has screwed up the sport to the point where I don't think it is fixable.

[hockeyfan87]

I heard Bob Mckenzie say he didn't think the season would start on time. If we miss another season I just feel I'm being cheated once again. Casual fans will disappear as usual and markets in the USA that are already struggling probably won't be able to recover. It would be especially devastating to the Canucks and our "window". What I'm saying is that everyone is going to lose unless both sides can compromise, which based on the history is unlikely.

[ccc44]

these are how negoations work , there basically laying out what areas they want changed and throwing a low ball offer on each so they have a starting point and then they have a realistic number they hope for

[Hugemanskost]

All of a sudden the KHL is a MAJOR player in drawing hockey's biggest talents.

Most fans on CDC are too young to remember the WHA, but, that's exactly what the KHL will become... especially for the European players.

As a member of the BCTF, I can see how the boss men have come in with high demands. It is my and every hockey fan's hope that a happy medium will be reached by both sides.

At least Harper and Obama can't "legislate" the players back to work. There could be a lockout, though, and that will help neither side in the long term.

A 50 / 50 division of HRR seems to me to be the way to go.

[DeNiro]

10 year RFA is ridiculous. It's Bettman's way of protecting all his loser markets that lose young players after their contracts are up.

The players will not accept any of that. Not even close.

This may be a long negotiation...

[Fincup13]

All of a sudden the KHL is a MAJOR player in drawing hockey's biggest talents.

Most fans on CDC are too young to remember the WHA, but, that's exactly what the KHL will become... especially for the European players.

[cdubuya]

Haven't read anyone else's comments but I think every change I read would greatly benefit the league. Not too sure about the longer elcs but in terms of tying off the cap loopholes their proposal is great. They can squabble all they want about the revenue sharing it'll probably end up about 50-50

[boxiebrown]

The thing that really annoys me about this proposal is that not only is it incredibly unfair to the players, but it doesn't even make financial sense for the owners. Right now the owners are only worried about dividing the pie. What they should be worried about is growing the pie in the future.

The fact of the matter is that there is NO EVIDENCE whatsoever that "parity" is good for the financial success of a league as a whole. The owners need to accept that the NHL will make more money if the Rangers win the cup than they will if the Panthers do. Limiting the ability of big market teams to attract and keep talent is just cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Here is what I would propose:

• Remove the cap, or at least raise it significantly

• Remove the floor, or at least lower it significantly

• Keep 3 year ELCs and 7 year UFA status, but remove RFA status completely.

• Give teams compensation draft picks when they lose a free agent - there would be a "compensation" round in the draft after the first round

• Strong revenue sharing

This plan would let big market teams spend and be consistently competitive, but it would also allow small market teams accumulate and keep young talent better. Small market teams that drafted well would easily be able to stay competitive.

More importantly, the biggest reason small teams lose money is the floor. Without the floor, and with stronger revenue sharing, the small market teams would be completely financially viable.

But of course since this plan doesn't involve screwing the players over for no reason whatsoever, the owners will never agree to it.

[Burnsey]

1. 5 year ELC is a bit high/long imo

2. Waiting 10 years to become a UFA is also a bit long.

3. Love the 5 year maximum contract length. Stop these stupid 7-13 year deals, it's just ridiculuos(sp?) and shows players as being un-classy just going for the money. A lot can happen in 5 years, a stanley cup team can turn into the worst team in that time span....

[Spoosh]

Industry insider: “We will not play next year”

Joe Yerdon

Jul 16, 2012, 9:00 AM EDT

Getty Images

The NHL’s first offer in its negotiations with the NHLPA was seen by many as a shot across the union’s bow. And with the league reportedly asking for a considerably larger split in hockey-related revenue from the players, the elimination of signing bonuses, as well as a salary rollback, predictions of a work stoppage are growing in number.

In fact, one source with knowledge of the players’ side of the negotiation is predicting not just a work stoppage, but an entire lost season.

“Last time around, the NHL made its salary cap proposal and barely moved off it,” the source, speaking under the condition of anonymity, told PHT. “This is not an initial proposal. The league is shutting down and it’s ‘come back when you’re ready to accept.’

“This is exactly what happened last time. You heard it here first, we will not play next year.”

Granted, that’s just one opinion.

For most, it remains hard to imagine another lost season after the entire 2004-05 schedule was wiped out due to a lockout. Could the league and union really let it happen again?

It’s also still very early in the negotiations. The current collective bargaining agreement doesn’t expire until Sept. 15, and we’re only in July.

NHL Deputy Commissioner Bill Daly declined to comment on the above.

Link to the article

[Bill Sikes]

no owners no professional hockey ... end of story

[NucksBruins]

Alright, so how does this end up? That's the question the initial offer raises. I was pondering how to make it work for both sides.

1- The split changes to 50-50 for revenues. That's likely where they end up.

2 - ELC stays at 3 years, but they add a second 3 year contract where a player remains an RFA and that contract can be a maximum of three years. They must play the full contract time in the NHL until they play the years on the contract, the same as Radulov had to. This prevents someone playing one season on the ELC or second contract and bolting for cash from the KHL until the contract expires. After that, they become a UFA. UFA contracts are capped at 5 years with perhaps a required minimum of 3 (single year contracts could be handled on a case by case basis?) for the first UFA contract and then they can be longer if a player has played out their first UFA contract or maybe has served a set number of years since becoming UFA the first time. The NHL also gets their way in that the amount remains equal for the five years with the cap hit. Players are UFA earlier in exchange for no cap circumvention.

3 - The cap floor and ceiling are changed from their current level so that the ceiling rises and floor drops. Yes, that makes parity almost disappear, but it allows small markets to make money and large markets to spend it.

4 - All hockey revenues are hockey revenues. Concessions, parking fees, hockey jerseys, memorabilia, all counts as hockey revenue and the players split that 50-50 with the owners. Accountants would love that being a part of the agreement.

5 - After the agreement goes into effect, every team has the right to buy out one contract they don't want on the books with no penalty, same as the NBA did.

Basically, in the end, both sides have to make an agreement that allows both sides to make more money. As long as owners want money from players back and players want more money from the owners, instead of working to add to revenues for both of them, this isn't going anywhere.

The players take a 50-50 split only if they become UFA earlier, can't see any agreement unless that happens and only if there are no grey areas in terms of what qualifies as hockey revenue.