Can someone tell me what's faulty with this scenario: Everyone is giving Bettman a hard time for not going up to $45M or higher to get a deal done. I agree that the owners wouldn't let him go higher. But look at it differently. Assume there are 6 teams that would spend the extra money going from $42.5 to $49M (assumes owners accepted PA proposal without "indexing"). That's a total of $39M more that the NHLPA would be paid than in the owners proposal at $42.5M. Divide that by 690 players in the NHL, and it comes out to about $56,500 per year per player. The players shot down the deal that would have them earn an average of $1.3M per year over $56,500? The players career would have to be over 23 years long to make up missing one year's paycheck. Unless you're name is Mark Messier or Chris Chelios - it's a losing deal to not have taken their offer. (I realize that you could also look at it from the owners standpoint - but it's all about what the small market owners were willing to have the discrepency between what they can afford, and what the cap limit was.) My wife was previously married. We were friends through her divorce, and I kept advising her not to fight over the dishes during the divorce. Just get it done, and move on. I think the players were fighting over the dishes, and ended up greatly extending the "divorce" over a small enough difference they could of lived with. The example just gets worse at $45M. That means the players are negotiating for about $20M each season. How crazy is that?