NHL has made a new, "secret" proposal to NHLPA??

[CarlRacki]

I dont think buyouts are done on an individual basis. The amount is universal as per the negotiated CBA.

Buyouts are different from option years. A team or player can have an option to extend the contract at a predetermined rate, by a year as part of the deal. But this is separate and different from buying out contracts at 66% OR 75% of their remaining value.

A guaranteed 2/3 buyout is a long way from the non-guaranteed contracts you have in the NHL. Essenntially a player can sign a $30 million deal, never play hard again, never score another goal and still walk away with $20 million guaranteed. This is somehow unfair?

 

[thinkwild]

A guaranteed 2/3 buyout is a long way from the non-guaranteed contracts you have in the NHL

Come again?

Well its not unfair to us poor small market teams that would never sign such a foolish contract. Perhaps its unfair to the rich teams (well all teams are owned by rich owners when they are winning) that are attempting to buy a cup. Id call it a proper check and balance in the system, just desserts, but not really unfair, no. I think most fans would of told the owners that spent on Jagr and Yashin that this was likely to happen. They were well warned, took the risk. And none of our other players are close to making that kind of money so it didnt really affect us either.

 

[struckmatch]

I was going to post a thread asking if anyone thought there were closed door, secret meetings between the two sides like in 1994. I'm not sure, I hope there is some form of communication between the two sides, although I remain skeptical.

These rumor sites are very shady, although Christian Ruutu does have some sources in and around the league, so maybe he could be right...I'm confused...

 

[victor]

Well its not unfair to us poor small market teams that would never sign such a foolish contract. Perhaps its unfair to the rich teams (well all teams are owned by rich owners when they are winning) that are attempting to buy a cup. Id call it a proper check and balance in the system, just desserts, but not really unfair, no.

No - it only seems to be unfair when these salaries are used for arbitration.

 

[thinkwild]

Fortunately, none of them were.

 

[Egil]

Currently you can buy out a player at 2/3 of their remaining salary. The NHL has not proposed to change this, at all, at any point. The players association is using this as a fear tactic (which is why Bettman made the statement he made about guaranteed contracts).

BTW, the NBA has guaranteed contracts and a cap. You get yourself in a ton of trouble with contracts sometimes, but you can most assuredly stay under a cap if required.

Again, this is a completely unfounded allegation from the PA which is used to scare their membership. It is the equivalent of many of the typical fear tactics used in an election (Bush will re-institute the draft for example), and as such needs to be snuffed out.

 

[YellHockey*]

Currently you can buy out a player at 2/3 of their remaining salary. The NHL has not proposed to change this, at all, at any point. The players association is using this as a fear tactic (which is why Bettman made the statement he made about guaranteed contracts).

Except that the NHL sent the PA a memo detailing a list of topics to be negotiated and guaranteed contracts were one of those topics on the list.

 

[s7ark]

Except that the NHL sent the PA a memo detailing a list of topics to be negotiated and guaranteed contracts were one of those topics on the list.

Link?

First I have heard of this.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

Link?

First I have heard of this.

it was in the sports news about a month ago. google will help you.

dr

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

Link?

First I have heard of this.

http://www.nypost.com/sports/32081.htm

 

[John Flyers Fan]

Currently you can buy out a player at 2/3 of their remaining salary. The NHL has not proposed to change this, at all, at any point. The players association is using this as a fear tactic (which is why Bettman made the statement he made about guaranteed contracts).

BTW, the NBA has guaranteed contracts and a cap. You get yourself in a ton of trouble with contracts sometimes, but you can most assuredly stay under a cap if required.

The NBA doesn't havea real cap, and the NHL owners want nothing to due with an NBA style soft cap/luxury tax.

 

[Pepper]

Contracts are already not guaranteed. They can be bought out.

2/3 buy-out which can be done during a short time-period, get real.

 

[Wetcoaster]

http://www.nypost.com/sports/32081.htm

Here is the original article which goes into more detail entitled "BETTMAN PLAYS 'THE LYING GAME' ":
http://www.nypost.com/sports/31968.htm

"First of all, you don't have to get rid of guaranteed contracts with a salary cap. Secondly, we've never discussed the issue with the union. Never." Gary Bettman Oct. 27, in an interview with WBNS 1460 Columbus, as transcribed and publicized by the NHL on its CBA-dedicated Web site.

"In connection with the negotiation of the provisions relating to distribution of [League] revenues, we believe it will be in our joint interests to reduce or eliminate various of the ways through which compensation dollars are presently not allocated in an effective or fair manner. Therefore, we will be raising for discussion issues affecting numerous CBA and SPC [Standard Player Contract] provisions including salary guarantees and buy-outs other than for injury . . ." Gary Bettman in a five page letter to Bob Goodenow dated July 27, 2004.

Maybe it was your evil twin Buttman raising the issue without your knowledge??? Yeah right that must be it because you would not lie right, Gary?

 

[PecaFan]

You do realise those two statements are perfectly in agreement, and are meaningless, right?

In July, they notify the union of the topics they *might* discuss in the future.

Several months down the road, in October (and later December), they say they've never discussed it.

Maybe they had meant to discuss it, but as of a few days ago, they have not discussed it. Note that the union has never challenged Bettman on this statement.

Oh, and insulting someone by making fun of their name is *so* grade 5.

 

[Steve L*]

Here is the original article which goes into more detail entitled "BETTMAN PLAYS 'THE LYING GAME' ":
http://www.nypost.com/sports/31968.htm

"First of all, you don't have to get rid of guaranteed contracts with a salary cap. Secondly, we've never discussed the issue with the union. Never." Gary Bettman Oct. 27, in an interview with WBNS 1460 Columbus, as transcribed and publicized by the NHL on its CBA-dedicated Web site.

"In connection with the negotiation of the provisions relating to distribution of [League] revenues, we believe it will be in our joint interests to reduce or eliminate various of the ways through which compensation dollars are presently not allocated in an effective or fair manner. Therefore, we will be raising for discussion issues affecting numerous CBA and SPC [Standard Player Contract] provisions including salary guarantees and buy-outs other than for injury . . ." Gary Bettman in a five page letter to Bob Goodenow dated July 27, 2004.

Maybe it was your evil twin Buttman raising the issue without your knowledge??? Yeah right that must be it because you would not lie right, Gary?

Youve lost the arguement as soon as you call on Brooks for backup!

He could be talking about changing the buy out clause from 66% to 55%, he can do that without dropping guaranteed contracts and basically have the same arrangement as it is now, do you realise this?

 

[Pepper]

I think Wetcoaster has had few other reading comprehension problems earlier so nothing new here.

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

Some people really need to get a grip on what a guaranteed contract is. A guaranteed contract means that the contract is written for an agreed to length of time and a promise is made to pay the whole amount of the contract. These contracts have an escape clause where the team may pay a substantial penalty (2/3 of the remaining salary) during a small window of time, disolve the contract, making the player an unrestricted free agent and allowing him to persue employment elsewhere. A non-guaranteed contract has no clause against termination and allows a team to release (fire) a player at any time without penalty or responsibility to the remainder of the contract. As long as there is a penalty for early termination the contract is considered guaranteed. I hope I typed this slow enough for the pro-NHLPA side to understand.

:lol

 

[Johnnybegood13]

http://www.nypost.com/sports/32081.htm

Whats the world coming to when articals from Larry (fruitloop) Brooks is brought up

 

[SENSible1*]

Some people really need to get a grip on what a guaranteed contract is. A guaranteed contract means that the contract is written for an agreed to length of time and a promise is made to pay the whole amount of the contract. These contracts have an escape clause where the team may pay a substantial penalty (2/3 of the remaining salary) during a small window of time, disolve the contract, making the player an unrestricted free agent and allowing him to persue employment elsewhere. A non-guaranteed contract has no clause against termination and allows a team to release (fire) a player at any time without penalty or responsibility to the remainder of the contract. As long as there is a penalty for early termination the contract is considered guaranteed. I hope I typed this slow enough for the pro-NHLPA side to understand. :lol

I doubt it. Bettman and Daly have clarified their position on this issue at least 3 times since the "smoking gun" memo, yet the PA and their apologists still don't seem to get it. Perhaps they get it, but don't want to lose one of their best coercive tools to keep the membership in line. Nice tactics; if the truth hurts your position, just lie to keep your members from considering the NHL's offer.

 

[Wetcoaster]

Youve lost the arguement as soon as you call on Brooks for backup!

He could be talking about changing the buy out clause from 66% to 55%, he can do that without dropping guaranteed contracts and basically have the same arrangement as it is now, do you realise this?

An ad hominem argument - not unexpected when there is no way to answer.

 

[Kaiped Krusader]

An ad hominem argument - not unexpected when there is no way to answer.

Why don't you answer the Iconoclast's post then? I think his answer is pretty solid.

 

[Pepper]

Why don't you answer the Iconoclast's post then? I think his answer is pretty solid.

I think he ran out of arguments few posts earlier already.

 

[Wetcoaster]

Why don't you answer the Iconoclast's post then? I think his answer is pretty solid.

???????????????

Why would I? His explanation of guaranteed contracts is accurate.

I was dealing with another issue. Bettman claimed he had never discussed the issue of guaranteed contracts with the NHLPA. A letter from Bettman to Goodenow was published that contradicts what Bettman has claimed.

 

[chiavsfan]

Since the topic has spun away from the original...I'll ask this again

When is this supposed "secret" proposal going to be made??

 

[Jussi]

Since the topic has spun away from the original...I'll ask this again

When is this supposed "secret" proposal going to be made??

IIRC, by Friday.