NHLPA losing its shoes and socks now....

Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by p.l.f., Jun 9, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. p.l.f.

    p.l.f. use the force

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    47,486
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Toronto, CANADA
    i don't get how the nhlpa can except a hard cap of 36 million after not budging at 49 million for so long :dunno:

    first they would never accept a salary cap - quoted by goodenow

    then after making serious concessions they would not budge below 49 million.

    now 36 million seems ok after going thru all the revenue paperwork ?

    :sarcasm:
     
  2. NYR469

    NYR469 Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    5,785
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    but what are the other parts of the deal? everyone focuses on the cap # but that might actually be the least important factor in the whole thing. a $36 mil cap with favorable free agency, qualifying offers, arbitration, etc might be better in some ways. they could set the cap at $100 mil but if there are no ways to get more $$ what good does that do the players. it isn't like they are taking the same deal and just lowering the cap.
     
  3. p.l.f.

    p.l.f. use the force

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    47,486
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Toronto, CANADA
    how can free agency be favorable with a 36 million hard cap?

    you can lower the free agency age to 28 but who would spend more than 3 - 5 million on anyone ?
     
  4. Slapshot17

    Slapshot17 Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2004
    Messages:
    2,055
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Prince George
    The only way I see the PA agreeing to a 36 million dollar cap or linkage of any sort is if there is a Franchise player clause in the agreement. Because then there will still be big money for the top 30 players in the game, and more to go around for the others.
     
  5. Motown Beatdown

    Motown Beatdown Need a slump buster

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2002
    Messages:
    8,572
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    Home Page:
    Are they losing now? Sure you could say, but linkage could change all that. The NHLPA turned down a hard cap without linkage of 42.5 million and it looks like they'll settle on a linked cap of 36-38 million dollars. Linkage is the key to the deal (and i dont know why the players fought linkage so hard) Take the NFL and it's linked cap. In 1998 the NFL salary cap was 51 million dollars. Next year (2005) it's expected to be around 85 million dollars.


    If the players and owners can find a way to grow this game, increase revenue they'll be well on their way to making more money, more than 42.5 million a year. Then again there will be a lot of work to do, but there's no reason why it cant be done.
     
  6. Resolute

    Resolute Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    Messages:
    4,125
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    AB
    Sure, the NHLPA might end up past $42.5 million by the end of the deal, but it will still be far, far less than the $53.5million (in year one) that the union was demanding at the time.

    The NHLPA's first offer was essentially a continuation of the status quo. To go from there to a linked cap starting with a maximum of $36 million is a crushing defeat no matter how you cut it.
     
  7. Motown Beatdown

    Motown Beatdown Need a slump buster

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2002
    Messages:
    8,572
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    Home Page:

    I agree with you on that. But linkage is better than 42.5 fixed. Thats if they can increase revenue.
     
  8. it's only a defeat in year 1 though, I think they'll gladly take one 36 mil cap and 5 years of 42+ then just 42 mil every year for 6 years.
     
  9. Resolute

    Resolute Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    Messages:
    4,125
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    AB
    Agreed JW.

    However, when you compare this against the offer the owners made that pretty much guaranteed 54% of revenes would go to the players, coupled with the profit sharing after $x, you have to wonder if the players really did throw away their best possible offer, even if this deal has the potential of surpassing the offer made at season's cancellation.
     
  10. Gary

    Gary Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    5,307
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Laser Printer Technician
    Location:
    Behind enemy lines
    Home Page:
    A "Franchise Player Clause" sounds like a recipe for disaster from where I sit. Here's what I'm talking about-On Detroit or Colorado...Who is the "Franchise" player?? Would'nt this start chaos in the locker room and have players threaten to leave? What if a team trades their FP? If, for example, Iglinia came to Boston with Thornton here. Iglinia's contract comes up and he wants FP money. What then? Here's another example-And it's arguable. Let's say Luongo is the FP for Florida. What happens if Bouwmeester matures and becomes the team MVP, is up for a contract and Luongo is still labeled the FP? To me, it would mean you cant have 2 or more stars without decension in the lockerroom :dunno:
     
  11. mercury

    mercury Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2003
    Messages:
    11,287
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    159
    Occupation:
    student/film intern
    Location:
    South Philly/SoCal
    Home Page:
    It really doesn't cause dissension within the locker room, since Franchise Player is not something most superstars want to be. In the NFL, it means you automatically get the average of the top 5 players at your position, so it prevents top players from getting outrageous contracts, and helps keep the salary cap system from crumbling. The Eagles' "franchise player" is DT Corey Simon, who arguably has not been top 5 at his position in the NFL for about 3 years. He is angry about it, since it has limited his earning potential by preventing him from testing the free agent waters. We are, in fact, attempting to trade Simon, but most teams don't want to pay him the $5.13 million he is guaranteed. Believe me, NHL'ers will not envy a teammate named the "franchise" guy.
     
  12. MHA

    MHA Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2004
    Messages:
    182
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    if this deal is true the players got royally killed.
     
  13. Drury_Sakic

    Drury_Sakic Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2003
    Messages:
    4,056
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    91
    Home Page:
    A few questions and points to be made..


    The players really were not expecting to get the 53.5 they asked for... they started high so that they would be met somewhere in the middle, just like the NHL did at 30 million.....

    42.5 for 6-8 years sounds OK....but the PA was going to be royally screwed by the "smaller issues" in that deal. That is why the deal fell apart without might fight from the rank and file. If the NHL had given a bit more on the small issues the members would have demanded more from the Union heads..There was also NO revenue sharing past year 1 really from the way the offer was worded.


    36 for 1 year and odds are a cap increasing by .5-2 million each year for 6-8 years also works out OK.. plus they get much better deals on the "smaller issues".. There will be also meaningful revenue sharing, meaning that smaller markets will have more money to give to players.

    This deal will work out much better in the long term unless league revenues totally tank, which I don't see happening past next season.
     
  14. Spungo*

    Spungo* Guest

    Would never happen. Absolutely never.
     
  15. Slapshot17

    Slapshot17 Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2004
    Messages:
    2,055
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Prince George
    Call it what you want, "Franchise Player", "Highest Paid Player", but if the highest paid player on the team does not count against the cap, the high-end players would be happy because they'd be making big money, and the money they would have taken out of the cap could be distributed amongst the other guys. I just can't see the PA agreeing to 36 million when they could have had 42.5 a few months ago.
     
  16. London Knights

    London Knights Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Messages:
    831
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The franchise player tag seems to work fine for the NFL. Why is it all of a sudden a bad thing when the NFL is held up as the holy grail when demanding a salary cap?

    And if they demand FP money they have every right to. Here's the fun part...an owner/GM can use something called "control" and say "NO". Two novel words. You get one player and you give it to the player who is deemed the most important and valuable to your team. For the most part there is no question who is the most valuable to a team.

    The leafs would want Sundin to be that player.
    New Jersey most likely would have Brodeur (or Niedermayer).
    Columbus is Nash
    Atlanta is Kovalchuk
    Detroit is Federov (Yzerman is older and at the end of the career, a possible 1 year deal as franchise at most)
    Colorado would be Sakic (similar to Detroit as Forsberg is most likely near done)

    It really isn't that hard. The team sure as heck knows who is the franchises most important player and thus they will be able to accept. I don't know why all of a sudden all players are lumped together as greedy SOB's. Prior to the lockout there could be a serious argument made to say that the NHL has the best group of players. They had very few holdouts and in a lot of cases the holdout was for longer years on their contract at the dollar amount they wanted. Aside from Yashin noone was holding out in the middle of a deal. Now because the PA didn't cave right away the players are all greedy beyond belief.
     
  17. txomisc

    txomisc Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2002
    Messages:
    8,215
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    141
    Occupation:
    self-employed
    Location:
    California
    Home Page:
    Correct. If the cap is low, everything else being favored is completely minimized. Whether you become a free agent at 27 or 31, you can still only sign for how much cap space a team has.
     
  18. Spungo*

    Spungo* Guest

    Would never happen. Absolutely never.
     
  19. tm

    tm Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2002
    Messages:
    345
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    119
    Location:
    Toronto
    Home Page:
    Ummmm, I have news for you ... aw, never mind. Leave him, he's on a roll ...
     
  20. coppernblue

    coppernblue Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2005
    Messages:
    384
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    does anyone remember j.r's suggestion of a maximum player salary like they have in the NBA?
    how come this has not come up at all
    say at like 7-8 million?
     
  21. Street Hawk

    Street Hawk Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Messages:
    5,310
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    Do you know how it works in the NFL????


    The Franchise tag in the NFL works because of the shear number of players a team has. A team has 22 starters, and of those 22, only 1 guy per year, who has played out his contract, can be tagged as the team's franchise player for that one year. But, that means that he gets the average of the top 5 players at his position, but that is ONLY a 1 YEAR deal.

    The team and player can still negotiate a long term deal, but the franchise tag ensures that the player should be at camp. The franchise player in the NFL still counts against the cap, it just a mechanism for teams to ensure that they keep a player they covet, but at a big cost. With non guaranteed deals in the NFL, it's all about getting the big signing bonus money.
     
  22. Kritter471

    Kritter471 Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2005
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Staff Writer
    Location:
    Dallas
    And why not?

    I like the idea - it does two things (especially if the designation could only be given to drafted/long-term players). It gives teams an ability to keep immensly talent, immensly popular players that they would not be able to keep under normal capped circumstances. For the Stars, it allows them to sign Modano, it may in the future allow Calgary to sign Iginla (if it didn't matter who drafted the team - remember, Iginla was developed by the Flames but drafted by Dallas) or Colorado to re-sign the Swedish Wunderkind. Heck, for the smaller markets, it might allow Columbus to keep Nash, Atlanta to keep either Heatley or Kovulchuk (or both, as one could be designated and the other signed under the cap - a pairing that almost definitely would be split by a very restrictive cap) or Boston, which is not smaller market but acts like it, to keep Thornton. And it would allow whoever ends up drafting Crosby a much more realistic shot at keeping him rather than seeing hiim wooed away by a team that clears as much cap space as possible.

    And it creates a very seperate market for your top players. No longer could a Tkachuk or Turgeon or Guerin point at the Modano's, Yzerman's and Forsberg's of the world as comparable mony. Since those players would most likely be franchised, the upper second tier couldn't use those salaries as negotiation starters as the contracts would be formed under an entirely different set of circumstances. Remeber, what really set off the escalation of salaries was the over-spending on the second and third-line players rather than the top group.

    I think the NHL would jump on the idea provided they get a fairly restrictive linked cap, as it gives the PA a face-saving manuver, gives the league a great PR starting ground ("now home-grown talent really does matter!") and could, at most, affect about 4% of all player contracts.

    And that's if every team chooses to go that route. The owners always have the right to say no if a player asks for the exemption.
     
  23. Resolute

    Resolute Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    Messages:
    4,125
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    AB
    If that was the case, why did the NHLPA not make a counter offer below $53.5 million? The NHL started at $39 (or in that area), the NHLPA countered $53.5, the NHL upped to $42.5. NHLPA took a nap.

    And, of course, we all know that none of this was negotiable. :dunno:

    This is where the union completely fell apart. Up until the season was cancelled, they treated every proposal as either take it or leave it. They would find an excuse to oppose every single NHL proposal, then reject it without any kind of negotiating or counter. It wasnt until the very end that they finally filed a counterproposal, and even then, did very little negotiating.

    Even at the 11th hour, Bob Goodenow was waiting for the owners to collapse. They didnt, and his strategy blew up in his face. The silver lining, I suppose, is that in the fallout of this, the players have finally come to the table ready to negotiate. The positive vibes coming from recent stories is the fruit of the two sides finally, actually negotiating.
     
  24. kdb209

    kdb209 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    16,272
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    126
    The Franchise Player thing works in the NFL because it has nothing to do with the cap - Franchise Players count against the cap just like anyone else. The Franchise tag is just a form of restricted free agency - it allows a team to designate a player who would otherwise be a UFA and keep him at a salary of the top 5 in his position (plus some other wrinkles). Players hate the designation because it limits them to a 1 yr deal with no signing bonus and delays a potentially bigger multi-yr deal with hefty bonus $$$s.
     
  25. Gee Wally

    Gee Wally Grumpy

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    50,300
    Likes Received:
    3,654
    Trophy Points:
    231
    Location:
    Grumpville USA
    Awards:
    my 2 cents..

    happiness of anybody means diddley. It's business . Cold and hard.

    Why offer a franchise tag if you don't have to ?

    If they push for it then the owners should come back with ...okay , like NFL , contracts aren't guaranteed.

    It should come as no surprise to anybody..Players, owners,and us fans that as time marches on the deal becomes less and less. There are billions being lost. It matters not who is at fault. All that matters is that it's a business and the numbers.

    The only way the players can get more is if the owners push the NHL market for players below say European market. But that's about it. And that won't happen.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"