I don't see Fehr's memo as being particularly troubling. Assuming his description of the NHL's offer is accurate (and I believe it is, because he would be inviting a backlash from the league if he misrepresented it), then all he did was accurately assess it as a demand for further cuts to salary and bargaining rights.
Fehr's job is to communicate the issues to the players, and I can't see any exaggeration in that memo.
But the key point here, the thing that matters, is that he also communicates that these issues will need to be overcome in the upcoming meetings. Not that they are unsurpassable, or outrageous, which is exactly what he would say if things were close to breaking down again.
It's clear from the wording and the tone that Fehr expects to continue working with the NHL to chip away at least the most odious elements of the player-rights proposal (note the line where he contrasts a single concession to the entire package, the former being uncomfortable but the latter being unacceptable) and that he is now operating with the assumption that 50/50 is the final destination (note that he is now objecting to an immediate salary rollback, not a gradual cut). That is all great news, because it signals movement toward the owners' plan. They are at least on the same page that a 50/50 rollback will occur and that some players' rights will be restricted; now it's more about wrangling the specifics together over long hours of negotiation.
I'm not one to give Fehr much credit for anything (see: my posting history) but I don't think he's being unreasonable or counterproductive here.
