Bob Gainey speaks: 2005 Draft.

[Kickabrat]

Can we keep Crosby out of this? He is being used as an example, but the issues being discussed apply to all draft eligble players. In front of a judge's bench, Crosby is no more special than Joe Smith.

Any scab would be in trouble not only with the NHLPA but with the non-scab players when they get back to work. For a young rookie player to take this step would make the rest of his career a living hell. But anyway, back to the issue at hand.

I am amazed that everything seems to hinge around the draft. If there is no draft, the whole hockey world as we know it comes to a crash. The hockey world as we know it came to a crash on Sept 15. Any new CBA (negotiated or otherwise implemented) will change hockey as we knew it. Not holding the draft is not what is going to bring things down its the fact there is no CBA. Yet, there are all these arguments flying around that the CBA is still valid until June, and then kaboom.

I have found no case law or NLRB ruling that would allow anti trust to come into play in the middle of a labor negotiation. As long as they are negotiating in good faith, how can anti trust come into play. I have repeatedly asked anyone to come up with evidence, but no one has.

In Brown v. Pro Football Services, Inc., the D.C. Circuit held that as long as the action taken by either the unions or management is legal within the labor laws, it will be exempt from the antitrust laws.

So Tom, unless you come up with something else, I suggest you get your head out of your ass and start reading.

 

[Tom_Benjamin]

Can we keep Crosby out of this? He is being used as an example, but the issues being discussed apply to all draft eligble players. In front of a judge's bench, Crosby is no more special than Joe Smith.

Sure, he is. We are talking about an 18 year old player. Joe Smith cannot win an antitrust suit because NHL teams have a good defense if they do not sign him. "Joe Who?" is a good defense because it is credible. "Sidney Who?" is not credible.

Any scab would be in trouble not only with the NHLPA but with the non-scab players when they get back to work. For a young rookie player to take this step would make the rest of his career a living hell. But anyway, back to the issue at hand.

What are you talking about? Why would Crosby cross a picket line? If the lockout is still on, Crosby would be sent back to Junior. If the players went on strike, Crosby would probably not cross. Whether the labour dispute is ongoing or not is not a factor in Crosby's decision.

His agent wants time to extort the maximum amount he can extort from his team. He wants to attend an NHL training camp even if it turns out there is no season. He wants time to relocate to his new city.

I am amazed that everything seems to hinge around the draft. If there is no draft, the whole hockey world as we know it comes to a crash.

Again, what are you talking about? If there is no draft, who owns the rights to Sidney Crosby? He has a legitimate interest in knowing who he can negotiate with on July 1st. He is a player who is absolutely certainly good enough to get a contract offer at age 18 and at least a tryout. For all we know there could be a settlement the night before next season is supposed to start. Sidney can't play? He doesn't get a chance to try out? How is that right?

The draft is certainly legal even though the CBA has expired. If, for example, the NHL lifted the lockout and agreed to play without a new CBA over the rest of the season, they have a draft order and they could hold their draft according to the rules of the old CBA. Sidney Crosby would almost certainly bound to the team that drafted him even though he was drafted under the provisions of an expired CBA.

But if there is no draft it can only mean one of two things on July 1st:

1) It means nobody can sign Sidney Crosby (or any other draft eligible player) to play hockey in the NHL for the following season.

2) It means that anybody can sign Sidney Crosby (or any other draft eligible player) to play hockey in the NHL for the following season.

That's what Crosby would ask a judge to decide. I can think of lots of reasons why a judge would decide Crosby was a free agent. I can't think of any that would explain why a judge would decide otherwise. What if the parties decided to go back to work while they negotiated a new deal? This is certainly common enough during strikes and lockouts. Where would that leave Sidney?

In Brown v. Pro Football Services, Inc., the D.C. Circuit held that as long as the action taken by either the unions or management is legal within the labor laws, it will be exempt from the antitrust laws.

So is denying Sidney Crosby - and every other 18 year old - the right to sign an NHL contract legal within the labour laws? How can it be?

Tom

 

[I in the Eye]

So is denying Sidney Crosby - and every other 18 year old - the right to sign an NHL contract legal within the labour laws? How can it be?

Tom

IMO, it's a privilege not a right to sign an NHL contract... Perhaps the labour laws deal with 'privileges' and 'rights' differently?

 

[me2]

I think the NHL will argue this if it came to it. I don't think there case can be very good though, or they would have the draft and avoid the problems. The big problem is here:

8.1. General. Commencing with the 1995 Entry Draft and with respect to the Entry Draft to be held each League Year thereafter, the provisions of this Article 8 shall apply. Each Entry Draft will be held in June (or July in the case of the 1995 Entry Draft), on a date which shall be determined by the Commissioner.

The provisions of section 8 apply to the entry draft. If there is no draft in June, the provisions don't apply to anything.

What is stopping the Entry Draft? They can use the old CBA rules (which don't require a season to run a draft), can't they.

Who says Crosby would cross?

Tom

So teams should go out of their way to sign some player who refuses to cross. That doesn't make much sense for a GM.

Lawyer: So why didn't you sign Crosby?

GMs: We are looking for replacement players to play now and Crosby wasn't available to play now. We offered him a standard per game contract like the other replacement players but he refused, apparently because he intended to strike once signed and didn't see the point of a per game contract. We offered him a contract. He's not signed because he choose not to. We didn't see the point continuing negotiations with him.

Judge: So you offered him a contract?

GM: Yes.

Judge: And now he's suing you because he didn't sign.

GM: Yes.

Judge: Next case please.

As for Crosby you expect him to go to all the trouble of signing/trying to sign, taking a team to court, fighting with the NHL, muddying his name just so he can sit out on the other side of the picket line? Why would he want that grief? He's not an NHLPA member, they can't make him do it. It's smarter to let some other chump take the fall, I'm sure the NHLPA could dredge up some.

 

[Tom_Benjamin]

IMO, it's a privilege not a right to sign an NHL contract... Perhaps the labour laws deal with 'privileges' and 'rights' differently?

Do you think the NHL could decide to deny blacks or Natives? Why not? If it is a privilege, they can deny it for any reason they want, can't they?

The only reasonable grounds to deny a player the right to sign an NHL contract is that he is not good enough. That's the reason the draft age stayed at age 18 even after the WHA folded. If the player is good enough, how can you legally deny him the right to play?

Tom

 

[I in the Eye]

Do you think the NHL could decide to deny blacks or Natives? Why not? If it is a privilege, they can deny it for any reason they want, can't they?

Or women? Likely No, but I imagine that they could decide to deny it to everyone, for the same reason, at the same time... The NHL is not a god-given right... In the end, the NHL is a business... an alternative work environment for hockey players... an option... Hockey players are free and able to find work and play elsewhere... All in my opinion...

Does Ted Nolan have a right to be a coach in the NHL?

The only reasonable grounds to deny a player the right to sign an NHL contract is that he is not good enough. That's the reason the draft age stayed at age 18 even after the WHA folded. If the player is good enough, how can you legally deny him the right to play?

Tom

How about a her... What if Sidney Crosby was a female? Would the NHL have to draft her and give her a contract?

 

[Tom_Benjamin]

In the end, the NHL is a business...

No, it is not. There are 30 businesses in the NHL. This is an important distinction. You are talking about 30 competing businesses choosing to do the same thing at the same time for the same reasons. They can do that if they are following a set of rules negotiated under a CBA. They can't do that just because. It is restraint of trade.

Why can't the owners simply decide to have a salary cap while they are deciding whether the teams can or cannot sign young players next summer if there is no draft?

How about a her... What if Sidney Crosby was a female? Would the NHL have to draft her and give her a contract?

Probably. How could they deny her if she was good enough?

Tom

 

[me2]

The only reasonable grounds to deny a player the right to sign an NHL contract is that he is not good enough.

Tom

Or that person is percieved as a trouble maker, or someone who won't fit in, or slacker, or not committed, team chemistry, or any other reason. See Ted Nolan, nobody questions whether he is good enough, he is.

If word gets out Crosby is a NHLPA plant teams might consider him as a troublemaker, uncommitted and disruptive of team chemistry. All good reason not to employ someone, talented enough or not.

 

[Tom_Benjamin]

Or that person is percieved as a trouble maker, or someone who won't fit in, or slacker, or not committed, team chemistry, or any other reason. See Ted Nolan, nobody questions whether he is good enough, he is.

This is silly. Why is it that I am arguing with the usual people in this case?

Why can't one of the lockout costs be that Sidney Crosby becomes a free agent? Perhaps the owners recognize that is a price they have to pay to get the system they want. And it would not be a terrible thing if Crosby ends up in New York. Free agent or not, he is probably still subject to the entry level salary system. A franchise player in New York or Toronto would be a happy event for the league as a whole.

On the other hand, it might be a pressure point on the owners to get something done before a season is lost. What is the problem with it? Why is it so important for owner apologists to dismiss the idea?

Ted Nolan is never going to get hired again and for very good reason. He managed to get his boss fired. That's unacceptable in every industry.

If word gets out Crosby is a NHLPA plant teams might consider him as a troublemaker, uncommitted and disruptive of team chemistry. All good reason not to employ someone, talented enough or not.

You don't honestly believe this is remotely possible. None of the 30 teams would hire the consensus best player since Lemieux because they all think he might be a troublemaker? A judge is going to buy that? Anyone over the age of 10 is going to buy it as the reason Crosby doesn't get offers on July 1st?

I do agree with one of your points. I can't see why the owners don't go ahead and hold a draft anyway. Daly has said they will not, but I don't see anything in the CBA that prevents them from drawing up a draft order. They have to give the NHLPA notice and they may get a grievance over it, but so what? That's better than doing nothing and buying into at least the possibility of a Sidney Crosby lawsuit.

The best answer I can come up with is that they can't agree as to how to do it. It isn't hard to imagine fights over that issue.

Tom

 

[Kickabrat]

No, it is not. There are 30 businesses in the NHL. This is an important distinction. You are talking about 30 competing businesses choosing to do the same thing at the same time for the same reasons. They can do that if they are following a set of rules negotiated under a CBA. They can't do that just because. It is restraint of trade. Tom

Once again you are WRONG. I already pointed out to you that under the NLR Act, the NHL is deemed to be an Association for purposes of that Act. It can act on behalf of all teams in labor relations matters.

I have given you the relevant sections of the NLR Act, I have cited legal precedent, all which show that anti trust legislation cannot be used if the parties are in the middle of negotiations. I have pointed out that Crosby can't sue to become a free agent because he already is. He can't sign with an NHL team because they are negotiating a labor contract. There can be no draft without a CBA (negotiated or otherwise imposed).

You yourself pointed out that a court said "Until either the union decertifies or there is a new CBA the restrictions negotiated under the old CBA apply and there is no antitrust violation." Crosby or anyone else cannot sue under antitrust while good faith negotiations are going on. The restrictions of the old CBA apply, you said so yourself. That means Crosby cannot play in the NHL unless he is drafted. Crosby or any other player has no "legal right" to force a team to draft him. Therefore he has no case.

As for Crosby deserving special consideration in a court of law, that concept is so full of crap it's not funny. For every one Cosby the NHL could trot out more than a dozen failed high draft picks who all had great potential and whose careers amounted to a hilll of beans, and players who were never drafted who became hall of famers. No judge would treat Crosby any different than Joe Smith.

Bottom line, not holding the draft means nothing. Once a new CBA (negotiated or otherwise imposed) happens, it will include language to take care of the draft and many other administrative matters. If the NLRB approves, that's it, CROSBY et al CANNOT SUE! If the NLRB teras a new one in the NHL, then the NHL is in so much doogy do do that the draft will be the least of their concern.

 

[gary69]

You yourself pointed out that a court said "Until either the union decertifies or there is a new CBA the restrictions negotiated under the old CBA apply and there is no antitrust violation." Crosby or anyone else cannot sue under antitrust while good faith negotiations are going on. The restrictions of the old CBA apply, you said so yourself. That means Crosby cannot play in the NHL unless he is drafted. Crosby or any other player has no "legal right" to force a team to draft him. Therefore he has no case.

As for Crosby deserving special consideration in a court of law, that concept is so full of crap it's not funny. For every one Cosby the NHL could trot out more than a dozen failed high draft picks who all had great potential and whose careers amounted to a hilll of beans, and players who were never drafted who became hall of famers. No judge would treat Crosby any different than Joe Smith.

Bottom line, not holding the draft means nothing. Once a new CBA (negotiated or otherwise imposed) happens, it will include language to take care of the draft and many other administrative matters. If the NLRB approves, that's it, CROSBY et al CANNOT SUE! If the NLRB teras a new one in the NHL, then the NHL is in so much doogy do do that the draft will be the least of their concern.

It sounds like you're probably right here, it would seem reasonable for a judge to accept NHL's position, that Crosby or whoever Joe Smith will not be prevented from playing in the NHL or negotiating a contract once NHL resumes. Whether there has been draft or not.

NHL could argue that since the new CBA negotiations are still going on, the specific details have yet to be determined (at that time of lawsuit) but will be determined in the new CBA.

 

[triggrman]

Wasn't LeCavalier the next Lemieux?

 

[Kickabrat]

For all we know there could be a settlement the night before next season is supposed to start. Sidney can't play? He doesn't get a chance to try out? How is that right?

If there is a settlement, one of the things settled will be how to handle the 2005 draftees. What those negotiated rules are will be what happens to Crosby and all the other 250+ draftees. If they don't like it too bad. The newly negotiated CBA would take precedent.

The draft is certainly legal even though the CBA has expired. If, for example, the NHL lifted the lockout and agreed to play without a new CBA over the rest of the season, they have a draft order and they could hold their draft according to the rules of the old CBA. Sidney Crosby would almost certainly bound to the team that drafted him even though he was drafted under the provisions of an expired CBA.

The draft is NOT legal if the CBA has expired. PERIOD. Why in the God's name would the NHLPA & NHL agree to institute the old CBA just to hold a draft.
1. They have higher priority issues to deal with before they get to the draft
2. The draft is a negotiation chip that neither party will give up just to make you happy so you can see your favorite team draft a player.

But if there is no draft it can only mean one of two things on July 1st:
1) It means nobody can sign Sidney Crosby (or any other draft eligible player) to play hockey in the NHL for the following season.

Hooray, you finally got something right.

2) It means that anybody can sign Sidney Crosby (or any other draft eligible player) to play hockey in the NHL for the following season.

No he and others cannot sign with the NHL while good faith negotiations are on-going and no CBA exists.

That's what Crosby would ask a judge to decide. I can think of lots of reasons why a judge would decide Crosby was a free agent. I can't think of any that would explain why a judge would decide otherwise. What if the parties decided to go back to work while they negotiated a new deal? This is certainly common enough during strikes and lockouts. Where would that leave Sidney?

If the parties went back to work while still negotiating then they would have to agree on rules for going back to work. I guess you are implying the old CBA would be brought back in the interim. If that were the case, this new agreement of theirs would include an agreement between the 2 parties on what to do with the draft and other administrative matters that needed fixing up.

So is denying Sidney Crosby - and every other 18 year old - the right to sign an NHL contract legal within the labour laws? How can it be?

It is legal under labor laws because they are still negotiating a contract. Until they come to a resolution (negotiated or otherwise imposed) nothing happens with the draftees, the UFA's, the RFA's etc.

 

[Kickabrat]

Wasn't LeCavalier the next Lemieux?

So was Alexander Daigle.

 

[YellHockey*]

So was Alexander Daigle.

No he wasn't. He was projected to top out as a star player but not a superstar in the calibre of Gretzky, Lemeiux, Orr, etc.

 

[Kickabrat]

No he wasn't. He was projected to top out as a star player but not a superstar in the calibre of Gretzky, Lemeiux, Orr, etc.

look up the word sarcasm in the dictionary. Then read the statement I made in the context of Tom's statement that a budding superstar junior player could get away with suing for free agency whilst a Joe Smith would not. Has the lightbulb turned on yet?

 

[Tom_Benjamin]

look up the word sarcasm in the dictionary. Then read the statement I made in the context of Tom's statement that a budding superstar junior player could get away with suing for free agency whilst a Joe Smith would not. Has the lightbulb turned on yet?

Gee whiz. How great is this? I laughed and laughed.

Sportsnet just had a segment on Sidney Crosby and him knocking heads with the league about giving away tickets to watch him play. Since he is filling rinks around the league, he's asked the teams to give 100 tickets to the underpriviliged.

Oh, and the possibility he might become an unrestricted free agent if the draft is not held mysteriously came up. Crosby and his agent didn't comment on air, but it was obvious where the story came from. The boys on the HockeyCentral panel certainly did debate it both on the Sportscast and the pre-game show.

They didn't discuss ways and means except to say that it would be one for the lawyers and Crosby might indeed try to get himself declared a UFA. Kypreos had clearly talked to IMG, Crosby's agent. Gord Stellick made the point that while the entire 2005 draft class was in the same boat, Sidney Crosby was special. Funny that the idea was not dismissed out of hand, eh?

I think Sidney and his agent are doing the NHLPA a favour.

Tom

 

[Kickabrat]

Oh, and the possibility he might become an unrestricted free agent if the draft is not held mysteriously came up. Crosby and his agent didn't comment on air, but it was obvious where the story came from.

No on-air comment by his reps....hmmm wonder why? Couldn't be because they know the facts and what the outcome would be could it?

They didn't discuss ways and means except to say that it would be one for the lawyers and Crosby might indeed try to get himself declared a UFA.

Gee, I wonder why they didn't discuss the ways and means? With all those bright researchers on staff not one of them could figure out a way he could get away with this? How strange.

Kypreos had clearly talked to IMG, Crosby's agent. Gord Stellick made the point that while the entire 2005 draft class was in the same boat, Sidney Crosby was special. Funny that the idea was not dismissed out of hand, eh?
I think Sidney and his agent are doing the NHLPA a favour. Tom

Gee I wonder why he didn't talk to an independent lawyer? Would you expect a player agent to publically say...."Oh no we could never win that case"?

Stelllick was absolutely correct, everybody is in the same boat. I think he meant Crosby was special on the ice. Which he is. In a court of law, he is just like all the other prospects. If he gets to be FA they all do. If the others don't he doesn't.

The only possibility I can figure out for them to be decalred FA's is if negotiations breakdown and are officilally broken off. The NHL decalres an impasse and loses. In which case, IMO the NHL is toast and FA draftees is the least of their worries. So I don't see them going this route unless they are absolutely positive that they win. It's clear that as long as they are negotiating in good faith, antitrust is not applicable. If any one else has got another way figured out let's hear it.

BTW I did not see the show, so I am going by what Tom has written.

 

[Tom_Benjamin]

The only possibility I can figure out for them to be decalred FA's is if...

A more reasonable possibility is that you have been completely wrong throughout this entire thread.

If there is no draft, I'm betting Crosby files suit on July 1st for the reasons I set out in the thread. I'd also bet he wins. I was guessing before, but Brisson and IMG are sending a message loud and clear and it isn't hard to see why. If they did not already have legal opinions telling them they can win, they would not have said anything. They even primed Sidney. "I'm not even thinking about next year or the NHL yet. I'm just trying to get better as a player. Blah, blah, blah."

If he wins, every player in his draft class will become free agents. The difference is that if Joe Smith doesn't get any offers he goes back in the 2006 draft. The NHL can get away with not offering him a contract and avoiding a collusion suit. They can get away with that with every other player because I don't think there is anyone else who can flatly claim they are NHL quality right now.

If Sidney gets a judge to grant him free agent status, he had better get about 15 phone calls the next day or he has another lawsuit ready to file. And that one will cost the NHL lots.

I'm sure Sportsnet will keep replaying the story if you want to see it. I'm also sure the story won't go away.

Tom

 

[SwisshockeyAcademy]

A more reasonable possibility is that you have been completely wrong throughout this entire thread.

If there is no draft, I'm betting Crosby files suit on July 1st for the reasons I set out in the thread. I'd also bet he wins. I was guessing before, but Brisson and IMG are sending a message loud and clear and it isn't hard to see why. If they did not already have legal opinions telling them they can win, they would not have said anything. They even primed Sidney. "I'm not even thinking about next year or the NHL yet. I'm just trying to get better as a player. Blah, blah, blah."

If he wins, every player in his draft class will become free agents. The difference is that if Joe Smith doesn't get any offers he goes back in the 2006 draft. The NHL can get away with not offering him a contract and avoiding a collusion suit. They can get away with that with every other player because I don't think there is anyone else who can flatly claim they are NHL quality right now.

If Sidney gets a judge to grant him free agent status, he had better get about 15 phone calls the next day or he has another lawsuit ready to file. And that one will cost the NHL lots.

I'm sure Sportsnet will keep replaying the story if you want to see it. I'm also sure the story won't go away.

Tom

What is the criteria involved in flatly claiming to be NHL quality? You do not feel that there is anyone else that can flatly claim it so you must have a real good handle on the draft class.

 

[GabbyDugan]

You people sure do think small.

Sidney Crosby is 17 years old and on the cusp of becoming a Canadian icon.

Nick Kyprios and 95 % of the people who have posted in this thread seem convinced that he is going to turn 18 years old with sheafs of legal briefs in his attache case and march a bunch of lawyers to the nearest courthouse. Why would he do this?

Sidney Crosby is a fairhaired, likeable kid cut out of the same cloth as Wayne Gretzky, Gordie Howe, Paul Anka, and Terry Fox. How many people in the Gatineau Arena Saturday night were teenage girls who don't care about lockouts or left wing locks and never will, but came to see Sidney Crosby? How many fathers were gathered around their TV sets and telling their atom aged boys to "watch how Crosby does it"? How many of the Saturday night six-pack crowd were watching the game and debating how "Crosby sucks...no he's the next Gretzky and Lemieux combined", etc. etc. etc. - Sidney Crosby is going to be on top of the hockey world, and I don't think he wants his first Sports Illustrated cover picture to be taken in front of The Court of Queen's Bench...

Sidney Crosby could wait until he is 20 or 23 years old to join the NHL, and all that would do is drive up his value. He is a one of a kind. If you owned the Mona Lisa and said you would bring the painting to market maybe next week, or the week after, or just eventually, what would it matter? You have the only one in the world...why devalue it by going to court to get it on the market instantly? Why enter the world of professional hockey througha legal writ instead of a red carpet at center ice in one of those magnificent NHL arenas?

Crosby has the opportunity to be an Eric Lindros in reverse. He will be the spokesman for any charity he choses. He will endorse any product he wants to. He will attend any function,and his presence will be treated as a news event. Through all this, he will be paid a sum in the millions by an NHL club to play hockey. He will play rich, live rich, and retire rich. Why does he need to spend his birthday crying to a judge..."I wanna play hockey, and I wanna play now ,whaaa, whaaa, whaaa..."?????

This is a very classy kid here. He starts out popular, dignified, and respected at a time when the rest of us are worried about how badly the millionaire hockey players are being screwed by the billionaire owners (or is it vice versa? I stopped caring about 1999...)

Tell me again why he is going to go to court instead of sitting back as the world unfurls at his skate blades???

 

[Jeffrey]

You people sure do think small.

Sidney Crosby is 17 years old and on the cusp of becoming a Canadian icon.

Nick Kyprios and 95 % of the people who have posted in this thread seem convinced that he is going to turn 18 years old with sheafs of legal briefs in his attache case and march a bunch of lawyers to the nearest courthouse. Why would he do this?

Sidney Crosby is a fairhaired, likeable kid cut out of the same cloth as Wayne Gretzky, Gordie Howe, Paul Anka, and Terry Fox. How many people in the Gatineau Arena Saturday night were teenage girls who don't care about lockouts or left wing locks and never will, but came to see Sidney Crosby? How many fathers were gathered around their TV sets and telling their atom aged boys to "watch how Crosby does it"? How many of the Saturday night six-pack crowd were watching the game and debating how "Crosby sucks...no he's the next Gretzky and Lemieux combined", etc. etc. etc. - Sidney Crosby is going to be on top of the hockey world, and I don't think he wants his first Sports Illustrated cover picture to be taken in front of The Court of Queen's Bench...

Sidney Crosby could wait until he is 20 or 23 years old to join the NHL, and all that would do is drive up his value. He is a one of a kind. If you owned the Mona Lisa and said you would bring the painting to market maybe next week, or the week after, or just eventually, what would it matter? You have the only one in the world...why devalue it by going to court to get it on the market instantly? Why enter the world of professional hockey througha legal writ instead of a red carpet at center ice in one of those magnificent NHL arenas?

Crosby has the opportunity to be an Eric Lindros in reverse. He will be the spokesman for any charity he choses. He will endorse any product he wants to. He will attend any function,and his presence will be treated as a news event. Through all this, he will be paid a sum in the millions by an NHL club to play hockey. He will play rich, live rich, and retire rich. Why does he need to spend his birthday crying to a judge..."I wanna play hockey, and I wanna play now ,whaaa, whaaa, whaaa..."?????

This is a very classy kid here. He starts out popular, dignified, and respected at a time when the rest of us are worried about how badly the millionaire hockey players are being screwed by the billionaire owners (or is it vice versa? I stopped caring about 1999...)

Tell me again why he is going to go to court instead of sitting back as the world unfurls at his skate blades???

to play with the canadians

 

[Tom_Benjamin]

Tell me again why he is going to go to court instead of sitting back as the world unfurls at his skate blades???

So he doesn't end up in a place like Edmonton or Carolina and does end up in a place like Toronto or New York even if the entry level salary cap applies and the money is the same to start. Being a cultural icon in Toronto is way, way better than being one in Edmonton. If his agent does not push him to sue, his agent is not doing his job.

It is kind of like if there was a salary cap and early free agency. Who would choose Edmonton if they had any other option? If there is no season, Crosby probably has an option. What chance do the Oilers or Hurricane have of landing him if he is a free agent? The same chance the Oilers will have with every really good free agent in a Gary Bettman designed NHL.

Zero.

Tom

 

[GabbyDugan]

Being a cultural icon in Toronto is way, way better than being one in Edmonton. If his agent does not push him to sue, his agent is not doing his job.
Tom

Sidney Crosby at 15 did not say word one about the QMJHL Draft being a legal issue for him or that going to Rimouski was a problem. This was a team playing in an isolated area, it's talent pool was depleted, and Crosby is not French. There were probably a half dozen more attractive places for Crosby to play in the QMJHL alone, and I'm sure a kid from a small town in Atlantic Canada would have been just as eager to play in the OHL as the QMJHL . Did his agent do Sidney Crosby a disservice by failing to file lawsuits on Crosby's behalf? I'm sure his parents would have loved to see their boy play in Halifax , Cape Breton, or maybe New Brunswick, or even London, Windsor , or Peterborough. Instead, they supported the QMJHL Draft, the QMJHL itself, and the Rimouski Oceanic hockey club. Crosby was the one person who could bring down the CHL Entry Draft and stick it to the hockey establishment, but he didn't. Maybe being unselfish makes him feel good, and using things like lawsuits and court injunctions to get his way go against his personal beliefs.

Even this year, the team Crosby is playing on looks to me like a longshot to make the Memorial Cup. The only way they get there is if Crosby carries a mediocre goalie and a bunch of Midget AAA defensemen on his back every step of the way. Should Pat Brisson be demanding a trade to a better QMJHL team so that Crosby can play in London next May? Maybe he should, but maybe also that just isn't the way Sidney Crosby wants to do things.

I don't see why Toronto or New York are going to be so wonderful for a teenager like Sidney Crosby or playing for Carolina or Columbus or Nashville would necessarily be punishment. How many kids have the Rangers and Maple Leafs signed since say 1926 that have become popular like rock stars or enhanced their image? Maybe Crosby would rather hang out with some really "nice" girls in Minnesota instead of having paparazzi folowing him from nightclub to nightclub in Los Angeles or New York. Would Crosby be welcomed with open arms into the New York Rangers dressing room by the team's veterans? Would Matts Sundin and Tie Domi be thrilled to see the media glare in Toronto shift to Crosby?

I could see Crosby wanting to play on certain NHL teams over others, but I don't think he wants to be the guy who dismantles the NHL Entry Draft to accomodate his whims, either.

This kid is 17 years old, and "If his agent does not push him to sue, his agent is not doing his job. " ????????? Has Sidney Crosby suffered grievous harm already? Does he "deserve" to be awarded damages and restitution?

 

[thinkwild]

Crosby has the opportunity to be an Eric Lindros in reverse.

An intersting player to compare him to. I dont see why you would be suggesting he would be crying before a judge, waahh wahh. He would very astutely allow his agents to allow the courts to render a decision during a potentially unique set of circumstances on what his status is. Regardless of the status in negotiations the courts could award him if circumstances came to that point, he would surely still arrive on a red carpet.

But I have to wonder like you if Sidney really enjoys all this publicity over this peculiar legal case. I'd think he wishes we would all not talk about it and not drag him into the middle of this battle. But in the end, business is business. And he has already shown savvy that he recognizes his value in his getting owners of the Q to put up some seats for underpriveleged kids, since the owners are making such a boatload of cash off him. He seems like a pretty smart kid. One likely to stand with his union.