Goodenow's plan

[DARKSIDE]

A relative of mine is close with an NHL owner as I have said in the past. Again I'll tell you all that I'm honestly not screwing around and he really does know him.

I talked to my relative today and he said that he talked to the owner and the owner said it's merely number crunching time. They have agreed to a deal on the economic system and all they need is to determine what revenues are and number crunch.

If I'm wrong I don't want to be ridiculed for "lying" that a relative of mine is close with the owner but he really is. The owner is relatively low on the totem poll I would say though. BUT his GM is involved in the meetings a lot. I'll take that as it is because who knows how long it will take to decide what revenues are and more importantly what the numbers will be and how long it will take to "crunch" them. Also I will point out that his words were "broke" the union.

You mind if I take a guess, it's the Devils new owner Jeff Vanderbeek , former executive with Lehman Brothers?

 

[Tiki]

What does that say of the state of the NHL if you feel 2/3rds of the players are in danger of losing their NHL jobs by reserve system players from other teams

I think is says the same thing about the other major sports league's as well. Your in an entertainment industry. As many like to say, the players are the product. If you are not in the top end of your game, you are easily replaceable.

Look at the music industry. When a Top end band breaks up, like the Beatles or Led Zeppelin, lots of music fans care. IF bands like Uriah heep and Iron Butterfly go away, they only ones who even notice are huge fans of those bands themselves.

Myself, as an Islander fan, will someday be sad to see the Rick go, but on the other hand when the vast majority of my team gets traded or retires, I will not be all that concerned. They are good players, but many are as good or better. Only a few per team really matter to the makeup of the group.

A truly free market, with no CBA rules in place, I fell is not a good thing for the players at large. Guys like Iginla will cash in big time. Many more would lose out just as bad.

 

[djhn579]

What does that say of the state of the NHL if you feel 2/3rds of the players are in danger of losing their NHL jobs by reserve system players from other teams ??

Could mean that we should ban all contraction threads and consider adding a few more teams?


There's more too... If the NHL does finally crackdown on all the clutching and grabbing, smaller players may be back in fashion. You often hear about players that have a lot of skill but don't have the size to handle the punishing NHL game. What happens when the game becomes less punishing? It could substantially increase the pool of available talent...

 

[Mess]

I think is says the same thing about the other major sports league's as well. Your in an entertainment industry. As many like to say, the players are the product. If you are not in the top end of your game, you are easily replaceable.

A truly free market, with no CBA rules in place, I fell is not a good thing for the players at large. Guys like Iginla will cash in big time. Many more would lose out just as bad.

Hockey players have pretty big ego's .. If you are a NHL player you think of yourself pretty hot stuff ..

Up to that point in time as you have moved up the hockey ladder you have always gone through the process of camps and tryouts to make the next level or the team that you are competing for, or have had to protect your spot on a team from challengers ..

I don't see this as any different .. The NHL does not owe them a living .. They have to keep their job by holding off all challengers

In fact in the NEW NHL with a restrictive Hard Cap .. they are just as likely to lose their job even more so now .. as not only do they need to be better but now the wage they make can also come into play .. A better player WILL GET CUT from a team in a cost cutting move to get under a Hard Cap figure.. It happens all the time in the NFL under its system .. In the NHL with a feeder system of young and inexpensive players it promotes it even, that bottom of your NHL team is always in danger from your AHL team.

In a free market world at least the financial restraints of a CBA will not lead to your departure, and the opportunity exists to move freely to find a place for your skills and salary expectations to fit even if that is not on your current team ..

 

[Mess]

There's more too... If the NHL does finally crackdown on all the clutching and grabbing, smaller players may be back in fashion. You often hear about players that have a lot of skill but don't have the size to handle the punishing NHL game. What happens when the game becomes less punishing? It could substantially increase the pool of available talent...

Look no further then the World Championships .. You don't bring along any muscle and size does not matter on the international stage with the intent to bring your best team to the world stage ..

The NHL should take a page from the ideology and play your most skilled and best players not your biggest clutch and grab players to clog the ice and play the trap ..

Marty St. Louis I believe has done a long way to prove that exact point and break down barriers ..

If the NHL wants to promote more scoring and grow the game and attracted more fans then employ higher skilled players regardless of stature rather then increase the nets or make the Goalies smaller ..

The solution is right under their nose they just can't see it .. IMO .

 

[mooseOAK*]

In a free market world at least the financial restraints of a CBA will not lead to your departure, and the opportunity exists to move freely to find a place for your skills and salary expectations to fit even if that is not on your current team ..
[/size][/font]

The reverse is also true, teams dumping players whose play doesn't match up to their salary, which scares the hell out of the NHLPA and its members. They don't want cost certainty but they love the certainty of those guaranteed contracts.

 

[Boltsfan2029]

I think is says the same thing about the other major sports league's as well. Your in an entertainment industry. As many like to say, the players are the product. If you are not in the top end of your game, you are easily replaceable.

Agreed. We learned the hard way in the old days when over 50 players a year would dress for the Bolts: They're all temporary.

True then, true now, true always.

 

[CGG]

The reverse is also true, teams dumping players whose play doesn't match up to their salary, which scares the hell out of the NHLPA and its members. They don't want cost certainty but they love the certainty of those guaranteed contracts.

A contract is guaranteed. That's why they call it a contract. What's the point of signing a contract if the team can just break it for the heck of it? The CBA allows for buyouts at 2/3. That is the only reason teams can cut players and get out of paying them a portion of the contract which they agreed to. When a coach under contract gets fired, they still get paid. No CBA. See the difference? The 2/3 "guaranteed contract" is actually a benefit to the team, not the player.

 

[ti-vite]

A contract is guaranteed. That's why they call it a contract. What's the point of signing a contract if the team can just break it for the heck of it? The CBA allows for buyouts at 2/3. That is the only reason teams can cut players and get out of paying them a portion of the contract which they agreed to. When a coach under contract gets fired, they still get paid. No CBA. See the difference? The 2/3 "guaranteed contract" is actually a benefit to the team, not the player.

I think he (mooseOAK) is talking about contracts like the NFL where players, even if they have several years of contracts can be torn up on the spot and the player released with no cost penalty at anytime. The reason for huge front loaded contracts. They are also 'contracts'. I don't know how NBA contracts work.

I don't think the NHL will get this from the PA though. Can't have everything

 

[kdb209]

Originally Posted by gc2005
A contract is guaranteed. That's why they call it a contract. What's the point of signing a contract if the team can just break it for the heck of it? The CBA allows for buyouts at 2/3. That is the only reason teams can cut players and get out of paying them a portion of the contract which they agreed to. When a coach under contract gets fired, they still get paid. No CBA. See the difference? The 2/3 "guaranteed contract" is actually a benefit to the team, not the player.

I think he (mooseOAK) is talking about contracts like the NFL where players, even if they have several years of contracts can be torn up on the spot and the player released with no cost penalty at anytime. The reason for huge front loaded contracts. They are also 'contracts'. I don't know how NBA contracts work.

I don't think the NHL will get this from the PA though. Can't have everything

Yes. A contract is a contract, but that doesn't mean it's guaranteed. If the contract has a buyout or cancellation clause, then thems the rules.

But, we were talking about a post-decertification world. The 2/3 buyout is an artifact of the CBA. Without a CBA an owner could put any buyout clause in a contract (including zero - non guaranteed). Yes the top tier players would have enough negotiating leverage to get reasonable buyout terms, but the bulk of the players would not.

I don't think anyone was talking about non-guaranteed contracts as part of a CBA.

 

[Tiki]

In fact in the NEW NHL with a restrictive Hard Cap .. they are just as likely to lose their job even more so now .. as not only do they need to be better but now the wage they make can also come into play .. A better player WILL GET CUT from a team in a cost cutting move to get under a Hard Cap figure.. It happens all the time in the NFL under its system .. In the NHL with a feeder system of young and inexpensive players it promotes it even, that bottom of your NHL team is always in danger from your AHL team.

In a free market world at least the financial restraints of a CBA will not lead to your departure, and the opportunity exists to move freely to find a place for your skills and salary expectations to fit even if that is not on your current team ..

Yes, but again, look at who gets cut. Its not the Tom Brady's, or the Payton Manning's who lose their job. They may have the bigger contracts, but deserve them and get to stay. Its the mid tier guys, whom may be better, but make too much under the NFL's caps system that lose out to other players that make less. It keeps non key guys from earning so much it harms the team as a whole. Teams will live with a slight down grade at corner to sign that new wide receiver.

If a similar system was in place in hockey, Underachieving older player like Turgeon from Dallas and Leclair from Philly could have been cut. Bringing in younger, hungry players and improving the on ice product from fans like myself who've paid a lot of money to see live NHL games.

Players would also have to learn to balance their demands in a cap system. Is making more money worth their team not being able to sign that FA that could put them over the top? Does this pay rate put me in a more likely pay rate to be a cut? There are a few NFL players who have been noted for taking less, or offering back money for the benefit of a team (Chad Pennington of the Jets and Teddy Bruschi of the Pats come to mind right away). True leaders on and off the field. Very much unlike the guys the Isles dress as their top two centers.

Can you truly say that NHL players would be better off not getting a deal as a whole? Is it worth the risk? The top players and teams will get paid very well. The Mid to low tier guys would have just as much job security, next to none. They would not have any form of arbitration, entry level guarantee's, minimum contracts ect. If it works so well that way why did they from the NHLPA in the first place? They wanted the power that can come from negotiating as a group and the Security the CBA has provided them. They will take a huge hit in this current one, but will still be there to fight again on the next CBA and begin regain some of the lost ground after the owners get the system they seem to want so desperately.

 

[Tiki]

Agreed. We learned the hard way in the old days when over 50 players a year would dress for the Bolts: They're all temporary.

True then, true now, true always.

Hehe yea, trust me, Isles fans feel your pain. At least you have been able to see a cup recently. (and don't have Dimbury as your GM)