Helene Elliott- Today's talks could pivotal

[NYR1724]

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-nhl2jun02,1,7062784.story?coll=la-headlines-sports

Elliot reported the following:

-FA drop from 30 to 28 over the last 3 years of the CBA
- Rookie contracts are 4 years long, cap at $850K, bonus cap at $400K
-Players proposed to accept 24 percent rollbacks ONLY if the owners honored the 2004-2005 contracts.

Here's a significant quote
"We are heading in the right direction," the source said. "If they add a Friday meeting, they may add a Monday meeting. But this could still all blow up."

NOT OPTIMISTIC.. staying consistent with go kim johnsson's idea

Click to read more...

 

[Mess]

Players have proposed accepting the 24% salary rollback they put forth in December, but only if last season's contracts are honored.

That one is interesting to see how it unfolds ..

 

[GirardIsStupid]

how exactly do the owners honour the 04-05 contracts heading into next season? do the players' contracts carry over into the next year? does this also mean there won't be as many free agents if there is an off-season? if that's the case, I would think its understandable given how much the players have conceded and lost. they make up for some of the money they lost and they have the security of knowing where they will play for next season. this is most certainly a big issue that could cause a rift amongst the teams that can or cannot afford to maintain such contracts for yet another season.

 

[Mess]

how exactly do the owners honour the 04-05 contracts heading into next season? do the players' contracts carry over into the next year?

Well the article says that the Owners preference is ..

NHL officials say the 2004-05 season should be wiped off contracts.

So this may lead to the 24% taken off the table .. That would really change teams as they would not be able to fit some players with no rollback ..

A team like Colorado will not have room for Forsberg at old rates to Sakic and Blake etc ..

 

[norrisnick]

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-nhl2jun02,1,7062784.story?coll=la-headlines-sports

Elliot reported the following:

-FA drop from 30 to 28 over the last 3 years of the CBA
- Rookie contracts are 4 years long, cap at $850K, bonus cap at $400K
-Players proposed to accept 24 percent rollbacks ONLY if the owners honored the 2004-2005 contracts.

Here's a significant quote
"We are heading in the right direction," the source said. "If they add a Friday meeting, they may add a Monday meeting. But this could still all blow up."

NOT OPTIMISTIC.. staying consistent with go kim johnsson's idea

That part is interesting. I wonder what percentage of players that would have become UFA without the honoring of the '04-'05 deals would trade that year for freedom on the open market?

 

[GirardIsStupid]

Well the article says that the Owners preference is ..


So this may lead to the 24% taken off the table ..

Well, I imagine some of the large markets might do some arm twisting to get this roll back. plus, what's the alternative? having no roll back which would be a huge burden for a number of teams to bear (i.e. Islanders)?

 

[Mess]

Well, I imagine some of the large markets might do some arm twisting to get this roll back. plus, what's the alternative? having no roll back which would be a huge burden for a number of teams to bear (i.e. Islanders)?

And if they are honored and extended a year ..

Then you have teams like Philly and Toronto , Detroit that 60+ mil Salaries going into the lockout .. That will be real interesting to see how they chop to get below a cap ..

Wouldn't it be strange for a Team like Philly .. How can they sign Carter and Richards with no Cap room to sign them , and needing to chop 30 mil off to get under a cap to boot.

If buyout rates are still 2/3 as per old CBA then these teams to chop $30 mil will payout $20 mil immediately before the season even gets under way ..

I wonder what option is really better 24% and contracts honoured or vice versa for teams .. I am thinking Owners would really be split on this ..

 

[GirardIsStupid]

Goodenow's a smart guy for creating this issue. One way or the other, the NHLPA will have some members making salaries comparable to levels prior to the lockout. It definitely eases the burden of having lost a year's worth of salaries. If I'm the NHL, I'm not that desperate for the rollback. I want to get rid of those old contracts as quickly as possible to usher in a new economic era. After all, the number of committed contracts falls from 592 in 04-05 to 288 in 05-06. Eventually, only 112 players would have contracts based on the old system heading into the second year of the new CBA. Short term pain for long term gain.

This predicament also exhibits that the NHL and NHLPA are still not close to a deal (contrary to what a certain blogger proclaimed earlier today). Some people put too much faith into their sources and take them for their word. I get the sense not all of those involved in these negotiations (especially from the PA side) fully comprehend the issues that have yet to be resolved.

 

[Mess]

Goodenow's a smart guy for creating this issue. One way or the other, the NHLPA will have some members making salaries comparable to levels prior to the lockout. It definitely eases the burden of having lost a year's worth of salaries. If I'm the NHL, I'm not that desperate for the rollback. I want to get rid of those old contracts as quickly as possible to usher in a new economic era. Short term pain for long term gain.

Its a tough call ..

If the owners want the market prices reset by 24% then they have to honour contracts ..

If they want a year off of those big contracts no 24% and then those old contracts are used as the base for Qualifying offers and Arbitration in comparison .. Keeping players wages like the old CBA really .. Where only UFA can set a player lower ..

A team like Calgary would love to get a 24% off of Iginla's 7.5 mil contract that knocks him down to 5.7 mil and he as a RFA get qualified at 5.7 rather then 7.5 mil .. Thats huge ..

As you say .. With a year knocked off contracts lots of players are going to make up for last year by getting paid old Salaries .. Pronger gets $10 mil for next season.

Fixed typo

 

[norrisnick]

This predicament also exhibits that the NHL and NHLPA are still not close to a deal (contrary to what a certain blogger proclaimed earlier today). Some people put too much faith into their sources and take them for their word. I get the sense not all of those involved in these negotiations (especially from the PA side) fully comprehend the issues that have yet to be resolved.

That of course is assuming that Helene Elliott is any more credible. Many other sources other than "he who shall remain nameless" have talked of caps and floors and that the rollback is still in the picture without any of this business of either/or with regards to the missing year's contracts.

If you are going to be sceptical of one source, don't automatically accept the other.

 

[NHLFanSince2020]

I'm thinking the NHL will take the 24% rollback and honor the 04-05 contracts.

It simplifies things (as far as # of free agents) and they get 24% back on existing contracts.

Seems like a no-brainer to me.

Here is reality check for everybody though.

"Bill Daly, the NHL's chief legal officer, said he would not comment on the talks but said rumors of an imminent agreement were untrue."

 

[GirardIsStupid]

That of course is assuming that Helene Elliott is any more credible. Many other sources other than "he who shall remain nameless" have talked of caps and floors and that the rollback is still in the picture without any of this business of either/or with regards to the missing year's contracts.

If you are going to be sceptical of one source, don't automatically accept the other.

It's quite different to take someone for their word when they say "a deal is close" and assume it to be true rather than having been presented any information that would lend credible support to any such notions. This person has at least managed to find out what's possibly being said. I doubt someone would self-contrive such specific info like this... In other words, I'm more apt (gullable) to believe someone if they tell me why they think a deal is going to get done soon.

It also helps that this person's credibility has yet to be tainted (from what little info I know) in comparison to the other who has let down hockey fans over and over. So, as long as you don't have the reputation of being a rumor mongerer, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt the first time around.

 

[Mess]

That of course is assuming that Helene Elliott is any more credible. Many other sources other than "he who shall remain nameless" have talked of caps and floors and that the rollback is still in the picture without any of this business of either/or with regards to the missing year's contracts.

If you are going to be sceptical of one source, don't automatically accept the other.

Good point .. but it makes sence from a PA point of view though .. It was their 24% offer .. If the NHL wants a year off contacts expiring then that is their gain or 24% off .. If you think about it as both to the owners then its 100% off 04-05 + 24% off future .. Would the PA offer the owners that.. WHY ??

Either or makes more sense.

Owners would need to decide what benefits them most ..

 

[norrisnick]

I guess I'd really hate to be a player without a contract right now. Either scenario really cuts into the teams' demands for their services.

 

[GirardIsStupid]

I guess I'd really hate to be a player without a contract right now. Either scenario really cuts into the teams' demands for their services.

That's a good point. Goodenow's proposition is certainly a risky one. I wouldn't be surprised if they backed off (bluffing) on this issue and re-offer the roll back without any strings attached...though the number of players with committed contracts substantially decreases. Clearly, however, the owners can afford to live without the roll back while those players with short careers and without contracts would take a huge financial hit.

 

[Mess]

I'm thinking the NHL will take the 24% rollback and honor the 04-05 contracts.

It simplifies things (as far as # of free agents) and they get 24% back on existing contracts.

Seems like a no-brainer to me.

Here is reality check for everybody though.

"Bill Daly, the NHL's chief legal officer, said he would not comment on the talks but said rumors of an imminent agreement were untrue."

NO brainer ??

I agree that is probably the way it might go ..but ..

Take a team like the NYR and

Jagr at 11 mil and Holik at 9 mil

If a year has expired then the Rangers save $20 mil combined ..

If they take the discount then its $20 mil - 24% =~ $15 mil save $5 mil combined / year .. but they also save $5 mil in all the other remaining years ,, Not sure how many years they have left though, but it would take 3 more additional years to reach the $20 mil savings.

 

[Mess]

That's a good point. Goodenow's proposition is certainly a risky one. I wouldn't be surprised if they backed off (bluffing) on this issue and re-offer the roll back without any strings attached...though the number of players with committed contracts substantially decreases. Clearly, however, the owners can afford to live without the roll back while those players with short careers and without contracts would take a huge financial hit.

Not really the big teams will be capped out either way ..

Teams like Boston only have a 6 players under contract they need 22 for a team ..

and the small market teams that have to come up to the min floor have to buy ..

This is actually a way to get the current UFA employed as well , without flooding the market which would allow the current UFA the ability to earn more as there wouuld be less supply then demand .

But if you think about from a player point on view .. he lost a year of wages is he likely also going to agree when he returns to also give back another 24% ??

This also begs the question then who would Goodenow cater more to employed players or UFA going into the lockout .. The UFA remember didn't lose $$ as they had not contract but the others did ..

 

[NHLFanSince2020]

NO brainer ??

I agree that is probably the way it might go ..but ..

Take a team like the NYR and

Jagr at 11 mil and Holik at 9 mil

If a year has expired then the Rangers save $20 mil combined ..

If they take the discount then its $20 mil - 24% =~ $15 mil save $5 mil combined / year .. but they also save $5 mil in all the other remaining years ,, Not sure how many years they have left though, but it would take 3 more additional years to reach the $20 mil savings.

The Rangers are kind of unique though, no one has come close to the Rangers when it comes to overspending.

So the Islanders get 1 year off the Yashin contract. Whoop-dee-doo! I think they'd prefer 24% off every year over the 1 year off.

At this time, I stand behind my thought that the NHL taking the 24% over the 1 year is a no-brainer.

If I sleep on it (and also read a plethora of reasons to the contrary which I expect from this board) then I might change my tune.

 

[Mess]

The Rangers are kind of unique though, no one has come close to the Rangers when it comes to overspending.

So the Islanders get 1 year off the Yashin contract. Whoop-dee-doo! I think they'd prefer 24% off every year over the 1 year off.

At this time, I stand behind my thought that the NHL taking the 24% over the 1 year is a no-brainer.

If I sleep on it (and also read a plethora of reasons to the contrary which I expect from this board) then I might change my tune.

UFA becomes and issue into this as well that favours the take the discount option ..
If not then some key players like say Scott Niedermayer becomes a UFA if you don't take the option ..

However the downside on longer contracts is that the player is also a year old so in the last year of the deal what value are you getting .. ??

Interesting puzzle lots of things to sleep on as you say ..

 

[me2]

UFA becomes and issue into this as well that favours the take the discount option ..
If not then some key players like say Scott Niedermayer becomes a UFA if you don't take the option ..

However the downside on longer contracts is that the player is also a year old so in the last year of the deal what value are you getting .. ??

Interesting puzzle lots of things to sleep on as you say ..

You get good value for most since the 24% rollback puts the salaries around the right amount. It also makes qualifying offers more sensible, better than QO on overpriced players. Teams with young stars won't mind keeping the young cheap stars on cheap contracts on year longer, and they are even 24% off that.

The only teams that will struggle are teams that went out spent big dollars on geriatrics.

 

[RangerBoy]

Larry Brooks

There are dissidents on both sides of the table, but the PA Executive Committee, which, The Post has learned, has been in consistent communication with club player representatives, has the support of a decisive majority of the rank-and-file.

At the same time, it is believed the most extreme members of the NHL negotiating committee would prefer a more restrictive CBA than the one on the table, but that they too are in the identifiable minority.

The league has established the middle part of the month as a target for completing the CBA in order to allow for the most orderly offseason relaunch

http://www.nypost.com/sports/47604.htm

Trevor Linden,Mike Gartner and Bill Guerin who represent the getting a deal done faction of the NHLPA are in the majority and have full support of the rank and file

Larry is tooting his own horn

The Post has learned from sources on both sides that, while the framework reported exclusively by this paper on Sunday is indeed expected to form the basis of a new collective-bargaining agreement, myriad critical issues remain unresolved — including, but not limited to, the final structure of the salary cap; revenue sharing; application of systemic issues such as salary arbitration and players on Injured Reserve within a hard cap structure; team rights to players that have expired under the old CBA; and the disposition of 2004-05 contracts.

The Post reported that the deal will feature a salary-cap range, with a team floor established at a number believed approximately $24M and a ceiling between $36M and $38M, with qualifying offers and salary arbitration based on the union's Dec. 9 proposal rather on the league's subsequent, more restrictive, versions.

The CBA also would include a 24 percent rollback on all existing contracts and qualifying offers.

Brooks does not have the 24% rollback contingent upon the 2004-05 contracts being honored

 

[Taranis_24]

Just thinking maybe the NHL counters with a lower % of rollback with out the caviet of paying 04 - 05 salaries. I could see the owners coming back say with a 14% rollback.

 

[RangerBoy]

A binding revenue formula is the key to moving the talks toward final negotiations, but after nearly 48 hours of meetings spread over five days — including nearly 12 hours yesterday — has failed to produce that vital agreement

The groups are apparently close to reaching settlement on the revenue issue and there was speculation in some quarters yesterday that they had in fact reached a settlement

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Co...64&t=TS_Home&DPL=IvsNDS/7ChAX&tacodalogin=yes

 

[Steve L*]

Seeing as half the NHL is out of contract, it makes sense for the NHL to not accept the rollback and not honour last seasons contracts as the rollback will only be effective on a small number of contracts.

 

[RangerBoy]

Does Al Strachan ever stop?

But there also are players who have enough foresight to realize that as long as Gary Bettman is at the helm of the NHL, the players never will be paid what they are worth. They feel their only chance is to stick to their stance long enough to force the owners to dump Bettman, who is determined to establish a system that caters to the whims of the underfunded teams. If Bettman gets his way, minimum payrolls will be institutionalized.

http://torontosun.canoe.ca/Sports/Hockey/2005/06/02/1067717-sun.html

Earth to Al,the owners are not dumping Bettman

This is all Strachan can muster in his first column since he came back from his vacation