Last chance for many players to salvage their NHL careers

[Blind Gardien]

Wouldn't a Luxury Tax, a stiff one, be the compromise?

I used to think so, pretty strongly. I could still, maybe, be convinced, but... the longer this all drags on, the more the landscape is likely to change. It's pretty hard to imagine or predict the impact all of this will have on the league revenues down the road. If things go bad, then a luxury tax, stiff as you want, set based on 2004 numbers means nothing. Or if things turn around somehow, then you still don't want the luxury tax stuck in one place.

That means that some form of linkage really makes sense. If it's a luxury tax, fine, but the thresholds have to be tied somehow to the revenues, because right now the crystal ball is just so cloudy. What is the difference between "cost certainty" and "linkage"?

From no salary restrictions, to a system that punishes teams for spending over a certain limit (with rewards going to weaker franchises).
Not all the way to a hard cap. But enough of the way there to slow salary spending significantly.

I'm in. So long as there is linkage to league revenues. I agree that it's a big step to go straight to a hard cap. But basically what makes me side with the owners is this: if they get the "unreasonable" system they want, then it doesn't hurt me and it probably helps ensure the stability of the game, and the only people who "suffer" are the players who get a bit of a pay cut. By contrast, if the players get what they want, the league is in big trouble. Meanwhile, a luxury tax-with-linkage system is inherently more risky than the owners' draconian preference. So, as much as the "fair negotiator" side of me wants to say, hey, why can't we just compromise on the tax system and see how that goes, there is still another voice that says, hey, why take any risk at all? There is a system out there (cost-certainty-hard-cap) which is no-risk. But anyway, even the slightly-risky tax system isn't on the table from the players.

Cost-certainty is pretty pie-in-the-sky, if you ask me.
And it's amazing that fans aren't seeing this for what it is.

What is it, then? As a cash-grab, at least it's a cash-grab which keeps the game alive in a pretty foolproof airtight way. I don't particularly care who makes the money, and I'm not exactly worried about the players starving if the owners make their grab. Cost-certainty makes good business sense, if you can get it.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

I agree. I love all the talk of public outrage or how important it is to win the PR war.

Nobody really cares who is at fault for the lockout.

In fact, few people in the States even care if there is a lockout. If that isn't troubling enough, many Canadians are finding they don't miss the NHL that much.

At this rate, the "winner" of this lockout is going to win a phyrric victory.

While it's true many in the states could care less about the lockout, they're not hockey fans anyway. I love this argument that people don't care about hockey and the media's ignoring it, etc. First, the U.S. doesn't care about hockey until the end of the football season, anyway, even if the NHL is playing. So no one paying attention to hockey now is no different. And FANS miss the game tremendously. There just aren't as many of them for the NHL and hockey. Too bad. But let's not make the fact that folks, in particular in the states, are not spending all their time talking about the lockout, seem like it's the end of the world.

 

[eye]

It's funny. I just finished a road trip and listened to 3 different U.S. sports radio talk shows in the past 5 days discussing the NHL work stoppage. There was no shortage of phone in callers. I think fans and media types think by saying that nobody cares about hockey that it will force players or owners to panic into compromising their stance.

The AHL, NCAA and Major Junior are all experiencing attendence increases so don't try to sell me on this b""" that fans are losing interest in hockey.

Now if the NHL shuts down for the entire year I can see fans turning on players permanently to the point they won't want locked out players back into the NHL when it starts up again next October.

 

[Digger12]

It's funny. I just finished a road trip and listened to 3 different U.S. sports radio talk shows in the past 5 days discussing the NHL work stoppage. There was no shortage of phone in callers. I think fans and media types think by saying that nobody cares about hockey that it will force players or owners to panic into compromising their stance.

The AHL, NCAA and Major Junior are all experiencing attendence increases so don't try to sell me on this b""" that fans are losing interest in hockey.

Now if the NHL shuts down for the entire year I can see fans turning on players permanently to the point they won't want locked out players back into the NHL when it starts up again next October.

Hockey will never die.

The NHL? That's another story...

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

A luxury tax in itself guarantees nothing. It may help but it will only be a real solution if the thresholds are somehow tied to revenues. There needs to a be a system in which the thresholds of that new system fluctuate up or down according to the health of the league. If the NHLPA comes forward with a stiff tax starting at X% of league revenues then there is talk. BUt it all comes down to one major thing...the NHL getting the NHLPA to talk about revenues and their fair share of those revenues. Which is why Daly has stated an NBA-like proposal from the players gets things moving even though they do not think the NBA system will ultimately work; it gets the NHLPA to negotiate some sort of system that has a predictable trigger.

The ultimate system will be a compromise from that point IMO...a higher hard cap of $50 mil with a strict luxury tax system between $40-50 mil and a minimum cap of $30 mil. With costs/punishments associated with teams that are continually in the luxury tax range. All these thresholds will be tied to a percentage of revenues not just some relatively random number. If the owners are under reporting as the NHLPA liked to whine about (notice how that has pretty much stopped the past few months) the caps go up from what the NHL numbers say. BUt i think the main point is to have the built in fluctuation and predictability of the system. If the league revenues keep on growing the NHLPA would be wise to negotiate an escalating percentage of revenues clause....as has been mentioned if the other operating costs remain roughly the same yet revenues go up 50% a bigger percentage can be allocated to the salaries.

In the end there is more than one solution that may work. However, it is the owners who are in the drivers seat in this negotiation and as a result they ultimately get to "pick" the system framework. And the framework they have opted for at this time is a much more predictable and "safe" system. Something they feel is needed at this time.

The owners are in business.
I know of few businesses who have GUARANTEED COST CERTAINTY.

A Luxury tax provides no guarantees. But I'm PRETTY DAMN SURE (I'd be willing to bet) that it would provide a HUGE drag on salaries, if it was done, dollar for dollar, at a low threshold like $40 Million.
In my PRETTY DAMN SURE proposal, I'm PRETTY DAMN SURE Mike Illitch, who lost 28 Million dollars in the past two years WITHOUT my proposal, would not have a payroll ANYWHERE near $77 Million. Not if it now costs him $114 Million (which would have added about $60Million MORE in losses over the past two years)
And when guys like Illitch decide against signing the Cujo's of the world, and making trades for salary dumps, that's going to bring down the pressures for salary demands all across the league.
The PREDATORS in the current system, will be SEVERELY CURTAILED in their effords to pick off the best players from every other team in the NHL.

I could live with that.
Because the richer teams, by virtue of extra fan support, should have the ability to do a little extra for their fans.
And teams close to winning should be forced to dismantle because of a silly salary cap/

 

[PanthersRule96]

I know for a fact that many players read HF and other hockey boards. Players generally lead a boring life believe it or not.

Haha. Imagine Mathieu Biron reading these boards LOL.......................that is, if he can read.