HF2002
Registered User
Try being a Sens fan.Bennysflyers16 said:Thanks for the reminder, When old Claude scored that goal I was sitting in my chair motionless, In Philly we always seem to let that 1 soft one in, Brutal !
Try being a Sens fan.Bennysflyers16 said:Thanks for the reminder, When old Claude scored that goal I was sitting in my chair motionless, In Philly we always seem to let that 1 soft one in, Brutal !
HF2002 said:Try being a Sens fan.
carey3037 said:.
--500k rookie cap (Watters said that "rookies thrown under the bus")
ti-vite said:carey3037 said:--500k rookie cap (Watters said that "rookies thrown under the bus")
carey3037 said:Today's Leafs Lunch Recap:
Watters reported many major terms of the new CBA had been settled:
--Watters reported 24M floor, 37.5M ceiling (Russ Conway later said the range was 24-25 and 36.8-38.6, so take your pick); however, nothing was mentioned of a luxury tax (which Dennis Beyak specifically mentioned in yesterday's "imminent deal" report) or a set linked revenue %.
--500k rookie cap (Watters said that "rookies thrown under the bus")
--Watters said QO's "mirror Dec 9 PA proposal" (Watters said 100% for 1M+, 110% for everything under 1M)
However, some things still unsettled, mentioning:
1)Training camp expenses
2)Per diem rates
Watters also reported Goodenow has been "campaigning hard with his hardline brethren" (mentioned Irbe and Damphousse by name) for the last 48 hours to stop the deal. Called it "one last attempt to garner support."
He also said with regard to Helene Elliott's article today, the 24% rollback wipeout or honoring last year's contracts would never be agreed to by ownership (although it sounded more like personal conjecture/opinion than coming from an actual "source").
The other big news was Watters' report of a possible Dispersal Draft that is still not finalized but would be part of the new CBA, which would be used to cut substantial payroll for teams previously "warned by Bettman" to cut their player costs (according to Watters, as soon as the CBA is done, all teams need to be within the cap limits without exception).
--Alternative to grandfathering contracts, which would not happen according to Watters (again, sounded more like personal opinion than "source" info).
--Said at least 6 teams were included (named NYR, DET, COL, TOR, and PHI).
--There would be a 5 or 6 player protected list for the above teams, the rest of the rosters would be fair game for a dispersal draft to the rest of the league.
--Watters put forth two scenarios:
1)the team losing the player would pay up to $4M of the dispersed player's salary, and the claiming team would pay the rest (used the example of a 6.5M salary...TOR would pay 4M, the claiming team would pay 2.5);
OR, 2)the team losing the player would just buy out the player's existing contract.
--However, interviewing Russ Conway just now, Conway reversed one of the scenarios, saying that he heard the claiming team would be the team paying the 4M higher total, and the team losing the player would pay the lower remaining amount...so you have two guys saying two different things....
--No compensation WHATSOEVER for the team losing the player.
--Nothing mentioned about a dispersal draft order, or how multiple claims would be handled.
Deebo said:wouldnt this dispersal draft concept anger the owners and fans in the markets where the public actually care about hockey..
i know the clubs were "warned", but to alienate your best customers like that seems kind of silly
RangerBoy said:Crosby's deal with Nike requires him to play in the NHL
This is the most logical approach. It would be grossly unfair to the overcap teams if they could not determine which assets they can maintain and who they should let go.norrisnick said:Question, would a dispersal draft operate in any way like the waiver draft where teams get to make players immune?
norrisnick said:Question, would a dispersal draft operate in any way like the waiver draft where teams get to make players immune or would it just be "Oh the Flyers are over the cap... hmmm lets see... I'll take Gagne, Pitkanen, and Handzus to help out." Because I doubt too many teams would be willing to take Leclair or Amonte off their hands given their contracts, so really how would it help in any way?
carey3037 said:Today's Leafs Lunch Recap:
Watters reported many major terms of the new CBA had been settled:
--Watters reported 24M floor, 37.5M ceiling (Russ Conway later said the range was 24-25 and 36.8-38.6, so take your pick); however, nothing was mentioned of a luxury tax (which Dennis Beyak specifically mentioned in yesterday's "imminent deal" report) or a set linked revenue %.
--500k rookie cap (Watters said that "rookies thrown under the bus")
--Watters said QO's "mirror Dec 9 PA proposal" (Watters said 100% for 1M+, 110% for everything under 1M)
However, some things still unsettled, mentioning:
1)Training camp expenses
2)Per diem rates
Watters also reported Goodenow has been "campaigning hard with his hardline brethren" (mentioned Irbe and Damphousse by name) for the last 48 hours to stop the deal. Called it "one last attempt to garner support."
He also said with regard to Helene Elliott's article today, the 24% rollback wipeout or honoring last year's contracts would never be agreed to by ownership (although it sounded more like personal conjecture/opinion than coming from an actual "source").
The other big news was Watters' report of a possible Dispersal Draft that is still not finalized but would be part of the new CBA, which would be used to cut substantial payroll for teams previously "warned by Bettman" to cut their player costs (according to Watters, as soon as the CBA is done, all teams need to be within the cap limits without exception).
--Alternative to grandfathering contracts, which would not happen according to Watters (again, sounded more like personal opinion than "source" info).
--Said at least 6 teams were included (named NYR, DET, COL, TOR, and PHI).
--There would be a 5 or 6 player protected list for the above teams, the rest of the rosters would be fair game for a dispersal draft to the rest of the league.
--Watters put forth two scenarios:
1)the team losing the player would pay up to $4M of the dispersed player's salary, and the claiming team would pay the rest (used the example of a 6.5M salary...TOR would pay 4M, the claiming team would pay 2.5);
OR, 2)the team losing the player would just buy out the player's existing contract.
--However, interviewing Russ Conway just now, Conway reversed one of the scenarios, saying that he heard the claiming team would be the team paying the 4M higher total, and the team losing the player would pay the lower remaining amount...so you have two guys saying two different things....
--No compensation WHATSOEVER for the team losing the player.
--Nothing mentioned about a dispersal draft order, or how multiple claims would be handled.
Define "the NHL"hossa-the-future said:if you were the nhl and you were trying to withhold info from the media cause you were close to a deal and didnt want a feb all over again,honestly would you tell bob "THE HOCKEY INSIDER" mckenzie a deal is done?
no offense to bob cause i find him to be the most reliable source there is
p.s hurry up and get a deal done the sens need hasek