Peca seems to get it...A split in the ranks?

[RangerBoy]

Michael Peca had a different reaction to the NHL's proposal

"There are some things in that proposal that are encouraging," Islanders captain Michael Peca said from his offseason home in the Buffalo suburbs. "Obviously, them talking and getting back [today] is encouraging. Throughout this whole process, I've been 100 percent certain there isn't going to be a season. But it seems like the last couple of days, I've kind of gotten the feeling that something's gonna get done and we're going to be playing hockey again pretty soon."

Peca's outlook is surprising, considering how strongly Saskin downplayed the league's offer and any progress being made. Peca, however, voiced a growing frustration among the players that the soapboxing by both sides has become tiresome - especially on the issue of the union's staunch opposition to a salary cap.

"I've always viewed it as it's tough going into a negotiation saying you're never going to accept something," Peca said. "This isn't me saying that it's all good and dandy, let's sign the [NHL's] deal. I'm just saying it's always hard to go into a negotiation saying, 'I'm never going to accept that.' Because then you're not giving yourself much room to negotiate. I think both sides are guilty of that."

http://www.newsday.com/sports/hockey/ny-spnhl034133494feb03,0,5170401.story?coll=ny-sports-print

Peca is criticizing Bob Goodenow and Ted Saskin

Click to read more...

 

[chiavsfan]

Don't worry, he will "retract" these statements soon...just like everyone else

 

[st5801]

He was misquoted. He ment that the PA is 100% unified and the owners need to give up on the cap.

 

[Thornton97]

I'll give it until noon. Takers? Over/under?

 

[CREW99AW]

Michael Peca had a different reaction to the NHL's proposal

"There are some things in that proposal that are encouraging," Islanders captain Michael Peca said from his offseason home in the Buffalo suburbs. "Obviously, them talking and getting back [today] is encouraging. Throughout this whole process, I've been 100 percent certain there isn't going to be a season. But it seems like the last couple of days, I've kind of gotten the feeling that something's gonna get done and we're going to be playing hockey again pretty soon."

Peca's outlook is surprising, considering how strongly Saskin downplayed the league's offer and any progress being made. Peca, however, voiced a growing frustration among the players that the soapboxing by both sides has become tiresome - especially on the issue of the union's staunch opposition to a salary cap.

"I've always viewed it as it's tough going into a negotiation saying you're never going to accept something," Peca said. "This isn't me saying that it's all good and dandy, let's sign the [NHL's] deal. I'm just saying it's always hard to go into a negotiation saying, 'I'm never going to accept that.' Because then you're not giving yourself much room to negotiate. I think both sides are guilty of that."

http://www.newsday.com/sports/hockey/ny-spnhl034133494feb03,0,5170401.story?coll=ny-sports-print

Peca is criticizing Bob Goodenow and Ted Saskin

surprising comments from Peca a union rep.He's been very vocal about the players never accepting a cap,sitting out 18-24 months if necessary.

hopefully he doesn't retract his statement.There are probably a lot more players thinking along the same lines,willing to move off the anti-cap bandwagon.

 

[Levitate]

that looks like a pretty balanced commentary actually...

he's not just criticizing goodenow and saskin, he's criticizing both sides for coming into the negotiations with a hard line they refuse to budge from

i dont' know how you draw the conclusion that he's really speaking out against the union there...those comments are very middle of the road

 

[Greschner4]

I'll give it until noon. Takers? Over/under?

Based on the Modano precedent -- less than 2 hours before retraction -- I'll take the under.

 

[neelynugs]

i don't think the "criticizing the union" part is what people are focusing on- i think it's more of the "we should NEVER say never about anything", and that's the attitude they should have crafted from the beginning. closed-minded people don't get very far

 

[Greschner4]

Michael Peca had a different reaction to the NHL's proposal

"There are some things in that proposal that are encouraging," Islanders captain Michael Peca said from his offseason home in the Buffalo suburbs. "Obviously, them talking and getting back [today] is encouraging. Throughout this whole process, I've been 100 percent certain there isn't going to be a season. But it seems like the last couple of days, I've kind of gotten the feeling that something's gonna get done and we're going to be playing hockey again pretty soon."

Peca's outlook is surprising, considering how strongly Saskin downplayed the league's offer and any progress being made. Peca, however, voiced a growing frustration among the players that the soapboxing by both sides has become tiresome - especially on the issue of the union's staunch opposition to a salary cap.

"I've always viewed it as it's tough going into a negotiation saying you're never going to accept something," Peca said. "This isn't me saying that it's all good and dandy, let's sign the [NHL's] deal. I'm just saying it's always hard to go into a negotiation saying, 'I'm never going to accept that.' Because then you're not giving yourself much room to negotiate. I think both sides are guilty of that."

http://www.newsday.com/sports/hockey/ny-spnhl034133494feb03,0,5170401.story?coll=ny-sports-print

Peca is criticizing Bob Goodenow and Ted Saskin

Peca's starting to see the obvious point that a ridiculous ideological stance has no place in a business negotiation of this type.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

Peca's starting to see the obvious point that a ridiculous ideological stance has no place in a business negotiation of this type.

You mean the one that BOTH the owner and players are taking ???

 

[Greschner4]

You mean the one that BOTH the owner and players are taking ???

No, I mean the one the players are taking. It stands alone among pro sports' players associations.

The owners' doesn't, since two other sports leagues have salary caps. Combined the NFL and NBA have negotiated (roughly guessing) eight CBAs with salary caps.

See ... the first one has no precedent. The second one has a bunch of precedent and is in line with that precedent. The first is out of the mainstream and ridiculous; the second isn't and that's not even taking into account the obvious differences between hockey economics and other major sport economics.

 

[SENSible1*]

Peca already has firsthand experience in wasting a season and has no desire to go there again.

It sure doesn't look like Tom B is painting too accurate a picture in suggesting Goodenow will be able to keep the players in line if he tries to sell them on the "benefits" of maintaining their "no cap" principle next fall.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

No, I mean the one the players are taking. It stands alone among pro sports' players associations.

The owners' doesn't, since two other sports leagues have salary caps. Combined the NFL and NBA have negotiated (roughly guessing) eight CBAs with salary caps.

See ... the first one has no precedent. The second one has a bunch of precedent and is in line with that precedent. The first is out of the mainstream and ridiculous; the second isn't and that's not even taking into account the obvious differences between hockey economics and other major sport economics.

At least look at it objectively. Both sides are acting stubbornly.

Also the current NBA CBA can hardly be considered a salary cap ... and is something that bettman and the owners wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole. 26 of the 29 NBA teams are over the "salary cap" some by as much as $40 million.

There is a salary cap that would work for the NHLPA.

There is a soft cap/luxury tax based system that would work for the owners.


Both sides are acting stubbornly ... and until that changes there will be no hockey.

 

[Oilers Ent]

Retraction in

10
.
.
.
9
.
.
.
8
.
.
.
7
.
.
.

 

[davidwii]

You mean the one that BOTH the owner and players are taking ???

In all reality, their both taking hard stands in the sand. Both sides are saying, This is the only option we WILL accept, or this is the only option we WON'T accept.

I think the PA is a little more vocal about the owners not willing to budge off of the cap, but I think that makes them look more hypocritical, because the won't budge onto a cap....so their doing the same thing.

I think though, the difference is, this is the OWNERS league. They own the businesses and frankly, they can do what they want.

I think yesterday's proposal offered alot that many other leagues....successfull leagues...don't offer their players. Even if the numbers weren't to their liking...negotiate so the numers are to their liking. But there were alot of very fair items in it.

They let the season die without coming back with a decent counter and their gonna be forever considered the reason in my opinion.

 

[Pepper]

At least look at it objectively. Both sides are acting stubbornly.

Also the current NBA CBA can hardly be considered a salary cap ... and is something that bettman and the owners wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole. 26 of the 29 NBA teams are over the "salary cap" some by as much as $40 million.

There is a salary cap that would work for the NHLPA.

There is a soft cap/luxury tax based system that would work for the owners.


Both sides are acting stubbornly ... and until that changes there will be no hockey.

Once again you miss the point.

Owners HAVE to take a hard line since they are the ones who are bleeding money every year.

Players DON'T HAVE to take a hard line but for ideological reasons ("we will want to secure the future of young players yadayada", "it's our right" etc) they are taking it.

 

[VanIslander]

Open ice body check by Peca.

Small guy can really dish one out.

The big guys will be hurting.

And, no, Peca won't recant.

He's a character guy.

Calls it as he sees it, and represents others: a great leader.

 

[old kummelweck]

Pecs was criticizing the rhetoric. No harm there.

 

[Greschner4]

At least look at it objectively. Both sides are acting stubbornly.

Also the current NBA CBA can hardly be considered a salary cap ... and is something that bettman and the owners wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole. 26 of the 29 NBA teams are over the "salary cap" some by as much as $40 million.

There is a salary cap that would work for the NHLPA.

There is a soft cap/luxury tax based system that would work for the owners.


Both sides are acting stubbornly ... and until that changes there will be no hockey.

They've both acted stubbornly.

On the merits, the PA hasn't offered a soft cap/luxury tax. A luxury tax is not a soft cap/luxury tax. The NBA has a soft cap and a luxury tax. The PA has offered only a luxury tax.

Why the PA hasn't just accepted the concept of a cap and asked for NBA-type exceptions like being able to go over the cap to keep your own guys, being able to have two teams over the cap trade guys making 20% different salaries, being able to have sign-and-trades of free agents is something I'll never understand and whether or not it's more stubborn than the owners, it's certainly more stupid.

 

[buce]

At least look at it objectively. Both sides are acting stubbornly.

Also the current NBA CBA can hardly be considered a salary cap ... and is something that bettman and the owners wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole. 26 of the 29 NBA teams are over the "salary cap" some by as much as $40 million.

There is a salary cap that would work for the NHLPA.

There is a soft cap/luxury tax based system that would work for the owners.


Both sides are acting stubbornly ... and until that changes there will be no hockey.

I looked at it objectively four months ago. Hell, I looked it objectively 2.5 years ago when the NHL begged the NHLPA to start looking at the CBA for the health of the league. The NHLPA sneared at them. The owners have suggested a system that is currently in operation in two better leagues. This is not mystery system. In stead of negotiating, the NHLPA painted themselves into a corner by stating that they will NEVER accept a cap. What they should have done is said that any cap that was offered better me a reasonable one and worked the numbers. A no cap stance is idiotic. How about a 95% cap. Are you telling the players would never take that. It was a childish response by the union. Then you have the uneducated hypocrite players mouthing off. Is there any wonder why the majority of reasonable people back the owners?

 

[barnburner]

that looks like a pretty balanced commentary actually...

he's not just criticizing goodenow and saskin, he's criticizing both sides for coming into the negotiations with a hard line they refuse to budge from

i dont' know how you draw the conclusion that he's really speaking out against the union there...those comments are very middle of the road

The NHLPA does not want "middle of the road" comments from their membership. Their viewpoint is either 100% support of the association's stance, or keep your mouth shut. I'm sure Peca will get pressure to recant his statement - but hopefully he has the personal integrity to tell them to take care of their own business and get a deal done.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

Once again you miss the point.

Owners HAVE to take a hard line since they are the ones who are bleeding money every year.

Players DON'T HAVE to take a hard line but for ideological reasons ("we will want to secure the future of young players yadayada", "it's our right" etc) they are taking it.

There is more than one way for the owners to get what they need. As long as they continue the mantra of "only a hard cap will work" chances are we'll still be here arguing about it.

The players haev acknowledged the fact the system needs to be changed, what they won't accept is that a hard cap is the only solution.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

They've both acted stubbornly.

On the merits, the PA hasn't offered a soft cap/luxury tax. A luxury tax is not a soft cap/luxury tax. The NBA has a soft cap and a luxury tax. The PA has offered only a luxury tax.

Why the PA hasn't just accepted the concept of a cap and asked for NBA-type exceptions like being able to go over the cap to keep your own guys, being able to have two teams over the cap trade guys making 20% different salaries, being able to have sign-and-trades of free agents is something I'll never understand and whether or not it's more stubborn than the owners, it's certainly more stupid.

Like I said neither side has thought very creativle.

The NHLPA should have put a more restrictive system in the table .. and the owners should have increased the percentage on the hard cap, and also not worried about all the other restrictions (arbitration, qualifying offers etc.) If they get the hard cap, the rest means little or nothing.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

I looked at it objectively four months ago. Hell, I looked it objectively 2.5 years ago when the NHL begged the NHLPA to start looking at the CBA for the health of the league. The NHLPA sneared at them. The owners have suggested a system that is currently in operation in two better leagues. This is not mystery system. In stead of negotiating, the NHLPA painted themselves into a corner by stating that they will NEVER accept a cap. What they should have done is said that any cap that was offered better me a reasonable one and worked the numbers. A no cap stance is idiotic. How about a 95% cap. Are you telling the players would never take that. It was a childish response by the union. Then you have the uneducated hypocrite players mouthing off. Is there any wonder why the majority of reasonable people back the owners?

How is the "no cap" stance any more stubborn than the owners stance of "only a hard cap will work" ..... both are equally stubborn.

 

[pei fan]

The NHLPA does not want "middle of the road" comments from their membership. Their viewpoint is either 100% support of the association's stance, or keep your mouth shut. I'm sure Peca will get pressure to recant his statement - but hopefully he has the personal integrity to tell them to take care of their own business and get a deal done.

True, but I think he was careful enough in what he said that there will be no
need of a retraction.