Poorly I would expect. It's the same fundamental issue where the PA leadership pushed for using the escalator every year.
Players on existing contracts vs. players on new future contracts.
And, to bring this back around....
The real issue issue is that the PA, apparently, doesn't understand the relationship between 'expected revenues', '50% of HRR', 'escrow', and 'player contracted salaries'.
Apparently, the players are upset because they THINK they had this deal:
The players would allow the owners to keep 50% of HRR. In return, the owners would magically turn over every leaf every year to try to increase that year's HRR so that there would be no escrow.
When, the actual deal is:
The owners will make their best guess about the new year's HRR, using every kind of projection possible including that of the CAD.
From that projection, the players have the right to increase the cap even more IF THEY WANT, but that actually doesn't increase the number of dollars in the players' pool.
The player contract doesn't actually define the players' salary.
The result of all of which is that:
Sum of league wide player contracts always exceeds available HRR.
Thus, players always have escrow losses.
And, the fight is:
Players want the actual number on their contracts and 'feel' cheated if they get less.
Owners don't really care about that, they just want the 50% of HRR, which the players have already given them.
To rectify the salaries to nearer the 50% of HRR means changing the definition of the cap ceiling, because the real problem is that teams will spend to the cap, and thus exceed HRR. However, that requires decreasing all salaries OR leaving less money in the pool for several years of FAs. Neither of these appeals to the players.
Thus, since the players can't have what they want, but they have already given the owners what the owners want, the players have nothing to negotiate with. And, we will have a work stoppage, because the players will complain this time (I have previously been far more neutral in the matter - but misunderstanding escrow is completely on the players, and if they blame the owners, it's their own fault). And, in the end, since the owners already have the 50% they want, they have nothing to give up, and the players will end up losing more.
It's pitiful. The players are going to lose more money negotiating among themselves, and they will cancel games also. Just foolish.
PLUS: If the players actually want to negotiate the Olympics, then they will lose even more. Imagine this:
In Olympic years, NO All Star game. League shuts down for 3 weeks. That's 10 games lost. Owners offer to change the schedules to accommodate that, but it's 10 games pro-rated from player salaries.
All fans would be fine with that: 72 game season in Olympic years. And, we get to watch the Olympics. But, it costs the players because HRR is not as high in those years.
Can you imagine the complaining then?