Quote From Daly sums up negotiations to date

[kastaure]

So what your saying the owners still haven't learned from past mistakes? Maybe it's time for owner to take control of themselves. God what an amazing concept, wonder why it's taken them so long to figure it out. Maybe they are slow learner, i knew not to spend more than i could afford when i was young, i guess that accounting class in HS really paid off. Or maybe i'm just special

This is the reason why we are in face of a CBA dispute JWI19. The Owner cannot legally set such control without it being part of the CBA and sign by the NHLPA. If they could just put rules unilaterally they would have done it but it's illegal to do so.

Lets imagine that when you where young some of your neighbour was really rich and went to the grocery and offer to buy all the candies for 20$ a piece.. what would the grocery store manager would do... raise the price to 20$ because some rich kids will pay them that price anyway and he is sure to sell all his candy anyway because the little rich ******* is on sugar rush. Now your parent give you 2 dollars per month for candys... what are you gonna do.... wait 10 months to buy that candy ???... ask your parents to complains to the rich ******* parents ??? or just go to Cosco buy a full rack of Candy for 40$ and sell them cheaper a buck each to all the neighbour kids and let the Grocery store manager alone with the rich *******.. and when the rich ******* will have enough of being alone he will came back and buy candy at 1 buck a piece because you would have set a price then whatever anybody is ready to pay the cost of a candy will always be 1$

It's basically a kiddy version of the debate here.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

Yes. Now Bettman does not technically need those owners, but does he want discord, especially since this is a very good starting point for a deal? Quite a dilemma.

Right now, he techically doesn't need it.
But if there is enough dissension among owners, they could very well call Bettman to the table and tell him that this "eight-man support" rule is out the window.
If 5 or more owners break ranks in a public way, Bettman's negotiating strength is weakened.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

You sound like a guy who is really impressed when a car dealer offers to give him $10,000 off the price of a new car... that is priced $20,000 over market value and has a 40% depreciation rate per year. You look at that big front end discount and completey ignore the long term ramifications of the deal and where you'll be by the end of your loan.

The NHLPA put out a great PR product, but as an offer it does not address the needs of the league. At no time did the NHL ask the players to return any of their past earnings. This is 100% smoke screen and shows it works when people like yourself swallow the hook. You are aware that this "give back" is for players only presently under contract? You are aware that there are 30ish percent of the PA that is not under contract, many of them big ticket players, and they are not included in the "give back". All of these guys get to negotiate new contracts and get to do so free of any sort of control mechanism to keep salaries under control. They still have the ability to hold the gun to the head of their teams and hold the fans hostage. The long term needs of the game have not been met and leave the game subject to risk. The deal is great in the short term, but is worse in the long term. From what I have seen, the game will be in worse shape in two years than they are now.

Two things.
1. Your Car analogy stinks.
Your analogy might fit for Kevin Lowe. But it doesn't fit for Mike Illitch. Mike Illitch likes expensive cars that perform. He's been paying a lot for them. Too much, even. Now the dealer just stuck a 25 percent off sticker on the windshield.
To Illitch, this deal makes sense, because he works and plays in a different market.

2. Yes, I am aware of what this means. In fact, I believe I was the first poster at HF to call it what it is. An offer designed to win PR and weaken the owners' resolve. Like I've said in about a dozen other posts, I think this is an intermediate step. You're gonna see the rollback come down and the luxury tax go up.
What you will not see, if there is to be hockey this year, is a salary cap.

 

[Motown Beatdown]

You mean that the majority of owners should band together and set up a system that stops irresponsible big spending owners from ruining payscales? Oh hang on, they are.

But the question is did it need to come to this. There is nothing stopping Bettman from telling teams to stop running their teams into the red. And it's not collusion either. If the owners can prove their revenues can only support an break even payroll, then there is nothing illegal about that.

 

[Motown Beatdown]

This is the reason why we are in face of a CBA dispute JWI19. The Owner cannot legally set such control without it being part of the CBA and sign by the NHLPA. If they could just put rules unilaterally they would have done it but it's illegal to do so.

There is no rule thats says owners have to run their teams into the red too. It would not be putting a cap on payrolls it would be seen as smart financial business. And unlike MLB they could prove it in court. (if it went that far and their numbers are correct)

It basically comes down to Bettman needs to find a way to bring in the stray sheep.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

I agree 1000% with Iconoclast.

I find it ironic that the PA is now offering to give money back, when all along they've been spewing the mantra of "well, nobody put a gun to the owners' heads".

This isn't a monetary dispute. It's a philosophical dispute. The PA refuses to negotiate any system with linkages to revenue, and the owners don't want any part of a system without it.

As far as I'm concerned, we're no closer to a settlement.

Don't hurt yourself agreeing so much. As far as I know, 1000 percent agreement should only be done between consenting adults in the privacy of their own homes. Or at least in a safe, sterile S&M club.

Look, friend. Look at the big picture.

If the players agree to a massive Luxury Tax, or if they completely capitulate and give in to a hard cap, what do you think happens?
Their salaries are going to get cut back by 20-30 percent.

What the players have done is stuck the 24 percent on the table first.
In their next offer, they will reduce the giveback and increase the Luxury Tax.
That's the deal.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

There is no rule thats says owners have to run their teams into the red too. It would not be putting a cap on payrolls it would be seen as smart financial business. And unlike MLB they could prove it in court. (if it went that far and their numbers are correct)

It basically comes down to Bettman needs to find a way to bring in the stray sheep.

Maybe what we need is a two-tiered league, a la Sweden.
It's obvious that some of these franchises have no business competing with the big boys.

 

[SENSible1*]

Don't hurt yourself agreeing so much. As far as I know, 1000 percent agreement should only be done between consenting adults in the privacy of their own homes. Or at least in a safe, sterile S&M club.

Look, friend. Look at the big picture.

If the players agree to a massive Luxury Tax, or if they completely capitulate and give in to a hard cap, what do you think happens?
Their salaries are going to get cut back by 20-30 percent.

What the players have done is stuck the 24 percent on the table first.
In their next offer, they will reduce the giveback and increase the Luxury Tax.
That's the deal.

The NHL would be foolish to negotiate off of this offer.

Present their own CBA counter-proposal, including cost-certainty, and force the PA to negotiate from it or lose the season. The PA's offer and the fact that they blinked first demonstrates a level of desperation on the PA's behalf that the owners should exploit to the fullest.

 

[mooseOAK*]

The NHL would be foolish to negotiate off of this offer.

Present their own CBA counter-proposal, including cost-certainty, and force the PA to negotiate from it or lose the season. The PA's offer and the fact that they blinked first demonstrates a level of desperation on the PA's behalf that the owners should exploit to the fullest.

I don't think that the owners want to throw that 24% rollback back into the water. Tweak that offer to add something that controls salary increases and I think that that's your deal.

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

i think you did a good job articulating your point, but i dont get this one comment.



how will it actually get worse ? i am interested in the mechanics by which you came to this conclusion.

dr

There is no mechanism in place to prevent salaries from continue to escalate. There is no mechanism in place for the negotiation of salaries at all. Read the fine print.

The NHLPA will do a one time roll back of the salaries of those players presently under contract to the tune of 24%. This is a one time action. There is nothing in there about setting a new marketplace. The standard is still there. We'll take one of the big name players that is up for contract renewal as soon as all of this is hammered out, one Jarome Iginla.

Now this is an iportant negotiation because it affects a small market team and a team who the lockout could heal or kill. So lets say the whole offer is accepted. What is the Iginla camp going to do? What are the Flames going to do? I forsee the Flames approaching the Iginla camp and trying to set the new marketplace and saying that Iginla should now be signing in the neighborhood of $5 or 6 million per season. The Flames can point to the contracts of guys like Naslund and Bertuzzi, who were subject to the roll back and claim that is fair. Here's where the Agent earns his money. He laughs in the Flames face and says no, the starting point in the negotiations is $7 million which his last contract was signed for. Iginla is not required to roll back his salary demands because he was not under contract and is not part of that agreement. When the Flames try to cry poor the Agent gets to point to the large chunk of cash the Flames just got in the salary roll back. The Agent has just shot all of the arguments that the team has full of holes thanks to the loopholes in the NHLPA proposal. So the Flames have a choice. Stick to their guns or pay Iginla what he demands.

See, there is no mechanism in the agreement to prevent this from playing out. There is no mechanism to prevent unnescessary holdouts from happening. There is nothing there to stop the Agents from clawing back all of that cash the NHL teams just got back in short order. Escalation will happen, and will happen quicker than we have seen any time in the past for obvious reasons. The teams have just got a huge chunk of cash and the NHLPA knows exactly where it is and where it came from. Thye gave it to them.

I know exactly what you are going to come back with too. Its up to the owners to police themselves and prevent this escalation from happening. One problem. There is no documented mechanism to prevent the escalation of salaries. The minute the teams start to try and set a marketplace the players scream colusion. Without something in the CBA the players can yell colusion at anytime and force the owners to continue to pay stupid sums of money and create a false market. In two years every single big name player will have a new contract even larger than they have now. The loopholes are there and any agent worth his salt will exploit them.

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

So what your saying the owners still haven't learned from past mistakes? Maybe it's time for owner to take control of themselves. God what an amazing concept, wonder why it's taken them so long to figure it out. Maybe they are slow learner, i knew not to spend more than i could afford when i was young, i guess that accounting class in HS really paid off. Or maybe i'm just special

I have to agree. Owners have gotten much smarter over the last year or so. I think this proposal, along with a slightly higher luxury tax, should make the game viable. Does it 100% guarantee that owners can shoot themselves in the crotch? No, but that's not the players responsibility IMO. Especially given the owners inability to grow the game (which is what allows for a hard cap IMO).

 

[GKJ]

Imagine you are Mike Illitch, or the owner of the Leafs, or whoever.

24 percent? Hmm. I could live with that.

I imagine that some owners will break ranks if Bettman ignores this offer.

He's not ignoring it, he is looking it over and wants to change some things. If the league was to accept such a luxury tax it's going to have to be more than 20% of a dollar

 

[vanlady]

There is no mechanism in place to prevent salaries from continue to escalate. There is no mechanism in place for the negotiation of salaries at all. Read the fine print.

The NHLPA will do a one time roll back of the salaries of those players presently under contract to the tune of 24%. This is a one time action. There is nothing in there about setting a new marketplace. The standard is still there. We'll take one of the big name players that is up for contract renewal as soon as all of this is hammered out, one Jarome Iginla.

Now this is an iportant negotiation because it affects a small market team and a team who the lockout could heal or kill. So lets say the whole offer is accepted. What is the Iginla camp going to do? What are the Flames going to do? I forsee the Flames approaching the Iginla camp and trying to set the new marketplace and saying that Iginla should now be signing in the neighborhood of $5 or 6 million per season. The Flames can point to the contracts of guys like Naslund and Bertuzzi, who were subject to the roll back and claim that is fair. Here's where the Agent earns his money. He laughs in the Flames face and says no, the starting point in the negotiations is $7 million which his last contract was signed for. Iginla is not required to roll back his salary demands because he was not under contract and is not part of that agreement. When the Flames try to cry poor the Agent gets to point to the large chunk of cash the Flames just got in the salary roll back. The Agent has just shot all of the arguments that the team has full of holes thanks to the loopholes in the NHLPA proposal. So the Flames have a choice. Stick to their guns or pay Iginla what he demands.

See, there is no mechanism in the agreement to prevent this from playing out. There is no mechanism to prevent unnescessary holdouts from happening. There is nothing there to stop the Agents from clawing back all of that cash the NHL teams just got back in short order. Escalation will happen, and will happen quicker than we have seen any time in the past for obvious reasons. The teams have just got a huge chunk of cash and the NHLPA knows exactly where it is and where it came from. Thye gave it to them.


I know exactly what you are going to come back with too. Its up to the owners to police themselves and prevent this escalation from happening. One problem. There is no documented mechanism to prevent the escalation of salaries. The minute the teams start to try and set a marketplace the players scream colusion. Without something in the CBA the players can yell colusion at anytime and force the owners to continue to pay stupid sums of money and create a false market. In two years every single big name player will have a new contract even larger than they have now. The loopholes are there and any agent worth his salt will exploit them.

Actually you are wrong the PA did propose a solution, the owners can take Iginla to arbitration. Under the new proposed arbitration he would then be subject to all the rolled back salaries. Agents are going to know this and not advise stupidity, they know the likelyhood under the new system that there client could lose more than they gain. The owners now have a hammer to use in negotiations, the players have used it for years to drive up salaries, the owners now have the power to use it to drive down salaries.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

Jarome Iginla..

Hmm ..

Why cant the Flames offer Iginla a take it or leave offer of 20m over 4 years. Fans seem to support hard line stances and if you believe the call in shows in Calgary (where i live) the fans would accept ANYONE on the ice just to SHOVE it to the players.

Flames wont have to worry about fan backlash and there is really nothing Iginla can do if CGY doesnt want to offer more.

Why cant the Flames show the same resolve in the Iginla negotiation that they are showing in the CBA negotiation ?

Hmm ?

DR

 

[mooseOAK*]

Hmm ..

Why cant the Flames offer Iginla a take it or leave offer of 20m over 4 years. Fans seem to support hard line stances and if you believe the call in shows in Calgary (where i live) the fans would accept ANYONE on the ice just to SHOVE it to the players.

Flames wont have to worry about fan backlash and there is really nothing Iginla can do if CGY doesnt want to offer more.

Why cant the Flames show the same resolve in the Iginla negotiation that they are showing in the CBA negotiation ?

Hmm ?

DR

Because those same fans will forget that they wanted a hardline stance against the players and scream bloody murder for the team to sign Iginla as they see their team sink out of the playoff race.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

Because those same fans will forget that they wanted a hardline stance against the players and scream bloody murder for the team to sign Iginla as they see their team sink out of the playoff race.

man, the owners not only want their cake and too eat it too, but they want the players to bake it first and then clean up afterwards.

why cant the owners be upfront and tell the fans Iginla is asking for too much and they are using the system to keep salaries under control so they dont have to have work stoppages.

screw what the fans think, they are sheep anyhow. do what is right for your business.

dr

 

[mooseOAK*]

man, the owners not only want their cake and too eat it too, but they want the players to bake it first and then clean up afterwards.

why cant the owners be upfront and tell the fans Iginla is asking for too much and they are using the system to keep salaries under control so they dont have to have work stoppages.

screw what the fans think, they are sheep anyhow. do what is right for your business.

dr

Doing things to keep the customers aka fans happy is one of the most important features of doing right for your business. Telling the fans that you refuse to compete in hopes of guaranteeing a profit whether the team makes the playoffs or not will send them away.

 

[Tico]

A little bit (well, a lot actually) off topic -

but I'd be interested to see the correlation between posters who have joined HF in the last 5-6 months and pro-NHL (not NHLPA) alignment. It feels sometimes that for a fan/prospects board, there's an awful lot of anti-player sentiment running around...kinda spikes the conversations...

 

[copperandblue]

It feels sometimes that for a fan/prospects board, there's an awful lot of anti-player sentiment running around...

I think most fans have and always will have more loyalty to their teams before they have loyalty to the players on their teams.

 

[Tico]

I think most fans have and always will have more loyalty to their teams before they have loyalty to the players on their teams.

Excellent point. It also supports the notion of a sizeable Iginla payday (for the example being discussed here) while still being loyal to one's team.

I still wish it were somehow possible to get a sense of membership longevity and pro/anti NHL/NHLPA stance. Could be an interesting result.

 

[ceber]

Actually you are wrong the PA did propose a solution, the owners can take Iginla to arbitration. Under the new proposed arbitration he would then be subject to all the rolled back salaries. Agents are going to know this and not advise stupidity, they know the likelyhood under the new system that there client could lose more than they gain. The owners now have a hammer to use in negotiations, the players have used it for years to drive up salaries, the owners now have the power to use it to drive down salaries.

The owners can use that hammer one time in a single player's career, and only twice overall in three years. They won't risk it if the difference between the player's demand and what they want to pay isn't that big. I think the owner-initiated arbitration is only useful in rare situations where a guy is getting overpaid by a considerable amount.

The real valuable change to arbitration is to only allow new or rolled-back contracts to be used for comparables, but since Jarome doesn't have to file for arbitration, his agent can do precisely what was described. 7 mill is probably close enough to what he's worth that the team won't spend one of their arbitrations on him. He's a star, fans love him, you want him on your team. The arbitration is handy for that guy who's getting 3 or 4 million and should really only be getting 1.5 or so. Losing that guy isn't a terrible deal. Losing Iginla puts the hurt on that organization in too many ways for it to be worth the risk of arbitration. IMO.

 

[shakes]

I think most fans have and always will have more loyalty to their teams before they have loyalty to the players on their teams.

And if for some reason the players do give in and accept an immediate cap with no grandfathering, I hope the people here that were all for the cap remember their stance when their teams start firesales to get under the cap.. you know.. for the "good of the game". Somehow, I think those people will still be whining when, say, their goalie just isn't cutting it for a strong playoff run or when their top line centre blows a knee and is out for the year and they can't be replaced or they have to rush someone from the minors to try and take their place.

 

[SENSible1*]

And if for some reason the players do give in and accept an immediate cap with no grandfathering, I hope the people here that were all for the cap remember their stance when their teams start firesales to get under the cap.. you know.. for the "good of the game". Somehow, I think those people will still be whining when, say, their goalie just isn't cutting it for a strong playoff run or when their top line centre blows a knee and is out for the year and they can't be replaced or they have to rush someone from the minors to try and take their place.

Ya, why would fans want to punish the teams responsible for the salary inflation in the first place?

If you think anyone but Leaf/Wings fans are going to cry for them, you are sorely mistaken.

BTW,

There would be no firesale to get under the cap. Those teams just wouldn't be allowed to add any salary until they did get under the cap. No UFA's for the worst offenders. I'm getting all misty here just thinking about their hardship.

 

[vanlady]

The owners can use that hammer one time in a single player's career, and only twice overall in three years. They won't risk it if the difference between the player's demand and what they want to pay isn't that big. I think the owner-initiated arbitration is only useful in rare situations where a guy is getting overpaid by a considerable amount.

The real valuable change to arbitration is to only allow new or rolled-back contracts to be used for comparables, but since Jarome doesn't have to file for arbitration, his agent can do precisely what was described. 7 mill is probably close enough to what he's worth that the team won't spend one of their arbitrations on him. He's a star, fans love him, you want him on your team. The arbitration is handy for that guy who's getting 3 or 4 million and should really only be getting 1.5 or so. Losing that guy isn't a terrible deal. Losing Iginla puts the hurt on that organization in too many ways for it to be worth the risk of arbitration. IMO.

I disagree with you I think that owner arbitration is far more valuable in hold out situations.

Agents are not stupid, there going to use the Score system to derive player contract information and use comparables which would put Jerome Iginala's salary between 5 -5.5 million. Agents know that no matter what they do unless there is a flurry of stupidity from one team, the owners arbitration clause is going to bring some sanity back.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

He's not ignoring it, he is looking it over and wants to change some things. If the league was to accept such a luxury tax it's going to have to be more than 20% of a dollar

I never said he was ignoring it. This refers to my original post, before the Bettman conference. I was saying IF he ignores it ... just some speculation.