Sunday Articles

[John Flyers Fan]

Dissent in ranks adds to troubles
http://www.sptimes.com/2005/02/27/Sports/Dissent_in_ranks_adds.shtml

Andreychuk: Hockey Will Be Back, And So Will I
http://bolts.tbo.com/lightning/MGBEFXXNO5E.html

Things will be back to normal in the NHL, just wait a year
http://www.detnews.com/2005/wings/0502/27/C01-101771.htm

Minority view quickly quelled
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/sfl-russo27feb27,0,1585494.column?coll=sfla-sports-headlines

Q&A: NHL may draft a new approach
http://www.nj.com/sports/ledger/index.ssf?/base/sports-5/1109485973322770.xml

SUIT WON'T LOOK GOOD ON BURKE
http://newyorkpost.com/sports/41410.htm

Gretzky's hands were tied at negotiations
http://www.detnews.com/2005/wings/0502/27/C07-101624.htm

Flyers' Esche says game needs a lift
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/sports/11000657.htm

Click to read more...

 

[Oilers Ent]

Thanks for putting these all in one spot. You rock.

 

[Morbo]

March 4: Union executive director Bob Goodenow, in a letter addressed to commissioner Gary Bettman, lowers salary-cap demand from $49 million to $48.95 million. Bettman responds by dropping owners' offer from $42.5 million to $12.3 million, Canadian.

March 14: Bettman says he might revise his final, final, final, final, final offer if Goodenow asks politely and addresses Bettman as "Master and Commander."

:lol

 

[thinkwild]

More Union bashing Yeah, this wasnt their straegy all along.

The Miami Herald quoted Panthers president Jordan Zimmerman last week saying he "sees no risk opening with replacement players and believes some players would absolutely cross the picket line." Talk like that certainly isn't going to make the next round of negotiations any smoother. No surprise, though, that a Panthers employee says that. It's believed Panthers owner Alan Cohen, along with Nashville's Craig Leipold, Boston's Jeremy Jacobs and Chicago's Bill Wirtz, were the ringleaders in making sure the NHL would not go higher than a $42-million salary cap

Ottawa's Melnyk and Floridas Cohen are reported to have faced off against each other in Corporate pharmaceutical legal battles. How can Melnyk side with him now?

 

[ScottyBowman]

Great article by Brooks exposing Brian Burke as a bully.

 

[thinkwild]

Andreychuk sure thinks a deal will get done.

Andreychuk said he believes camps will "definitely'' open on time "with us'' and "I will be there."

Seems positive.

 

[thinkwild]

We can't wait until Burke is asked under oath whether he personally challenged the team to get Moore between periods of the Mar. 8, 9-2 Avalanche victory — that's been the hearsay on the street for months, by the way — or whether he has knowledge of any Canuck employee having done so.

Juicy.

 

[NYIsles1*]

Thanks John for the articles..

Almost sad to see the disparity between the quality work Michael Russo does in Florida vs the bile coming from Brooks because he has an agenda vs Burke.

 

[Pepper]

Brooks once again manages to make himself look like an ass.

Burke will never ever testify that he ordered his players to injure Moore and no player will ever testify that Burke issued such a command. That's simply wishful thinking from Brooks part, he's probably still mad at Burke who has torn every pro-PA yahoo a new ******* during this lock-out.

What probably happened is that Burke told his players not to let Moore forget that his hit was not appreciated and in hockey that reminder happens by dropping the gloves.

 

[wazee]

Ottawa's Melnyk and Floridas Cohen are reported to have faced off against each other in Corporate pharmaceutical legal battles. How can Melnyk side with him now?

If players can fight it out on the ice and shake hands and go for a beer after the game, why do you think owners must remain forever enemies because they battled it out in another area of business? Do you really think it was personal between Melnyk and Cohen? How silly can you get.

 

[Mighty Duck]

Just another example of how the American media, and the American public have a paper bag over their head when it comes to hockey in North America. Most of the stories are completely out dated, or a complete joke. The real problem with hockey today is the involvement of American billionaires who have no regard to a budget what so ever. It is not fan support which ended the Canadian franchises in Canada, or in the future. The blame rests solely on a few egotistical and irresponsible owners in cities like Detroit, New York, Philadelphia and Colorado, and a few others who are crying wolfe now, like Carolina, Washington and Boston have made real stupid contract signings only because they acted like drunken idiots at an Auction. The NHL is getting exactly what it deserves, as their value of their franchises are dropping like a snowball headed to He!!. They hire a basketball guy to run their league is like hiring a Captain of an ocean ship to fly a jumbo jet. I hpe the NHL goes completely under, as it would completely reset the clock, and franchises would be successful based on support rather than the size of the owners pockets.

 

[i am dave]

At the end of Panaccio's article (Flyers' Esche Says Game Needs A Lift), he says Ed Snider is denying rumors that he is attempting to meet with big market clubs before the BOG meeting. Ed Snider is denying a rumor.... Expect something to happen on Monday.

 

[wazee]

At the end of Panaccio's article (Flyers' Esche Says Game Needs A Lift), he says Ed Snider is denying rumors that he is attempting to meet with big market clubs before the BOG meeting. Ed Snider is denying a rumor.... Expect something to happen on Monday.

Is Panaccio the guy who wrote the article tagging the big market teams the 'Silent Seven'? If so, it is not surprising that he would still be trying to promote the idea that the owners are split...

 

[Mess]

Is Panaccio the guy who wrote the article tagging the big market teams the 'Silent Seven'? If so, it is not surprising that he would still be trying to promote the idea that the owners are split...

Fair enough .. but I bet you there are a bunch of Owners that would jump at a 45.0 Mil cap offer, I bet some even thought long and hard when the 24% was offered .. If your company was profitable in the old CBA and the players offered to give you 1/4 of salary back .. Owners would be all over that ..

Now that a Cap is on the table and the final number being worked toward that really gives all the owners a better position ..

The key point that being that a Hard Cap is an optional Ceiling and with no FLOOR .. Big market teams know very well that small market teams will never spend that be it 42.5 or 45.0 or 49.0 Mil ..

The issue then is down to competitive balance based on affordability .. but the weaker teams that have gotten the high draft picks over the last 5 years also intend to get better by more skill level for less money kicks in .. Atlanta of paper with its core youngsters always improving can be just as competitive in the ice as a big Market team based on Salary ..

For instance Kovalchuk and Heatley together don't make the $ 6.5 Mil that Leafs are paying Owen Nolan a season .. Which team here has the better chance on the ice $$$ wise??

.. add Lehtonen and Marc Savard to the others and you are not close to Philly and LeClairs $9 m a season .. So team salary is a red herring to believe it EQUALS completive balance on the ice .. and a 25 m Atlanta Salary can be better then a 45.0 M Philly one IMO..

The on going joke could be how many Atlanta Thrashers does it take to Equal one Alexi Yashin ?? These teams the have high salary would trade them for the Talent on the small market teams in a heartbeat disproving the Bigger is always better notion ..

 

[kingsfan]

• Jan. 11: NHL commissioner Wayne Gretzky and union executive director Brett Hull meet for beers, hammer out agreement in 35 minutes.

Somehow, I could see this happening too, though neither man would take the respective job. They are to smart for that.

 

[Hoek]

Andreychuk has always been positive or at least hopeful during the process. Poor guy just wants to play I think..

 

[NYIsles1*]

Fair enough .. but I bet you there are a bunch of Owners that would jump at a 45.0 Mil cap offer, I bet some even thought long and hard when the 24% was offered .. If your company was profitable in the old CBA and the players offered to give you 1/4 of salary back .. Owners would be all over that ..

Problem is the only teams that claimed a significant profit were Minnesota, Vancouver and Toronto. All these other teams reportedly lost money and were not profitable.

A one time rollback on contracts changes little when it just keeps the market open for teams to once again bid against one another on players until they spend more than they take in. Solves nothing.

 

[kingsfan]

Fair enough .. but I bet you there are a bunch of Owners that would jump at a 45.0 Mil cap offer, I bet some even thought long and hard when the 24% was offered .. If your company was profitable in the old CBA and the players offered to give you 1/4 of salary back .. Owners would be all over that ..

Now that a Cap is on the table and the final number being worked toward that really gives all the owners a better position ..

The key point that being that a Hard Cap is an optional Ceiling and with no FLOOR .. Big market teams know very well that small market teams will never spend that be it 42.5 or 45.0 or 49.0 Mil ..

The issue then is down to competitive balance based on affordability .. but the weaker teams that have gotten the high draft picks over the last 5 years also intend to get better by more skill level for less money kicks in .. Atlanta of paper with its core youngsters always improving can be just as competitive in the ice as a big Market team based on Salary ..

For instance Kovalchuk and Heatley together don't make the $ 6.5 Mil that Leafs are paying Owen Nolan a season .. Which team here has the better chance on the ice $$$ wise??

.. add Lehtonen and Marc Savard to the others and you are not close to Philly and LeClairs $9 m a season .. So team salary is a red herring to believe it EQUALS completive balance on the ice .. and a 25 m Atlanta Salary can be better then a 45.0 M Philly one IMO..

The on going joke could be how many Atlanta Thrashers does it take to Equal one Alexi Yashin ?? These teams the have high salary would trade them for the Talent on the small market teams in a heartbeat disproving the Bigger is always better notion ..

Dude, think about it. Kovalchuk isn't going to stay at what he's making now. He's a RFA and would likely get 4.5-5 mill a season on a new deal. Minimum. Heatley too. Atlanta's payroll won't be 25 mill for long. That's the issue here. The small market teams, if they want to make a buck, have to keep drafting kids and hope they develop before they are due a big contract. Look at Edmonton and Calgary and you'll see why it doesn't work. Edmonton won't keep Hemsky at 1.3 mill or so a season for long. You get these good kids for 3 seasons at a decent salary, then suddenly they are demanding 3-4 mill a season minimum and these small market teams end up trading most of them away because they can't afford it. The Detroit's, Philly's, Toronto's can. Name one small market team that can do a bad signing like Leclair at 9 mill a season and get away with it? None. But Philly can have him sitting on their payroll and still go out and add salary at every trade deadline, even big contracts like Amonte's two years ago and Zhamnov this past year. Yep, real fair and competitive. The only thing that is keeping the small markets like Nashville and Calgary going is the defensive systems like the trap where Marcus Nilson equals Steve Yzerman out. And that's not helping the game on TV or being marketable at all. You can have a team full of Wes Walz's winning 45 games a year at 2-1. I can see the ratings rising now.

 

[myrocketsgotcracked]

Juicy.

i know here in BC, canada, that one is not required under the law to testify against himself, is the law in colorado the same? if it is the same, then burke dont have to say anything.

 

[wazee]

i know here in BC, canada, that one is not required under the law to testify against himself, is the law in colorado the same? if it is the same, then burke dont have to say anything.

In the United States, the rights of the accused are protected by the 5th Amendment to the Constitution, which includes, among other things, protection against self-incrimination. When someone refused to answer a question because it would incriminate him, it is called ‘taking the fifth’...

FIFTH AMENDMENT [U.S. Constitution] - 'No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb, nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.'

 

[Brewleaguer]

Man not even the low market team president & local papers can't get it right. "The Miami Herald quoted Panthers president Jordan Zimmerman last week saying he "sees no risk opening with replacement players and believes some players would absolutely cross the picket line."
They are not on strike, they're locked out.

 

[djhn579]

Man not even the low market team president & local papers can't get it right. "The Miami Herald quoted Panthers president Jordan Zimmerman last week saying he "sees no risk opening with replacement players and believes some players would absolutely cross the picket line."
They are not on strike, they're locked out.

Before replacement players could be used, the NHL would have to offer their best and final offer. If this offer is not accepted and there is no further movement, the NHL can declare an impasse. Once impasse is declared, the NHLPA will have to vote to accept the best and final offer or go on strike. If the NHLPA decides to go on strike, the NHL can bring in replacement players, so the current NHL players would have to cross the picket lines (figuratively, the NHLPA may not set up actual picket lines...)

EDIT: I left out all the other legal manuevering that will become involved when the NHL declares impasse...

 

[Brewleaguer]

Before replacement players could be used, the NHL would have to offer their best and final offer. If this offer is not accepted and there is no further movement, the NHL can declare an impasse. Once impasse is declared, the NHLPA will have to vote to accept the best and final offer or go on strike. If the NHLPA decides to go on strike, the NHL can bring in replacement players, so the current NHL players would have to cross the picket lines (figuratively, the NHLPA may not set up actual picket lines...)

EDIT: I left out all the other legal manuevering that will become involved when the NHL declares impasse...

The NHL did offer their best and final offer, according to them.
The offer was already 'not accepted'
They can declare an impasse, but the NLRB would have to say it's a true impasse, which it's not anymore.

SO the NHL screwed themselves, IMO

 

[codswallop]

Fair enough .. but I bet you there are a bunch of Owners that would jump at a 45.0 Mil cap offer, I bet some even thought long and hard when the 24% was offered .. If your company was profitable in the old CBA and the players offered to give you 1/4 of salary back .. Owners would be all over that ..

Now that a Cap is on the table and the final number being worked toward that really gives all the owners a better position ..

The key point that being that a Hard Cap is an optional Ceiling and with no FLOOR .. Big market teams know very well that small market teams will never spend that be it 42.5 or 45.0 or 49.0 Mil ..

The issue then is down to competitive balance based on affordability .. but the weaker teams that have gotten the high draft picks over the last 5 years also intend to get better by more skill level for less money kicks in .. Atlanta of paper with its core youngsters always improving can be just as competitive in the ice as a big Market team based on Salary ..

For instance Kovalchuk and Heatley together don't make the $ 6.5 Mil that Leafs are paying Owen Nolan a season .. Which team here has the better chance on the ice $$$ wise??

.. add Lehtonen and Marc Savard to the others and you are not close to Philly and LeClairs $9 m a season .. So team salary is a red herring to believe it EQUALS completive balance on the ice .. and a 25 m Atlanta Salary can be better then a 45.0 M Philly one IMO..

The on going joke could be how many Atlanta Thrashers does it take to Equal one Alexi Yashin ?? These teams the have high salary would trade them for the Talent on the small market teams in a heartbeat disproving the Bigger is always better notion ..

Sometime last summer, Don Waddell (Atlanta's GM) stated that he was going to offer those two around $4M/yr each, regardless of what transpired with the CBA. They both likely would have signed for that or at least something close to it. If the season had been played, that would have pushed Atlanta's payroll to around $36M. Savard's contract was only for one more season, and Lehtonen's for two. Those two raises however would likely be a wash if guys like Mellanby and McEachern were to retire. But the team is growing and getting better, very possible the new owners would approve of acquiring another good player with a decent sized contract.

Point is, Atlanta is a terrible example. If the league had stayed on track, their payroll would have been $35M+ this season and closer to $40M the year after. The contracts of the cheap young players would only last a few years anyhow, especially if they all play well. And I'm about as close to positive as I can be that the new owners wouldn't be shy about spending money. The old owner (AOL/TW) kept the payroll on a very tight leash.

 

[kdb209]

In the United States, the rights of the accused are protected by the 5th Amendment to the Constitution, which includes, among other things, protection against self-incrimination. When someone refused to answer a question because it would incriminate him, it is called ‘taking the fifth’...

FIFTH AMENDMENT [U.S. Constitution] - 'No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb, nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.'

It is my understanding that this is true for criminal cases - refusing to testify cannot be used in any way as an admission of guilt. But I beleive that in civil cases (and the Moore lawsuit is a Civil Suit not a criminal case) refusing to testify can be used as being predjudicially negative.