NHL 2012-2013: Tentative deal early Sunday January 6

Well, the NHL would survive but it would need to contract the league. If this became a long term problem.

It survived in the past. The allure of money will always bring other players over. At worst it be temporary thing and then the kids would start coming over for the big pay. The European leagues have very serious flaws that the NHL doesn't have and the KHL, in particular, has made itself a viable option in response to the NHL. They were bleeding talent for a long time.

I'm more worried about losing the Fins and Swedes rather than the Russians anyway. More of them and in different positions and not all of them are stars.

Vector wrote:

Well, the NHL would survive but it would need to contract the league. If this became a long term problem.

It survived in the past. The allure of money will always bring other players over. At worst it be temporary thing and then the kids would start coming over for the big pay. The European leagues have very serious flaws that the NHL doesn't have and the KHL, in particular, has made itself a viable option in response to the NHL. They were bleeding talent for a long time.

I'm more worried about losing the Fins and Swedes rather than the Russians anyway. More of them and in different positions and not all of them are stars.

The NHL will always survive, its just a question of what product will they be able to deliver.

From a pure market standpoint my opinion is they are in for an extreme rude awakening if some of these Russian oligarchs suddenly decide that Hockey is their cup of tea. Sochi might be that showcase... Also might be the last straw for the Russian guys if Bettman sticks his head up his ass over that also.

We already have the crazy Russian owner whos crossed the Atlantic to buy the Brooklyn Nets and thats because Basketball is going to be his toy hobby. The rest of them have stayed in soccer and for people who follow it know what kind of money they can splash around. The kind of money these guys have compared to what the NHL owners want to pay is akin to what the middle east owners have been doing in Soccer in the last couple of years. Eye popping kind of stuff where you go 'They paid how much to get him and are paying him how much on top in salary?'

Recent example Russian related as its cheating to use the middle east guys as examples. Zenit St Petersburg paid a total of 65m Pounds or the equivalent of 100m USD to sign two players at the end of the transfer window. Thats just to acquire their rights. I have no clue what they agreed to in personal terms. The kicker is the 2 guys they signed are arguably not even that amazing.

Zenit is backed by Gazprom which back the KHL team also... Who signed Ilya for the lockout. Who are also the most profitable company in the world last year at 44billion. profit.

I just find it interesting that the NHL is busy trying to curb player salaries when they are honestly a drop of a hat away from guys half way around the world turning their system upside down. Just the model of free agency alone would entice these guys. What we don't have to buy the player first? Well I'll just roll those 30m odd savings into the players deal to really turn his head. Hows say? 15m a year until you get bored of hockey sound.

If anything they should be plotting to court some of these guys before they end up owning a KHL team as their competitors. Or you know improving their own business model so when this does happen they have a chance in hell going toe to toe with these guys financially.

I hadn't thought about Sochi and the role it might play for Russian hockey jowner, good shout. Hulk (one of the players signed by Zenit for that ridiculous transfer fee) is apparently making three times what the team captain is making.

If Russia manages to win gold it could spur some of the oligarchs to dump big dollars into the KHL. That said, I'm not sure if there's enough prestige for it to for the spending to approach what the likes of Anzhi and Zenit are spending - the Champions League is absolutely huge and there's nothing on the club side of the sport that really approaches that.

As for the lockout in general, I read a really good piece that pointed out that the players as individuals do nothing but lose with the lockout. The lost money they're missing out on isn't something they can make up for in future years and their careers are short (about 60% of the players won't be in the NHL in 7 years time). Taking a hard-line stance isn't a good idea.

I'm pro-player to the extent that I want a solution that will mean work stoppages will be much less likely and the solution I want is extremely beneficial to the players, but I don't understand what the NHLPA is doing. They don't have much if any leverage and their strategy seems to be the same as 2004-05 except with a more unified face. Trying to get the labour boards in various provinces to intervene was a good idea but unless the more detailed hearing in Quebec turns up something that hasn't led to anything. They need to do something more radical if they're going to get something big, otherwise the NHLPA is better off getting the best deal they can right now.

I can't say I miss the NHL all that much at the moment. I've been watching more soccer and some baseball, spending a little more times playing games, and generally finding good uses for the free time. I wasn't all that excited about the season anyway with the Montreal slated to be mired in mediocrity and truculence so that plays a pretty big role. If the Habs were actually good (like San Jose, Vancouver, LA, Chicago, etc.) I might be disappointed.

Roke wrote:

I hadn't thought about Sochi and the role it might play for Russian hockey jowner, good shout. Hulk (one of the players signed by Zenit for that ridiculous transfer fee) is apparently making three times what the team captain is making.

If Russia manages to win gold it could spur some of the oligarchs to dump big dollars into the KHL. That said, I'm not sure if there's enough prestige for it to for the spending to approach what the likes of Anzhi and Zenit are spending - the Champions League is absolutely huge and there's nothing on the club side of the sport that really approaches that.

As for the lockout in general, I read a really good piece that pointed out that the players as individuals do nothing but lose with the lockout. The lost money they're missing out on isn't something they can make up for in future years and their careers are short (about 60% of the players won't be in the NHL in 7 years time). Taking a hard-line stance isn't a good idea.

I'm pro-player to the extent that I want a solution that will mean work stoppages will be much less likely and the solution I want is extremely beneficial to the players, but I don't understand what the NHLPA is doing. They don't have much if any leverage and their strategy seems to be the same as 2004-05 except with a more unified face. Trying to get the labour boards in various provinces to intervene was a good idea but unless the more detailed hearing in Quebec turns up something that hasn't led to anything. They need to do something more radical if they're going to get something big, otherwise the NHLPA is better off getting the best deal they can right now.

I can't say I miss the NHL all that much at the moment. I've been watching more soccer and some baseball, spending a little more times playing games, and generally finding good uses for the free time. I wasn't all that excited about the season anyway with the Montreal slated to be mired in mediocrity and truculence so that plays a pretty big role. If the Habs were actually good (like San Jose, Vancouver, LA, Chicago, etc.) I might be disappointed.

First part I'm not sure if it is necessary for Russia to win but more for Hockey to just be exciting and for those guys to notice. The duh moment of 'WOW this sports is pretty exciting and I have more money then I can spend anyways.... how much is a team again'. The how much is a team part though is the Comish of the KHL pitching not the NHL.

As for what the NHLPA is doing? Its made the Owners react like this.

http://deadspin.com/5951872?utm_campaign

I think the owners know they are losing the PR war at this point. This isn't like basketball last year. NHL fans have already lost a full season over this crap so I think its fair to say allot of them are scratching their heads on how you lose an entire season and still not solve the problems.

My hope is a season starting at Xmas after the owners collectively remove their heads from Bettmans ass and end up giving up more of the concessions. If not also unlike the NBA allot of guys are already off in Europe playing hockey so its not exactly as painful.

I didn't respond earlier until I saw that piece on deadspin today because its just depressing. Morons.

jowner wrote:

First part I'm not sure if it is necessary for Russia to win but more for Hockey to just be exciting and for those guys to notice. The duh moment of 'WOW this sports is pretty exciting and I have more money then I can spend anyways.... how much is a team again'. The how much is a team part though is the Comish of the KHL pitching not the NHL.

As for what the NHLPA is doing? Its made the Owners react like this.

http://deadspin.com/5951872?utm_campaign

I think the owners know they are losing the PR war at this point. This isn't like basketball last year. NHL fans have already lost a full season over this crap so I think its fair to say allot of them are scratching their heads on how you lose an entire season and still not solve the problems.

I saw that. Interesting that the NHL used a photo of Derek Boogaard in the package.

Maybe I'm missing the point but with player salaries going to be linked to revenues unless something unforeseen happens, I don't think the PR war matters hugely. If people stop watching games and stop going to games the drops in revenues will be mitigated by the money being paid out to the players being lower. For the players winning the PR war to the extent that people start changing their consumption habits doesn't help either because their take depends on the size of the pie.

I didn't respond earlier until I saw that piece on deadspin today because its just depressing. Morons.

I can't blame you there. Some writer/blogger types I follow on Twitter have been following the AHL and Major Junior hockey closely now that those leagues have kicked off. I'm not in the same boat because the AHL's so closely affiliated to the NHL and I find Major Junior more contemptible than an NHL that cancels three straight seasons what with it having teenagers fight for entertainment and not paying the players.

Anyway, let us all go and share some sacrifice or something.

The PR war matters I guess to see who the fans blame. If the fans relate to the players then the NHLPA can say 'you guys are bullies, offer a fair deal' if the fans start siding with the owners then they can start pushing the union with 'shared sacrifice' bullsh*t as the Deadspin article alludes to.

Its all posturing and so far I think its a safe bet to say both sides haven't lost much that they weren't prepared to lose. Negotiations start again tomorrow I think? So the real question is will they actually start talking now as we move closer to the real point where it actually starts to hurt.

In the short term its the current players that hurt. The owners somewhat but more in the long term as they stunt the leagues growth.

Going back to my point about the KHL its in the very long term that the owners really get hurt IMO. Have fun negotiating future TV deals where the real growth is when you don't have a monopoly on all the best players being in your league.

NHL just took the PR from the PA. Finally a reasonable starting offer.

50/50 split. No escrow/salary rollback. No change in HRR.

The 2 biggest sticking points.

5 years max free agency contract.
8 years in league and 28 years old to qualify for UFA status.

NHL offer also reportedly calls for players to claw back over time any money they would lose this year on existing contracts, which was a key sticking point for the PA. The players wanted owners to honor contracts they just signed.

If they can work this deal out in the next few days, there would be a one-week training camp and the season would start November 2nd. Full 82-game season, with teams playing an extra game every 4 or 5 weeks.

Cause for some optimism, I guess...although these things always seem to go through the same pattern: stalemate, seeming breakthrough, everything falls apart as one side walks away, reconciliation and starting over, and then, finally, real negotiation.

B Dog wrote:

NHL offer also reportedly calls for players to claw back over time any money they would lose this year on existing contracts, which was a key sticking point for the PA. The players wanted owners to honor contracts they just signed.

If they can work this deal out in the next few days, there would be a one-week training camp and the season would start November 2nd. Full 82-game season, with teams playing an extra game every 4 or 5 weeks.

Cause for some optimism, I guess...although these things always seem to go through the same pattern: stalemate, seeming breakthrough, everything falls apart as one side walks away, reconciliation and starting over, and then, finally, real negotiation.

This is the first time we've seen a glimmer of hope in this CBA process, but who knows if, or how quickly, it will lead to anything.

Great...

“I am concerned based on the proposal that was made today that things are not progressing,” he said. “To the contrary, I view the proposal made by the Players’ Association in many ways a step backward.”

http://sports.nationalpost.com/2012/10/18/nhl-lockout-gary-bettman-disappointed-in-unions-latest-offer/

Bonnonon wrote:

Great...

“I am concerned based on the proposal that was made today that things are not progressing,” he said. “To the contrary, I view the proposal made by the Players’ Association in many ways a step backward.”

http://sports.nationalpost.com/2012/10/18/nhl-lockout-gary-bettman-disappointed-in-unions-latest-offer/

Yup the players are going to drive themselves right over that cliff. They feel like the NHL is trying to take to much money away from them, so they are going to let them take all the money away from them, just so the owners can't make any themselves.

Idiots.

I admire it. Takes allot more balls then I have to potentially lose that much money.

Some people will argue it's greed but you could easily argue the other side that it's principle.

At the end of the day I still feel the owners bring very little too the table to justify their portion. So it's fair to tell them to f*ck off.

This is where we are now. Closer than ever before....

Owners want the players to pay for the difference in existing contracts and 50%. NHL proposal
Players want the owners to pay for the difference in existing contracts and 50%. Proposal 3

goman wrote:

This is where we are now. Closer than ever before....

Owners want the players to pay for the difference in existing contracts and 50%. NHL proposal
Players want the owners to pay for the difference in existing contracts and 50%. Proposal 3

And this is why the owners are on drugs. They were behind the massive contracts that went out in the offseason, and now they want to pull this bullsh*t deal with 'Oh, we paid you too much'. f*ck. That. Noise.

goman wrote:

This is where we are now. Closer than ever before....

Owners want the players to pay for the difference in existing contracts and 50%. NHL proposal
Players want the owners to pay for the difference in existing contracts and 50%. Proposal 3

Yup, now it's down to how quickly the players' share gets down to 50% of revenue a deal's only a matter of time. Unless one side gets emotional and cuts off its nose to spite its face.

Still waiting on movement on the 50/50 offer on the table from the owners. The NY Islanders may be heading for Brooklyn in 2015, which leads to the possibility of adopting the Brooklyn name to replace New York. Could they become the Brooklyn Islanders? Doesn't really roll of the tongue well.

As a lapsed Islanders fan, I think the move to Brooklyn is a positive, even if there are some challenges. Namely, the Barclays Center will only seat 14,500 for hockey and one end of the rink won't have seating around it. Really.

Despite that, it's an upgrade over the pit that is Nassau Coliseum. That place was on the fast track to being a pit in the 80s. The owner tried to get a new arena built but simply couldn't. This was his last best option and is much better than the team moving to Seattle or Kansas City or Quebec.

That said, if they change the name or the logo it will quickly become the worst thing that has ever happened anywhere.

You people and your optimistic talk of the NHL ever playing again. So cute!

ColdForged wrote:

You people and your optimistic talk of the NHL ever playing again. So cute!

The deal between the Barclays Center and the Islanders is for 25 years...perhaps they aren't expecting hockey again until the 2020s.

Also, Charles Wang confirmed that the name will remain New York Islanders. Logo stays the same too.

What! When they could have been the Brooklyn Wangs? Once again, the NHL disappoints.

The NHL is so depressing. Its even more frustrating now that they aren't very far apart and still can't come together to make a deal.

nihilo wrote:

The NHL is so depressing. Its even more frustrating now that they aren't very far apart and still can't come together to make a deal.

I wonder if were actually at the point now where ego will stand in the way of logic.

I still side 100% with the players. They are taking a pay cut for no reason and would like what happened in the summer honored. I have a hard time grilling them when they were the ones locked out and they should sacrifice even more cause?... they are already rich? they stand to lose more?

I don't care who is right or wrong. I just want see Tarasenko playing for the Blues. We just got DirecTV back after two years, and one of the things I was looking forward to the very most was NHL hockey.

I wonder if were actually at the point now where ego will stand in the way of logic.

Dude we have been at the point since day 1.

Gaald wrote:
I wonder if were actually at the point now where ego will stand in the way of logic.

Dude we have been at the point since day 1.

It wasn't logical for the players to take the deal back in September. The current NHL offer proves that.

http://blogs.thescore.com/nhl/2012/10/24/would-khl-players-really-make-us-lonesome-were-they-to-go/

maybe the dumbest thing I've read regarding the KHL.

jowner wrote:
Gaald wrote:
I wonder if were actually at the point now where ego will stand in the way of logic.

Dude we have been at the point since day 1.

It wasn't logical for the players to take the deal back in September. The current NHL offer proves that.

http://blogs.thescore.com/nhl/2012/10/24/would-khl-players-really-make-us-lonesome-were-they-to-go/

maybe the dumbest thing I've read regarding the KHL.

I'm not talking about what deal they should have taken. I am talking about how Ego has been standing in the way of logic since day 1. They could have easily gotten to where they are a month ago, but both sides, and I have to say the players and Fehr in particular, are to busy trying to prove a point instead of trying to make a deal.

In the end whatever deal the players end up with, they won't be happy, and they will regret holding out for so long. Just like the last time. The players are the ones with the limited time to make what they can, they are the ones who stand to lose out the most if this year gets shortened or doesn't happen all together. Donald Fehr is driving them over a cliff because of his ego, and he has most of the players cheering him on.

How has ego been standing in the way of logic since day 1 if they got a better deal since day 1? 0_o

Sounds like pretty logical and sound business to call someones bluff if you know their hand. My point on Ego is if both sides start getting hard feelings and bargaining in bad faith it could get actually ugly. So far 0 games have been canceled btw.

I think the only point Fehr and the players are trying to prove is mugging the players because you suck at your business model isn't going to be a cake walk.

Yes we all know that relatively the players are poorer, stand to lose more etc etc but that doesn't mean you just do the cost benefit and bend over. If that was the case they would of panic folded a long time ago.

Also I don't 100% buy the notion the owners don't have allot to lose also. The gate matters to these teams so they are going to seriously hurt once games start getting lopped off the schedule. Not to mention as their franchise values start getting shaky and stagnant as they shoot their own growth in the foot.

As it stands I'm pretty sure the players have 0 regrets to this point. They didn't strike remember and so far have only gotten a better deal then the turd the NHL originally floated.

Yes the owners will lose money, but they also have other businesses where they make way more money which allows them the luxury of owning an NHL team. The players play hockey, they make their money playing hockey, and any other money they make is because they play NHL hockey. The players have way more to lose.

As for negotiating, which I have been paying pretty close attention to, this is how it's gone so far. NHLPA says they have will have an offer ready some time in the summer (I think July). September comes around and nothing. So the NHL makes an initial offer, the players are offended. The NHLPA makes a counter offer, which doesn't take into account the NHL's offer. Talks end. A while later the NHL makes another offer, the NHLPA basically makes the same offer as before. The NHL says, no sorry that's not how this works and until you make a different offer we got nothing else to say. Weeks go buy nothing happens. Everyone is waiting for the NHLPA to make an offer, and their response when asked is that they are working on something but the time isn't right yet. At this point the NHL was already cancelling the preseason and the first set of games was about to get cancelled. THE TIME ISN'T RIGHT YET? WHAT THE f*ck are they waiting for? This gets us to last week, the NHL out of the blue makes another offer, and states that they could still do a full season, 50/50 split. The offer isn't perfect but it's the kind of offer everyone figured would eventually get on the table, people are excited, maybe now there will be some headway! The NHLPA again comes back to the table with not 1 but 3 of their own proposals that don't take into account what the NHL had just offered!

The NHLPA has done everything in their power to drag this out! They are the ones not negotiating in good faith! They were the ones who could have started negotiations all summer and didn't, and every time an offer does come up, they are the ones ignoring it and offering up their own plans. If you want to offer up your own solutions to problems you don't wait for the other side to offer up something first, ignore it and then offer up your solution. You come to the table first! This tactic of waiting and then ignoring what's offered gets no one anywhere. The owners have at least moved off of their initial position in order to get closer to a deal. The NHLPA is satisfied waiting for the owners to make all the moves and then blaming them for the lockout. As if we are all to stupid to realize just how much leverage the owners would lose if they allowed the players to keep playing until they decided it was in their best interest to walk out and stop the season whenever they liked.

This is why I am on the owners side. Yes the owners are dumb asses, and yes it is basically through their own stupidity that we are hear yet again. However the players aren't negotiating. They are trying to strong arm their bosses into letting them set the rules for how the league they don't own splits up the money. The players are living in a fantasy land created by an egomaniac who is looking to write the last chapter in his biography. You know, the one where he breaks the NHL owners and bends them to his will.

I don't see how the Players aren't negotiating in good faith. How would you feel if, as a player, you were offered this fantastic contract, and then had the rug pulled out from under you a couple months down the road? Because that's what happened. The owners are expecting the players to take not only a loss in revenue sharing, but to take a loss on what they were told they would be paid for services rendered. That's flat-out breach of contract, and the very definition of bad faith negotiating. Of course they're going to counter offer to maintain not only what they were contracted to be paid, but to maintain a level of profit share from what they got the previous season while giving a larger cut to the owners, which is all they're after.

As an aside, I don't see how *anyone* could possibly side with the owners. The players aren't refusing to play. The owners are refusing to allow them. NHLPA offered to keep playing through negotiations. Bettman and the owners refused to allow them.

edit - And to tack on to that? The owners demanded a new CBO. They could easily have played another season without renegotiating and risking a lockout. Of course they had to make the first offer. And like I said, the first offer was roughly comparable to being slapped in the face with a giant dick.

Don't really want to argue the exacts of the details but for example:

! The NHLPA again comes back to the table with not 1 but 3 of their own proposals that don't take into account what the NHL had just offered!

Well it kinda did take into account? Owners offered 50/50 and players offered back a variation of the 50/50. I see that as bargaining in good faith. Just the difference in the press conferences was pretty evident. Bettman came out for just over 5 minutes and hardly discussed details. Fehr came out and said they put up 3 offers and were pretty much stonewalled that the NHL would only negotiate minor details on their own offer.

Bargaining in bad faith IMO is where the NHL originally started at. Or the potential that this goes nuclear and the owners feel the need to 'punish' the players once games start getting lost.

My perspective is this this.

1. The players have been locked out. The onus is not on them. Hockey would be happening right now if the owners never locked them out in the first place.

2. The NHLPA didn't force the issue because their leverage increases as this gets closer to games being canceled. What power did they have before? preseason canceled? big deal. The heat on the owners picks up when it gets to the point where games might actually be lost and the gate revenues from it. Question is from this point forward do the owners get serious about coming to a solution or do they get whiny and punish the players.

As for Fehrs ego? I dunno, Baseball is looking like a pretty good model right now.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/feature/?id=75388 sure they aren't making the same but that's a decent chunk of guys not starving by any means. This isn't MLB/NBA/NFL where you lockout the players and a few of them end up in the Chinese Basketball league.

Its obviously opinion tho and your entitled to yours. I will happily trade 20 games of this season if it knocks some sense into the owners that they don't have the same monopoly power like the other leagues. Its time for them to build up the league if they want it to actually be stronger 20 years from now.