2024-2025 NHL Regular Season

12526283031306

Comments

  • MayDay10MayDay10 Posts: 11,738
    polaris_x wrote:
    i'm not saying it should be a mlb type system but they do have labour peace and at the end of the day - that is what fans want ...

    it seems like you are on the side of the owners here ... is it your position that the players should cede certain rights and give in to the owners on this?

    There is labor peace in MLB because players run amok. As a fan of a team that has become a farm team for about 6 high revenue teams it sucks. I dont watch games once my team is out of it in June every season. I dont want that in the NHL. That was the path it was going down before the 04 lockout. Every star player was going to Detroit, Toronto, Rangers, Flyers, and maybe 1 or 2 others. Teams were required to get the perfect mix of middling players and run a suffocating defensive system. It would be worse now IMO, even with the tradeoff of labor peace.

    I think the players do need to give a bit here. It is a waste of everyone's time to keep their line. The owners can/will wait longer. The owners' system isnt that bad, especially if/when the players negotiate off it and score points on things like contract length, arbitration rights, etc. When compared to NFL and NBA, the proposal isnt that bad. They thought '05 was the end of the world and now they would like nothing more than to keep the system. By sitting, they are losing more money than they will salvage in negotiations. So many ex players have spoken up advising the players that it is not worth it.

    They also need to fight to make the deal as long as possible.
  • lukin2006lukin2006 Posts: 9,087
    Question:
    Will Justin Schultz and/or Nail Yakupov be eligible for the Calder Trophy if this season is lost?
    It's the only individual trophy no Oiler has won (aside from the Richard, but it would have been won by Oilers several times if it had been around during the dynasty)......
    Gretzky was denied the Calder for playing pro in the WHA before coming to the NHL.....would that rule apply to Schultz and Yakupov?

    Where's Shultz playing...AHL? Yakupov...yes it should be denied...he's in the KHL that's pro hockey.

    Unfortunately the NHL was never consistent with that rule...they denied Gretzky who played pro hockey but allowed a Russian years ago to win it :fp: :fp: :fp:.
    I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin

    "Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
  • lukin2006lukin2006 Posts: 9,087
    drivingrl wrote:
    MayDay10 wrote:
    I saw someone tweet that in 1995 the agreement came on January 11th, and in 2005 the final cancellation was February 16th.

    I was wondering if there was a specific date by which they just called the season dead if there was no agreement. One would hope that having a such a date in the rulebooks wouldn't be necessary, but here we are again. :fp:

    The season a long ways from being lost.
    I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin

    "Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
  • MayDay10MayDay10 Posts: 11,738
    @cotsonika: NHL might not like everything in PA offer. But if PA is on NHL framework, NHL can't walk out, say not speaking same language. Time to talk.

    @TSNBobMcKenzie: @cotsonika Unless the $180M add to Make Whole turns a percentage based offer into a guaranteed dollar amount. Won't know til we see all #s.
  • MayDay10MayDay10 Posts: 11,738
    @adater: The $180 million is nhlpa's desire for owners to foot bill for most of lockout pain to this point.And, well, they're the ones who started it

    @LouisJean_TVA: It must not be ignited by the offerings of the players or NHL. Expect the details before you decide if the outcome is near it not.
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    MayDay10 wrote:
    There is labor peace in MLB because players run amok. As a fan of a team that has become a farm team for about 6 high revenue teams it sucks. I dont watch games once my team is out of it in June every season. I dont want that in the NHL. That was the path it was going down before the 04 lockout. Every star player was going to Detroit, Toronto, Rangers, Flyers, and maybe 1 or 2 others. Teams were required to get the perfect mix of middling players and run a suffocating defensive system. It would be worse now IMO, even with the tradeoff of labor peace.

    I think the players do need to give a bit here. It is a waste of everyone's time to keep their line. The owners can/will wait longer. The owners' system isnt that bad, especially if/when the players negotiate off it and score points on things like contract length, arbitration rights, etc. When compared to NFL and NBA, the proposal isnt that bad. They thought '05 was the end of the world and now they would like nothing more than to keep the system. By sitting, they are losing more money than they will salvage in negotiations. So many ex players have spoken up advising the players that it is not worth it.

    They also need to fight to make the deal as long as possible.

    what? ... what star player went to toronto!? ... either way ... imo the nhl has the most parity in any of the sports leagues now ... so, how is it that they need fixing? ...

    but the players have given ... this negotiation hasn't been lets start at our end zone and meet at the 50 yd line ... the owners are in the end zone and the players are at the 50 yd line and the owners want to agree on the 2 yd line ...
  • lukin2006lukin2006 Posts: 9,087
    MayDay10 wrote:
    polaris_x wrote:
    i'm not saying it should be a mlb type system but they do have labour peace and at the end of the day - that is what fans want ...

    it seems like you are on the side of the owners here ... is it your position that the players should cede certain rights and give in to the owners on this?

    There is labor peace in MLB because players run amok. As a fan of a team that has become a farm team for about 6 high revenue teams it sucks. I dont watch games once my team is out of it in June every season. I dont want that in the NHL. That was the path it was going down before the 04 lockout. Every star player was going to Detroit, Toronto, Rangers, Flyers, and maybe 1 or 2 others. Teams were required to get the perfect mix of middling players and run a suffocating defensive system. It would be worse now IMO, even with the tradeoff of labor peace.

    I think the players do need to give a bit here. It is a waste of everyone's time to keep their line. The owners can/will wait longer. The owners' system isnt that bad, especially if/when the players negotiate off it and score points on things like contract length, arbitration rights, etc. When compared to NFL and NBA, the proposal isnt that bad. They thought '05 was the end of the world and now they would like nothing more than to keep the system. By sitting, they are losing more money than they will salvage in negotiations. So many ex players have spoken up advising the players that it is not worth it.

    They also need to fight to make the deal as long as possible.

    Of those teams you mentioned ... only Detroit had success ... winning the SC doesn't go to the team with the most star players.
    I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin

    "Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
  • drivingrldrivingrl Posts: 1,448
    Found this while surfing lockout tweets. Very sweet.

    Must Watch: @predsnhl surprise a youth hockey game by bringing the full NHL experience to the rink. 250 fans #smashmob
    http://youtu.be/wBMjPc69Tuk

    This makes me hate the Predators less. ;)
    drivingrl: "Will I ever get to meet Gwen Stefani?"
    kevinbeetle: "Yes. When her career washes up and her and Gavin move to Galveston, you will meet her at Hot Topic shopping for a Japanese cheerleader outfit.

    Next!"
  • Drowned OutDrowned Out Posts: 6,056
    lukin2006 wrote:
    Question:
    Will Justin Schultz and/or Nail Yakupov be eligible for the Calder Trophy if this season is lost?
    It's the only individual trophy no Oiler has won (aside from the Richard, but it would have been won by Oilers several times if it had been around during the dynasty)......
    Gretzky was denied the Calder for playing pro in the WHA before coming to the NHL.....would that rule apply to Schultz and Yakupov?

    Where's Shultz playing...AHL? Yakupov...yes it should be denied...he's in the KHL that's pro hockey.

    Unfortunately the NHL was never consistent with that rule...they denied Gretzky who played pro hockey but allowed a Russian years ago to win it :fp: :fp: :fp:.
    Yes, that was Makarov, winning it at 31 years old....that's when they changed the rules I believe.
    Schultz is playing for the Oiler-owned affiliate in Oklahoma.....they've had Schultz, Eberle, and RNH all season, and Hall for a couple weeks now... and still can't draw fans.....sad. Schultz is leading the league in scoring...how often do you see that from a D man? Eberle is second, RNH is tied for third.
    I kind of disagree about Yakupov...I don't see the difference between the AHL and KHL as far as pro hockey goes. How do you define pro? Size of paycheck? There are multi-million dollar AHL players as well...



    and it looks like I'm gonna have to break down and join twitter.
  • Drowned OutDrowned Out Posts: 6,056
    lukin2006 wrote:
    MayDay10 wrote:
    polaris_x wrote:
    i'm not saying it should be a mlb type system but they do have labour peace and at the end of the day - that is what fans want ...

    it seems like you are on the side of the owners here ... is it your position that the players should cede certain rights and give in to the owners on this?

    There is labor peace in MLB because players run amok. As a fan of a team that has become a farm team for about 6 high revenue teams it sucks. I dont watch games once my team is out of it in June every season. I dont want that in the NHL. That was the path it was going down before the 04 lockout. Every star player was going to Detroit, Toronto, Rangers, Flyers, and maybe 1 or 2 others. Teams were required to get the perfect mix of middling players and run a suffocating defensive system. It would be worse now IMO, even with the tradeoff of labor peace.

    I think the players do need to give a bit here. It is a waste of everyone's time to keep their line. The owners can/will wait longer. The owners' system isnt that bad, especially if/when the players negotiate off it and score points on things like contract length, arbitration rights, etc. When compared to NFL and NBA, the proposal isnt that bad. They thought '05 was the end of the world and now they would like nothing more than to keep the system. By sitting, they are losing more money than they will salvage in negotiations. So many ex players have spoken up advising the players that it is not worth it.

    They also need to fight to make the deal as long as possible.

    Of those teams you mentioned ... only Detroit had success ... winning the SC doesn't go to the team with the most star players.
    The Rangers won their 94 Cup by pillaging the Oilers. The Oilers were def going the farm team route before the salary cap....I support the players in this, but I do think the cap, and revenue sharing (well, also a stronger dollar and ownership), is what saved the team here in Edm.
  • MayDay10MayDay10 Posts: 11,738
    yeah. There were teams on the brink of folding prior to the last lockout. The salary cap tied to revenue and revenue sharing is key. Teams were farmed to the bigger markets as well and it was pretty miserable. While high payroll didnt guarantee success.... there was definitely a correlation. I used to loathe deadline day and the beginning of free agency. Now it is fun.

    It seems the NHLPA proposal today has entered the same universe as the NHL proposal... which is huge. They still want almost $400 Million on the 'make whole' which is a lot. Word is a lot of NHLPA members pushed leadership to put the proposal forth.

    I think the NHL is going to balk at it again, there will be strong words, and they will take it through the holiday and it will look hopeless. I think next week they will meet and we will end up somewhere between the 2 proposals.
  • MayDay10MayDay10 Posts: 11,738
    Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie
    The NHLPA breakdown of the $393M it is seeking for Make Whole is as follows: Year 1: 182M, Year 2: 128M, Year 3: 72M, Year 4: 11M.


    thats in addition to the 50/50. These numbers dont appear to bad if you consider spreading it amongst 30 teams.
    Not sure of what the NHLPA proposal says on length or the peripheral issues.
  • MayDay10MayDay10 Posts: 11,738
    @TSNBobMcKenzie: Also in PA proposal: For on-ice discipline, appeal process to neutral arbitrator or panel of 3 arbitrators (one NHL, one NHLPA, one neutral)

    Very interesting and long overdue. Colin Campbell was awful and Shanahan is a clown.




    edit: Just saw it was for appeals
  • MayDay10MayDay10 Posts: 11,738
    @TSNBobMcKenzie: NHLPA proposes elimination of re-entry waivers and the four-recall rule post trade deadline.

    thats another good one.
  • MayDay10MayDay10 Posts: 11,738
    @TSNBobMcKenzie: The NHLPA proposal on "cap benefit recapture" (anti-backdiving measure) only applies to new contracts and deals of 9 or more years.

    @TSNBobMcKenzie: NHL won't like that last one because it doesn't go after existing back-diving contracts.

    @TSNBobMcKenzie: NHLPA proposes the Upper Limit (salary cap) may not fall below 67.25 M in any year of the agreement.

    Elliotte Friedman ‏@FriedgeHNIC
    NHLPA leaders tell players they have "refused" to accept NHL proposals restricting free agency and salary arbitration.


    the minimum cap amount could be a deal-breaker.
  • Let's go St Petersberg :fp:
    GoiMTvP.gif
  • fifefife Posts: 3,327
    MayDay10 wrote:
    @TSNBobMcKenzie: The NHLPA proposal on "cap benefit recapture" (anti-backdiving measure) only applies to new contracts and deals of 9 or more years.

    @TSNBobMcKenzie: NHL won't like that last one because it doesn't go after existing back-diving contracts.

    @TSNBobMcKenzie: NHLPA proposes the Upper Limit (salary cap) may not fall below 67.25 M in any year of the agreement.

    Elliotte Friedman ‏@FriedgeHNIC
    NHLPA leaders tell players they have "refused" to accept NHL proposals restricting free agency and salary arbitration.


    the minimum cap amount could be a deal-breaker.

    They really have not talked about the min. Cap.

    of course we have not really seen the whole proposal but if the NHL does decide to cancel the season I wonder if the NHLPA will go after the cap
  • MayDay10MayDay10 Posts: 11,738
    I meant putting a floor on how low the cap can be. IMO the owners will never sign off on anything like that not tied directly to revenues.

    I do not think the cap will ever be taken off the table. The NHL has guaranteed contracts in its pocket as well.

    I really do not think this entire season will be cancelled. I believe that if it was cancelled and there was still no deal next September.... the NHL may just run out its own CBA rules and move on without the NHLPA.

    It seems that the NHLPA has moved onto the same plane as the NHL. Now it will be a matter of where the needle falls in between and agreeing on the peripheral issues, which will be give/take. There may be another round of both sides acting butt hurt, but it doesnt seem they are far enough apart to blow it up.
  • MayDay10MayDay10 Posts: 11,738
    @FriedgeHNIC: Very interesting sentence in NHLPA proposal: "beginning with the second year of the Agreement, players' share, expressed in dollars.

    @FriedgeHNIC: may not fall below its value for the prior season." Sounds like protection from a fan backlash. NHL probably won't like that."

    @cotsonika: Protects players from going backward, puts onus on owners to keep going forward. But doubt owners will accept risk. If revs drop, % rises.

    @cotsonika: As @mc79hockey said, PA proposal includes: "Players' share, expressed in dollars, may not fall below its value for the prior season." Hmm.

    @TSNBobMcKenzie: A shade over 55 per cent in Year 1, a shade under 54 per cent in Year 2, 52 per cent in Year 3, and 50. 3 per cent in Year 4.




    this stuff doesnt sound as encouraging.

    the entire 04-05 lockout was a struggle to tie salaries to revenue. Now the NHLPA thinks they can eliminate that?
    its not going to work. The NHL isnt going to agree to only tie salary to revenue when things are going well and I dont blame them.
  • MayDay10MayDay10 Posts: 11,738
    @cotsonika: If revenues go down, the players' percentage will go up in the future, under this proposal.

    @cotsonika: Basically, players will drop to 50% now, but plus make-whole and plus guarantee they won't go backward in dollars from this point.

    @LouisJean_TVA: Biggest concession in @NHLPA offer is they are sharing the burden of lockout and furure HRR. They will take 50/50 plus top up.

    @NYDNRangers: Union proposal asks for guarantee that starting in year 2, players share can be no lower than that of the year before

    @TSNBobMcKenzie: But if we don't get a negotiation out of this, we never will. OK, I'm done now. Back to your regularly scheduled nonsense.

    @cotsonika: Again, this protects players, shifts risk to owners. This season would set bar for future. Very interested to hear NHL response.
  • fifefife Posts: 3,327
    MayDay10 wrote:
    I meant putting a floor on how low the cap can be. IMO the owners will never sign off on anything like that not tied directly to revenues.

    I do not think the cap will ever be taken off the table. The NHL has guaranteed contracts in its pocket as well.

    I really do not think this entire season will be cancelled. I believe that if it was cancelled and there was still no deal next September.... the NHL may just run out its own CBA rules and move on without the NHLPA.

    It seems that the NHLPA has moved onto the same plane as the NHL. Now it will be a matter of where the needle falls in between and agreeing on the peripheral issues, which will be give/take. There may be another round of both sides acting butt hurt, but it doesnt seem they are far enough apart to blow it up.

    I think the owners won't play the guaranteed contracts cause it would cause more harm than good for them. what i think you would see is more of an NFL structure where teams will have to pay large signing bonus and moist teams can't really afford that.

    I have a feeling that if the NHL comes back right away today than the season will be gone. If the NHl takes some time like say a day or 2 to come back than there will be a season.

    from what i read, the boston owner is the hard ass so lets see what he thinks.

    I think this offer is a step in the right direction but don't think the owners will like it.
  • MayDay10MayDay10 Posts: 11,738
    @NYDNRangers: NHLPA trying to ensure that owners assume $$ responsibility for revenue losses that occurred due to the owners' lockout

    @cotsonika: In short, this is a big move by PA, but devil in details -- especially one I just tweeted about. Probably, hopefully, more talks to come.

    @TGfireandice: By guaranteeing no drop in actual dollars in players' share from Year 2 on, owners would pay for lockout impact if HRR falls due to backlash

    @BroadStBull: Apparently, players' offer does NOT have an immediate 50/50 HRR split.

    @brianlawton9: I don't believe this offer is going to do much to excite @nhl ! No hockey for still a while @nhlpa, still big disconnect #shame4game

    @KatieStrangESPN: #CBA Interesting element of union proposal: features guarantee that, starting in Year 2, share cannot be lowed than previous year. (cont'd)

    @KatieStrangESPN: #CBA (cont'd) That protects against both devaluation of CAD dollar and the potential decline in revenue and thereby shifts risk onto owners.
  • drivingrldrivingrl Posts: 1,448
    MayDay10 wrote:
    @KatieStrangESPN: #CBA (cont'd) That protects against both devaluation of CAD dollar and the potential decline in revenue and thereby shifts risk onto owners.

    Clever. Wish I could do that in my line of work. 8-)
    drivingrl: "Will I ever get to meet Gwen Stefani?"
    kevinbeetle: "Yes. When her career washes up and her and Gavin move to Galveston, you will meet her at Hot Topic shopping for a Japanese cheerleader outfit.

    Next!"
  • fifefife Posts: 3,327
    So no deal. they may not meet tomorrow.

    Say bye to the season.
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    fife wrote:
    So no deal. they may not meet tomorrow.

    Say bye to the season.

    really ... at this stage ... the only real pressure would be from sponsors ... if there is a feeling that there is not going to be a season ... those dollars are going to have to go somewhere else ...
  • lukin2006lukin2006 Posts: 9,087
    No, Thanks: NHL Lockout Talks Break off Again

    http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/ ... K5AjqXAXGI
    I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin

    "Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
  • lukin2006lukin2006 Posts: 9,087
    lukin2006 wrote:
    Question:
    Will Justin Schultz and/or Nail Yakupov be eligible for the Calder Trophy if this season is lost?
    It's the only individual trophy no Oiler has won (aside from the Richard, but it would have been won by Oilers several times if it had been around during the dynasty)......
    Gretzky was denied the Calder for playing pro in the WHA before coming to the NHL.....would that rule apply to Schultz and Yakupov?

    Where's Shultz playing...AHL? Yakupov...yes it should be denied...he's in the KHL that's pro hockey.

    Unfortunately the NHL was never consistent with that rule...they denied Gretzky who played pro hockey but allowed a Russian years ago to win it :fp: :fp: :fp:.
    Yes, that was Makarov, winning it at 31 years old....that's when they changed the rules I believe.
    Schultz is playing for the Oiler-owned affiliate in Oklahoma.....they've had Schultz, Eberle, and RNH all season, and Hall for a couple weeks now... and still can't draw fans.....sad. Schultz is leading the league in scoring...how often do you see that from a D man? Eberle is second, RNH is tied for third.
    I kind of disagree about Yakupov...I don't see the difference between the AHL and KHL as far as pro hockey goes. How do you define pro? Size of paycheck? There are multi-million dollar AHL players as well...



    and it looks like I'm gonna have to break down and join twitter.

    As long as they denied Gretzky rookie of the year because he played in a competing league all other players should be denied rookie of the year...that's just personal feelings...probably not what will happen in reality. Lets face it the NHL treats European players with kid gloves...if Eberle and Hopkins can play in the AHL then so should Yakupov...it'd be a lot easier for the Oilers to keep a watchful eye on his progress and for him to adapt to the system the Oilers want to play...personally I would have selected Murray and let someone else have Yakapov...unless he's another Pavel Datsyuk...I wouldn't trust him...too me he's already showing signs of selfishness.
    I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin

    "Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
  • lukin2006lukin2006 Posts: 9,087
    fife wrote:
    So no deal. they may not meet tomorrow.

    Say bye to the season.

    I still think the deal will get done...just not before Christmas.
    I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin

    "Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    sooo ... let's say the deal does not get done ... season is lost ...

    and let's say neither the owners or the nhlpa cave to a point where a deal gets reached ...

    i suppose the nhl can restart up and see which players are willing to cross - i suspect a lot of them ... what will the other players do? ... play in the KHL? ... seems like players will have little leverage which ultimately is what i think the owners think ...
  • lukin2006lukin2006 Posts: 9,087
    polaris_x wrote:
    sooo ... let's say the deal does not get done ... season is lost ...

    and let's say neither the owners or the nhlpa cave to a point where a deal gets reached ...

    i suppose the nhl can restart up and see which players are willing to cross - i suspect a lot of them ... what will the other players do? ... play in the KHL? ... seems like players will have little leverage which ultimately is what i think the owners think ...

    I doubt the KHL is good alternative long term ... lots of problems with KHL ... most rinks are shoddy soviet era, air travel is suspect, 30 million salary cap ... life is pretty good in the NHL ...too bad these millionaires don't want to admit that ... 5 star hotels, first class chartered air, most teams play in top notch facilities and all players earn 6 figure salaries and many earn 7 figure salaries ... and most have never held a real job in their life other than part - time jobs ... sympathize with them I will not. I'll save my sympathy for the people that would like to take their kids to the game but can not afford to do so.

    I still believe they will plat just not till after christmas.
    I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin

    "Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
Sign In or Register to comment.