Thread: The Official CBA Negotiations/Lockout Super Thread

The strange part is that the players are going to lose more by being locked out than if they accepted the League's offer (according to Bettman).

^ I read/watched that also.

Maybe it is a matter of pride, or the "we aren't going to let you push us around no'mo" type of thing for the NHLPA?

Something I keep wondering:

Do players get their full salary if there is a lockout? Are the owners required to pay them during a work stoppage?

Originally Posted by aragorn

Why would you think that? With the lawsuits settled after the last lost season, and the fact the NHL does not own the Stanley Cup, it could likely be given to the next best hockey champion. I think any North American team hockey organization can put in a claim to it if no NHL season takes place. There was talk of giving it to the gals last time, and this time it could very likely happen. I think it would be cool... The Fredericksburg Fire Hydrants, 2013 Stanley Cup Champions, inscribed on the cup.

Your 2013 Champions Team LGK !!!!



Fish, after you lift the Cup, can I get it second ? I know what I'm doing on my day.... Take a guess.

Originally Posted by KingsWord

Something I keep wondering:

Do players get their full salary if there is a lockout? Are the owners required to pay them during a work stoppage?

Players dont get any money for the duration of the lockout. Thats why you have a guy like Weber getting a huge signing bonus this year. The bonus was guaranteed while salary was not.

Bettman and Fehr just need to whip it out and compare. THAT'S how you decide the revenue sharing percentages.

That's what real men would do.


"Merka

Well that really changes my perspective on this thing. For some reason I thought the players still took a salary of some kind. This really hurts the lower end players a lot. The young guys in there last year of an ELC who burn all their money on booz and girls are probably broke right now.

The players dont want to any less money than the $1.87 billion what ever number, so fine let them have it. If the owners think league revenue is going to keep going up why dont they just say ok, that is your hard cap number for the next CBA. Based on the proposed NHL growth numbers this is what the % will be over the next 5 years if they kept the same $1.87 billion number.

This year the NHL made $3.28 billion (shown below as $3,280) and the 57% of HRR makes it just about $1,870
11/12 - $3,280 this year its 57% and it is about $1,870

12/13 - $3,512.9 it would be about 53% this year
13/14 - $3,762.3 50%
14/15 - $4,029.4 46%
15/16 - $4,315.5 43%
16/17 - $4,621.9 40%

Then the PA would then come back and say F you to a hard cap number for the HRR. Then the owners should come back and say $1,870 will be your minimum. And give the players the option to take that or 47% (I came up with 47% by averaging the % over the next 5 years that would make them about $1,870 and rounding up) which ever is the larger number. By 16/17 the $1,870 number will go up to $2,172.3. That is respectable growth from years 2014-17 with out any change in salary for the next 2 seasons. Over the next two seasons the league would make about $715 million more dollars to help the league figure out what to do with the teams that are losing money (aka where to relocate them to)

The PA will then come back and say F you again, why are the players doing all the hard work and only getting 47%. They should then come back with asking for the two year freeze of the $1.87 billion, then go to 50%.

The league will say no, and come back with the two year $1.87 bill freeze, then stat at 47% of HRR and every year for the next three years after that increase a percent up to 50%. This will help the league with any relocation costs for the teams that are losing money (the 47, 48 & 49% years) then lock that 50% number in for the two years after that. Then we have a 7 year CBA and everyone gets their money, and we get to go to FF to watch hockey in two weeks.

The league should also freeze the cap number for the next two years, this will help if the owners are really losing money like some articles suggest. Then increase it SLOWLY the five years after that (if everyone is still making money)

Thats my plan. If I am way off on anything, sorry.

Originally Posted by bob8880

Players dont get any money for the duration of the lockout. Thats why you have a guy like Weber getting a huge signing bonus this year. The bonus was guaranteed while salary was not.

* bob8880 has reached 1500 posts!* [10:02 AM]