|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jun 26, 2020 12:36:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jun 26, 2020 13:25:04 GMT -5
I thought I saw on the National last night that Vancouver pulled themself out of the running to be a hub city
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 26, 2020 14:34:05 GMT -5
Yes. Canucks pulled out because the province wouldn’t give some sort of exception to the NHL. I love it. Our health officer would not agree to the NHL players being treated differently than we BC residents. That’s how it should be. No doubt Bettman and Jacobs will find some politicians willing to bend over, but not here in BC, one of the safest places in North America. Stick it gents.
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Jun 26, 2020 15:45:17 GMT -5
Yes. Canucks pulled out because the province wouldn’t give some sort of exception to the NHL. I love it. Our health officer would not agree to the NHL players being treated differently than we BC residents. That’s how it should be. No doubt Bettman and Jacobs will find some politicians willing to bend over, but not here in BC, one of the safest places in North America. Stick it gents. Dr. Bonnie Henry is a rockstar. Dr. Deena Hinshaw here in AB is doing a great job as well.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jun 27, 2020 8:51:16 GMT -5
Yes. Canucks pulled out because the province wouldn’t give some sort of exception to the NHL. I love it. Our health officer would not agree to the NHL players being treated differently than we BC residents. That’s how it should be. No doubt Bettman and Jacobs will find some politicians willing to bend over, but not here in BC, one of the safest places in North America. Stick it gents. Any national-level 'lessons learned' process should be chaired by BC's health officer, IMO ... they're playing the game right and all they need do is look at Kingston to see what happens when people from other cities decide to head to Kingston for 'pampering' and 'patios' ... we were 'green' for months until two days ago when we had a surge of 18 positive tests (many more to follow) ... Kingston has now been downgraded to 'yellow' all because of a few out-of-town visitors and one (it takes only one) proprietor who felt the rules didn't apply to her business ... the regional health officer said the only way Kingston would get more COVID-19 cases is if they came from out of town and that's exactly what happened ... good call by the BC government ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 27, 2020 13:01:14 GMT -5
Yes. Canucks pulled out because the province wouldn’t give some sort of exception to the NHL. I love it. Our health officer would not agree to the NHL players being treated differently than we BC residents. That’s how it should be. No doubt Bettman and Jacobs will find some politicians willing to bend over, but not here in BC, one of the safest places in North America. Stick it gents. Any national-level 'lessons learned' process should be chaired by BC's health officer, IMO ... they're playing the game right and all they need do is look at Kingston to see what happens when people from other cities decide to head to Kingston for 'pampering' and 'patios' ... we were 'green' for months until two days ago when we had a surge of 18 positive tests (many more to follow) ... Kingston has now been downgraded to 'yellow' all because of a few out-of-town visitors and one (it takes only one) proprietor who felt the rules didn't apply to her business ... the regional health officer said the only way Kingston would get more COVID-19 cases is if they came from out of town and that's exactly what happened ... good call by the BC government ... Cheers. Yeah, there's still a lot of 'annoyance' shall we call it? at not opening up faster, but most people accept the direction. I'm sure it helps that Dr. Henry and John Horgan (premier) have been right so far and the deaths in BC have been held relatively low. They're using some good mathematical models to keep cases below certain percentages as they go from one stage to the next. One can argue that it hurts the economy to go this slowly, but if people feel they're at risk they're not likely to want to go to work or out for dinner or to a pub. I don't think the economy will be affected differently either way.
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 28, 2020 20:17:22 GMT -5
According to Wyshynski on Espn, the league and the players were apparently deep in negotiations this weekend regarding not only the final details of Phase 3/Phase 4, but also regarding a four year extension of the current CBA (which would expire after 2021-22 season).
Given the implications of what it means to be bound by revenue sharing in a time of economic crisis, the players are seemingly going to have to accept plenty they do not like: 20 percent escrow for a couple of years, a 10 percent salary deferral in 2020-21, $81.5 million cap through 2021-22 with only a very modest increase in 2022-23.
Bergevin will have to be careful with Domi, Gallagher, Petry, Tatar, and Danault. Montreal's been coming in $7 million under the cap ceiling but if those guys all get the raises they believe they earned, things will get very tight relatively soon. I know a lot of Habs fans like all of these guys because they are good NHL players and good guys to boot, but keeping together the entirety of a core that has not produced any on-ice success seems like a strange strategic plan in this economic landscape.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 28, 2020 22:12:22 GMT -5
Quick projections (and this should be considered even if the CAP doesn't go down). Petry and Tatar will be 33 and 30 in December. If the ages were reversed, I'd re-sign Petry, but unless you can get him for 3 years max, he really has to be dealt. Tatar's value is at it's highest. Utilize that. Get back some 19-20-21 year old top prospects. Maybe even draft picks for 2022/23 from a team that's good now but with the possibility of plummeting in 2-3. years. Get younger and ladder some of your extra picks. Move Weber. We can't afford to pay (CAP wise) a 3rd pairing guy (2 years from now) $8MM a year. Finally, convince Julien to work with the kids or get a different coach.
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 29, 2020 12:48:08 GMT -5
Petry and Tatar are good players. I like them. And another thing they have going for them is durability.
But in this tough economic landscape, there are only so many dollars to go around. The idea of following a draft and develop model is to actually create viable replacements for some veterans. At times I wonder if Bergevin is simply embracing drafting and developing because it helps deflect attention away from the lack of winning.
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Jun 30, 2020 5:49:13 GMT -5
According to Wyshynski on Espn, the league and the players were apparently deep in negotiations this weekend regarding not only the final details of Phase 3/Phase 4, but also regarding a four year extension of the current CBA (which would expire after 2021-22 season). Given the implications of what it means to be bound by revenue sharing in a time of economic crisis, the players are seemingly going to have to accept plenty they do not like: 20 percent escrow for a couple of years, a 10 percent salary deferral in 2020-21, $81.5 million cap through 2021-22 with only a very modest increase in 2022-23. Bergevin will have to be careful with Domi, Gallagher, Petry, Tatar, and Danault. Montreal's been coming in $7 million under the cap ceiling but if those guys all get the raises they believe they earned, things will get very tight relatively soon. I know a lot of Habs fans like all of these guys because they are good NHL players and good guys to boot, but keeping together the entirety of a core that has not produced any on-ice success seems like a strange strategic plan in this economic landscape. Players need a new leader I would say. That is real bad deal they have with ESCROW. He really dropped the ball on that one. I don't think they have to accept a high ESCROW for 2 years do they though? Because CBA is up next July. Only 1 year sounds like to me. There is no way they can get out of it for 20-21, because they negotiated it in CBA. But I can't see players accepting a Saperlipopettety deal similar to one they are on now. Just figure it up, a 20% escrow, on top of 40% Revenue Canada, agent fees. They be taking home substantial less the half their salary. Sounds like be higher than 20% though. Looking back on some numbers, it was 15% this season. Then all teams lost 12 games this season, plus 100% loss of playoff gate receipt. Probably be closer to 30%. Maybe the owners give them some of the 650 million expansion fees from Seattle franchise? lol just joking. New CBA next summer and new tv contract up with NBC, definitely be massive changes in financial picture for players.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jun 30, 2020 5:55:28 GMT -5
Petry and Tatar are good players. I like them. And another thing they have going for them is durability. But in this tough economic landscape, there are only so many dollars to go around. The idea of following a draft and develop model is to actually create viable replacements for some veterans. At times I wonder if Bergevin is simply embracing drafting and developing because it helps deflect attention away from the lack of winning. That's the way I feel about him. He's just deflecting attention away from his failures. Its his most notable skill.
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 30, 2020 6:37:38 GMT -5
Gnick, it is the NBC television deal that has one more season. Since both sides decided not to opt out of the current CBA when they had the chance last summer, the current CBA actually has two more years on it.
As you estimate, the players look set to lose at least 30 percent of their salaries next season (20 percent escrow and 10 percent salary deferral). For me that does not necessarily imply Fehr is doing a bad job representing the players' interests. When players' compensation is tethered to the league's revenue, a massive revenue drop is going to drag down the players.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jun 30, 2020 8:41:09 GMT -5
I know I'm bored when I can't take my eyes off the ticker. The reason I mention this is that I am seeing names of NBA & MLB players that are opting out of the replays of their leagues. I assume they are doing this out of concerns for workplace safety. Haven't seen anyone from the NHL yet. At they not allowed or are they all just eager to get back? I did see this story about NHL players with Covid: www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/nhl-positive-covid-19-tests-1.5631645
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 30, 2020 9:03:15 GMT -5
Hockey culture is different from those other sports. But, yeah, for sure, there will likely be a few guys in the NHL that might look at the situation and think okay I already got paid for 2019-20 and I don't even have a contract for next season so the upside is limited and risk is considerable.
It is not just the Covid threat. Ramping back up to play do or die playoff intensity hockey after four months off is a recipe for core muscular injuries.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jun 30, 2020 10:16:09 GMT -5
I know I'm bored when I can't take my eyes off the ticker. The reason I mention this is that I am seeing names of NBA & MLB players that are opting out of the replays of their leagues. I assume they are doing this out of concerns for workplace safety. Haven't seen anyone from the NHL yet. At they not allowed or are they all just eager to get back? I did see this story about NHL players with Covid: www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/nhl-positive-covid-19-tests-1.5631645Nice find, JKR ...
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jun 30, 2020 11:28:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Jun 30, 2020 12:32:34 GMT -5
Of course the players who don't want to play want to be anonymous. Though not so anonymous when they cashed their big, fat cheques. Funny how that works.
Sure players have been paid and they can bleep "covid" to not play.
Just this thing about getting paid lots and lots of millions to play a kids game.
Would i hold it against a player if he opted out? You can bet the house on that. Someone like a Weisse or fringe player would never see a contract.
Let's not forget that this is ENTERTAINMENT industry and if someone doesn't want to participate in it for what is realistically a very small risk, almost non existent actually, then they should expect the consequences.
Let's not pretend that these multi millionaires are on the same level as grocery clerks that we can sympathize with...but not too much if our grocery shelf is empty.
Let's also be real here.....this IS about money and that money pays those big, fat, ridiculous huge contracts.
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Jun 30, 2020 12:41:53 GMT -5
BTW......i'm going to hold my breath until one of these "anonymous" players speaks out and sends back 30% of their salary to the owner. Or is that 50% including the playoffs?
Yes sir....holding my breath....and soon to be expired....
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Jun 30, 2020 12:52:29 GMT -5
BTW......i'm going to hold my breath until one of these "anonymous" players speaks out and sends back 30% of their salary to the owner. Or is that 50% including the playoffs? Yes sir....holding my breath....and soon to be expired.... They've sent back a little under 22% actually. They paid 14% in escrow, and opted not to receive their final paychecks (yet?), even though they were fully entitled to. Guaranteed contracts and all. NHL players receive 13 paychecks per year, so missing one of those comes out to about 7.7% of their total pay. Added to the escrow, and it’s a shade under 22% that they have given back to the owners. NHL players are not paid during the playoffs.
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Jun 30, 2020 13:28:13 GMT -5
BTW......i'm going to hold my breath until one of these "anonymous" players speaks out and sends back 30% of their salary to the owner. Or is that 50% including the playoffs? Yes sir....holding my breath....and soon to be expired.... They've sent back a little under 22% actually. They paid 14% in escrow, and opted not to receive their final paychecks (yet?), even though they were fully entitled to. Guaranteed contracts and all. NHL players receive 13 paychecks per year, so missing one of those comes out to about 7.7% of their total pay. Added to the escrow, and it’s a shade under 22% that they have given back to the owners. NHL players are not paid during the playoffs. Are you SURE they haven't received their final cheques? What difference does it make if they don't get paid for the playoffs? The teams profits, cap and revenue sharing are part of that and a part of their salaries. In fact, the union fought against any playoff based salary. I don't buy ANY narrative about the poor little downtrodden millionaires forced to work against their will and health and looking for justice against those evil billionaires. They are BOTH in it for the money.
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Jun 30, 2020 13:54:02 GMT -5
Are you SURE they haven't received their final cheques? Yep. What difference does it make if they don't get paid for the playoffs? The teams profits, cap and revenue sharing are part of that and a part of their salaries. In fact, the union fought against any playoff based salary. You said "Or is that 50% including the playoffs?" I thought you were implying that they were still getting paid 50% during the playoffs. They are not, but as you know any money made during those playoffs goes towards overall revenue, which is then distributed back to the players in the form of salaries. But with no fans, merchandise sales, or concession stands, I don't think they're going to make much money at all during the playoffs. This is all about protecting their existing and future TV deals. The networks pay the NHL for NHL content - tough to argue that you should be paid if there is no content, right? Which is why a placeholder team "winning" the 1st overall and thus necessitating a 2nd, made-for-TV-NHL event is... well, rather fortuitous, don't you think? I don't buy ANY narrative about the poor little downtrodden millionaires forced to work against their will and health and looking for justice against those evil billionaires. They are BOTH in it for the money. No argument here. This whole thing makes no sense if you take away the money portion. Though I'm sure Gary will assure us that it's all being done "for the fans".
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Jun 30, 2020 14:08:44 GMT -5
[ What difference does it make if they don't get paid for the playoffs? The teams profits, cap and revenue sharing are part of that and a part of their salaries. In fact, the union fought against any playoff based salary. You said "Or is that 50% including the playoffs?" I thought you were implying that they were still getting paid 50% during the playoffs. They are not, but as you know any money made during those playoffs goes towards overall revenue, which is then distributed back to the players in the form of salaries. But with no fans, merchandise sales, or concession stands, I don't think they're going to make much money at all during the playoffs. This is all about protecting their existing and future TV deals. The networks pay the NHL for NHL content - tough to argue that you should be paid if there is no content, right? Which is why a placeholder team "winning" the 1st overall and thus necessitating a 2nd, made-for-TV-NHL event is... well, rather fortuitous, don't you think? I don't buy ANY narrative about the poor little downtrodden millionaires forced to work against their will and health and looking for justice against those evil billionaires. They are BOTH in it for the money. No argument here. This whole thing makes no sense if you take away the money portion. Though I'm sure Gary will assure us that it's all being done "for the fans". What would be the total revenue from all sources in a normal year? I'm guessing that if it was all shut down now, between ALL sources, they would of lost 50% of all their revenues. Include in there TV, merchendise, etc. As for the "poor me" attempt by some players (or owners) the cynic in me takes over....then thrives on it's own on the fields of hypocrisy. Then if the media plays their games, it just adds fertilizer to those fields.
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jul 1, 2020 8:15:29 GMT -5
Bob McKenzie is reporting that Edmonton and Toronto will be the hub cities. I guess the NHL came to its senses and stopped having its irrational attachment to Las Vegas, a place where Covid cases are running rampant and, quite frankly, is miserable at this time of year even without the pandemic.
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jul 1, 2020 8:30:57 GMT -5
Players without 2020-21 contracts will have their benefits extended until the 2019-20 season is completed or cancelled.
July 1 salary bonuses will apparently be paid as scheduled (jeje Molson must be delighted to shell out nearly $17 million USD today when the season may not start until January and it will likely be without fans).
I have not heard any details about the CBA extension that is widely anticipated to be going before players for a vote.
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Jul 1, 2020 10:53:45 GMT -5
This is all about protecting their existing and future TV deals. The networks pay the NHL for NHL content - tough to argue that you should be paid if there is no content, right? That's right BC. The best thing for the league, the players, and the fans would be to simply call it quits on the season and hope start from scratch for 2020-21, and even that is shaping up to be a delayed/modified season as well. But the money issue is no small matter and it goes beyond player and owner "greed". As you said, the NHL promises content in return for the national media and sponsorship revenue. No content means no money, but those payments have already been made so the NHL is looking at either giving back the money (which is unlikely) or cutting into the value of the remaining years of the contract to compensate the media companies. Either way the NHL loses money and the players lose money. The only way to ameliorate the situation is to do what they are trying to do now - hold some kind of abbreviated season/playoff to deliver the content the league promised. But it doesn't stop there. Local teams have the same problem with local media contracts. You need to deliver the games to earn the money. And arenas have been financed (publicly and privately) on the basis of a pledge of arena related revenues like naming rights, luxury suite revenues, concessions, advertising, etc. Again, those contracts are based on delivering the games so the financial hit is not immaterial and teams could be facing debt defaults on their arena deals. And before anyone says "hey, those rich owners can afford to cover the losses" that's not universally the case. Sure, there are lots of deep pocketed teams that can step in to fill a financial gap but not every team can say that. It's a real problem, What I don't get about the NHL and the NBA is that most of the regular season was already played before the shutdown. So most of the promised content has been delivered. Missing playoff money is a big deal, but I bet both leagues could work with their media partners to adjust the contract to smooth out the effect of the lost games over several years to minimize the financial hit. Frankly it's leagues like MLB, MLS, and even the NFL that stand to lose the most. Those leagues could be looking at most if not all of a missed season and the revenue loss there is huge.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jul 1, 2020 12:58:40 GMT -5
I dont understand thé comment about player anonymity when dropping out of this restart. The NBA & MLB players that arent taking part have given their names. There's no secret there.
Punishing a player that is concerned about returning seems vindictive. And you can bet if that player is a star, there will be no consequences.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jul 1, 2020 13:02:09 GMT -5
Bob McKenzie is reporting that Edmonton and Toronto will be the hub cities. I guess the NHL came to its senses and stopped having its irrational attachment to Las Vegas, a place where Covid cases are running rampant and, quite frankly, is miserable at this time of year even without the pandemic. It's not just Vegas, it's a large swath of the U.S. that seems to have lost control. Has the federal government just given up?
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Jul 1, 2020 14:10:03 GMT -5
Bob McKenzie is reporting that Edmonton and Toronto will be the hub cities. I guess the NHL came to its senses and stopped having its irrational attachment to Las Vegas, a place where Covid cases are running rampant and, quite frankly, is miserable at this time of year even without the pandemic. It's not just Vegas, it's a large swath of the U.S. that seems to have lost control. Has the federal government just given up? Just like Canada, shut downs and regulations are up to the governors. Second, US are doing 600,000 tests a DAY. One has to be careful how one reads this "surge" which also corresponds to recently seriously ramped up testing. In FACT, the US has blasted past Canada in tests per million and accelerating. As of today, Canada has 73,398 tests per million and US is at 103,317 and climbing. Since testing has not been consistent from day one, all kinds of political spin can be done on the numbers. I sent an email to worldometers to put in a percentage meter of daily tests versus positives, which would be a REAL indicator of rising or falling rates. Also how many NEW "serious critical". Again, both are the real indicators. NO response. Third, I'm more concerned about "new" hospitalizations and deaths then how many people tested positive. Something that is not easy to find. The problem of course is that we wont get facts from "media" that doesn't suit a narrative. Source.....https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jul 1, 2020 16:58:29 GMT -5
Jkr, was it someone in the media talking about player anonymity? For now, players expressing doubts certainly have the right to do so anonymously. However, if the NHLPA votes affirmatively on a return to play proposal, I cannot see how a player exercising his right to opt out could do so anonymously.
My understanding is that the federal government assists states with funding testing and treatment. However, there are plenty of politicians (Trump most notably) at all levels of government whose words and actions have not conveyed to the public a sense of seriousness about coronavirus.
Cranky, going back to your point about a marginal player not daring to opt out of the return to play, I agree though with a caveat. If you are a fringe guy who believes it is 50/50 whether you can get a one-way NHL min contract (that by the way would not even kick in until December or January), would it be worth it to resume 2019-20 when injury (not just Covid) could strike and then you may not even be in a position to find a gig in Europe, which could start providing you a paycheque as early as September. Weise seems old school and he is likely not the type of guy to put self-interest ahead of the group, but it would not be irrational for a guy in his position to opt out and focus on finding a club in Europe.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jul 1, 2020 17:10:43 GMT -5
Jkr, was it someone in the media talking about player anonymity? For now, players expressing doubts certainly have the right to do so anonymously. However, if the NHLPA votes affirmatively on a return to play proposal, I cannot see how a player exercising his right to opt out could do so anonymously. Pretty sure I saw it further up the thread.
|
|