Lockout Update: Day 67: There is still a lockout.

*

The NHL and the NHLPA will meet this morning at 10am ET. The NHLPA is reportedly going to present another proposal for the league to shoot down and storm out in frustration consider. I'll bet anyone $100 that the league will accept the offer and announce this afternoon that a deal has been reached. Or whatever the opposite of that is.

*

Reports out of Columbus state that there is a strong likelihood that Ryan Murray will be out for the season. He tore something in his shoulder. They're taking a closer look at it in Columbus, but that's how it's looking. So Ryan Murphy one year, Ryan Murray the next year - highly-skilled defensemen drafted in back-to-back years sustaining a major injury that could linger or repeat further down the road.

*

As I updated yesterday, Claude Giroux has returned to North America for some concussion testing. EA Sports cover curse? No way - says EA sports!

Thanks to Puck Daddy for the video link

Giroux is visiting Sidney Crosby's concussion doctor. On one hand, that's probably best for the player's health. On the other hand, erring on the side of caution would mean missing a lot of time and a lot of games. Uh, imaginary games, I guess…

*

John Buccigross gives us a passionate article, basically telling the players to get back to work and that everyone in life is screwed by their boss. That's very true. In fact, if you step back and ignore the owners being ridiculously unfair and greedy - they are the boss. If you don't like it, then change companies or change careers. We all face such a decision. If you decide to stay, these are the rules…

I can't believe it took me this long to realize this, but you often hear someone argue that the players gave so much last CBA yet the owners want them to give even more this time around. But what I realize now is that the owners wanted X and seven years ago they were talked into Y by the players in order to get the deal done. They knew that the deal they settled for with the players still wasn't good enough, but were willing to try it so as not to miss a second consecutive season and since they got their salary cap it was worth a shot. Well, they tried it their way and it didn't work. They knew in 2004 that the business was broken badly. Was agreeing to give the players 57% going to fix it? Nope. But a second season couldn't be cancelled and with the cap in place it was good enough. Today, the owners want the rest. Will 50-50 fix it? No. Revenue sharing is a must. So I'm hoping the players really push them hard on that issue.

Ask yourself this. When the owners made their…say, third offer in 2004 - say it was sometime in early October. If the players accepted that offer, what would have happened?

Well, the offer was probably somewhere closer to 50-50 with a salary cap. The players would have played that season and had an average of $1.5 million more in their bank account. And there wouldn't be a lockout today, because that would have fixed the business model (or at least come close enough). Players would be richer, the league would be pushing $5 billion per year - forget the $3.1 billion stuff it would be over $5 billion by now were it not for either stoppage.

Just musing aloud. Rambling, if you will. Gooo unions! Hey look! Past those trees! It's a forest!

*

Jacob Markstrom is a hurting prospect. What a rough start - an .881 SV% in seven AHL games so far. His veteran backup Dov Grumet-Morris has played eight games now and has a .927 SV%. Golden Boy status will see Markstrom continue to get the starts, but he needs to do something with them.

*

Drew Shore leads San Antonio (Florida's farm team) in scoring with 11 points in 14 contests.

*

The Marlies have loaned Leo Komarov to Dynamo Moscow of the KHL. This will help them strop scratching good prospects. So far, Carter Ashton, Matt Frattin (though admittedly this was to rest him), Joe Colborne and Nazem Kadri have been among the healthy scratches.

*

Brendan Ross looks at the 2013 Draftees over at The Hockey Writers.

*

Oh wow, look what the Preds did for some kids. Fantastic. The expression on their faces early on, and what they said towards the end…

 


Write comment
Comments (14)add comment

msamsel said:

msamsel
Cover curse No cover curse? Wasn't there a "presented by BlackBerry" for the NHL13 cover vote? Oh we know how well they're doing.
November 21, 2012
Votes: +0

Sovereign said:

Sovereign
... @ Isle B

Of course they are to blame. They have a culture of entitlement where they think they entitled to more than half the profit of he business. Not to mention they couldve chosen to be proactive and start negotiations before the last CBA expired. They are EVERY BIT as responsible for this game of chicken as the owners. And should be holding themselves responsible.

The only argument I have heard from the NHLPA side that I have agreed with is honoring existing contracts. I have no with teams cutting expenses and salries whatsoever. They should be cutting them enough to pay for their own arenas so that we dont have to. Another thing that gets missed.
Not only will it be the fans who end up paying for the lockout in ticket prices. But that there is not model built in for building/renovating the arenas. That gets passed on to the tax payer. Most of whom AREN'T fans.

But now Im digressing a little....

Players should smarten up because they are the ones losing.
Only people who lose more are the fans.

At this point I would rather see the owners cancel next season too. Break the union, and get an economic model that is sustainable longterm past the 5 year mark.
November 21, 2012
Votes: +0

Isle B. said:

Isle B.
... @Sovereign

A more accurate ballet analogy is that the Kirov Ballet is paying their dancers more than the Joffrey ballet would like to pay their dancers and they go about trying to solve this problem by having both ballet companies shutter their doors until the dancers agree to roll back their salaries that the Kirovs had previously been more than happy to pay. It makes no sense for any party involved except for the stingier ballet company.

There is collateral damage in all labor disputes that result in work stoppages. However, this is a LOCKOUT, just like in 2004 and 1994. The players are not on strike. The PA is not to blame here.
November 21, 2012
Votes: +0

Nehithaw said:

Nehithaw
... That clip was AWESOME!!!! The look on the kid's faces was amazing. It is nice to see something refreshing like this when there is so much ugliness happening on the other side of the hockey coin. Thank you very much for this.
November 21, 2012
Votes: +0

Sovereign said:

Sovereign
NHLPA where the argument falls off is that without organized professional owners and executive organizations these players would still be playing for scraps and have day jobs. People nowadays dont know or forget that our hockey heroes of old had day jobs and moonlighted as hockey players.
The NHL is a business and the purpose is to make money. Predominantly for the owners, who, facilitate the league. After that comes the employees. But where the NHLPA falls short is that they believe they are he only employees. They forget the hundreds of office staff workers, and thousands of maintenance men, concession workers, ushers, security guards etc.
Employee labour is a cost of doing business. But if the business isnt making money than the business model has to change.
That change is in the labour agreement because it is by far the highest expense. Dont forget a player making a league minimum 500k that takes a 10% haircut on his salary is the equivalent of two full time employees entire years salary at concessions or comparable.
Bring that up to a superstars salary and you could be talking 40-50 people. At 10%!
Switch up the example and use ballet dancers. Since they can be prima-donnas too!
They too train their whole lives. Pay for expensive schools like juliard(sp?) unlike most young professional players in the OHL etc who get paid to go! Only 20$ or so but still someting. Then after years of professional training at those schools, coming out with massive debts or expenses. Then like the rest of us get jobs and if they are lucky join a production. But not all productions are big and they dont all catch on. The show has to make gate in irder to stay in production or keep theatres open. Even big ballets with big euro stars fail in places. And they have to take the show on the road to make money. But as they are doing so they can only share the profits and expenses that the production can allow. And thus these dancers only make a pitance until they make it big and a show is good. But eventually the production tires and wages cant keep up with costs. So pay cuts, firings, and and cheaper talent is found. At the end of the day the SHOW MUST GO ON! And the only way to do that is to fix the business model of the production. Namely labour cost and expenses. Legal minimum wage doesnt change. Electricity prices are fixed. Mortgages and land leases are agreed. Etc etc.
But the typical union mentality is find cuts somewhere else!
Sometime there is nowhere else. Sometimes the problem is the employees.
It is not the end of a business or an era. Just a lifestyle and perks.
I remember how many players and people pitched a fit over the travel and lifestyle downgrade it was playing in europe after last lockout. And how they all came out and spoke of the safety issues and concerns after the plane crash killed that entire team.
Well for them to be in a position of privalege to be able to speak on those matters comes at a price.

Paid for by Owners and FANS, and everyother employee BEFORE the players let lose on a penny. Because they have a negotiated CBA. Well this is the time when they all come back to Earth and realise they have to concede to. Or Move On!
November 21, 2012
Votes: -1

Isle B. said:

Isle B.
... I really don't see any pro-owner argument in this dispute. What kind of multi-billion- dollar business conducts labor negotiations by locking out its unionized employees for 4-12 months every 7-10 years? The NHL is the worst-run league in professional sports and one of the worst-run public trusts in the world. If it was a utility company it would rank somewhere between LIPA and Enron. If it was a country, it would rank somewhere between Belarus and pre-Arab Spring Libya. I think there is more hope for a top-shelf Western European hockey forming in and around Alpine and Scandinavian countries (not the KHL) and then expanding into North America than there is for the NHL to ever get its act together as long as Gary and his puppet master owners are running things.
November 21, 2012
Votes: +1

Dakkster said:

Dakkster
... "Or whatever the opposite of that is." smilies/cheesy.gif
November 21, 2012
Votes: +1

2sticks1puck said:

2sticks1puck
future players If the NHLPA takes a stand and disrupts the cycle of the NHL locking out every 6 years, then this is definitely for future players.
November 21, 2012
Votes: +0

Pengwin7 said:

Pengwin7
Preds Organization Nashville has a pretty solid hockey organization. I have to hand it to them. They seem to have done a great job filtering hockey down into their grass-roots programs. Much better than the Thrashers, here in Atlanta, ever got through. It's a credit to their organization. For as much as some of us complain about hockey expansion into the southern US, it's a great example of an organization that figured out how to make it work.

Thanks for that clip. Typical Preds game too... 2-0. And that puck in the crease that's cleared away at the 2:21 mark. Mercy. I must've watched that play and the following celebration about 10 times. Good stuff, thanks for the clip.
November 21, 2012
Votes: +1

2sticks1puck said:

2sticks1puck
Bosses Maybe in ancient times and prior to the 1910s - but labor wars and employees rights have really changed things. Bosses do not dictate everything. Heck even Apple can't force kids in china to work 24 hours a day anymore.
November 21, 2012
Votes: +0

bowlercoaster said:

bowlercoaster
... I agree that losing 10% of a playing career hurts, but I'm not sure I'd call it a waste. I think that the NHL made this a matter of principle with that initial low ball offer. If they'd come out w/ something reasonable the players the situation might have been more of a "work together" instead of the labour war we have now.

I really feel for guys like Iginla, Joe Thornton, Lecavalier, anyone who is likely to lose 2 full years of prime earning capacity. (at this point I am basically assuming the whole season is going to be cancelled, but we'll see, maybe they'll hammer out a deal today).

But I don't think the union will have any bargaining power if they just capitulate every time and take whatever's offered to avoid losing part of their playing career. At some point the union will have to say "enough's enough."

Last time I thought Goodenow and the rest of the PA executive were idiots for not realizing the league needed a cap, this time I think the owners are idiots for asking for the moon "Because I want a moon."
November 21, 2012
Votes: +0

Dobber said:

Dobber
bowlercoaster I'm not anti-player. I'm pro-player. I speak what I think a player should do, in the best interest of the player. The best interest of the player is to make money. I understand that to do things another way is unfair, and hurts the pride, and just flat-out wrong. But players should bend over and take it. Because that's what is best for their wallet.

They're not doing this for 'future players'. Because by the time those future players come in, there will be yet another CBA. So they are doing this for themselves. And in a 10-year career, they are wasting 10% of it if they miss a year.
November 21, 2012
Votes: +1

bowlercoaster said:

bowlercoaster
... I felt like someone should take the other side to your constant, anti-players rhetoric. The argument I keep hearing over and over is "the owners are the bosses, so grease the chute up and get over this barrel players, that's life."

Why is that life for the NHLPA? This isn't some job putting a door on an F-150 or making subway sandwiches. These are professional athletes. If there was anyone good enough to play at this level, they would be doing it. They are a unique, extraordinarily rare commodity. What do the owners do? They own a building and a team. I'll admit, it is very difficult to own a building. Often you have to own a multi-billion dollar business like Comcast or Bell before you can start buying buildings. Ditto a sports franchise. But the skill they bring to the table is where the owners really shine. Not just anyone can do the things Charles Wang has done. It takes a genius to hire a back up goalie to run your team.

Players? Pfffffft. They just skate around. They should be playing for sandwiches.

Here's the real answer. Owners should be making money on their teams. Players should be making as much money as possible for being the product. The really rich teams need to re-distribute/share earnings to help out the smaller teams. Some teams need to get out of terrible markets where they have never made a dime and never will. Ie: Phoenix to Quebec City for a Jets 2.0 $$$ boom. Players have agreed to 50/50 revenue sharing, why the NHL is ready to go to the mattresses over contract rights is beyond me. The players have to play for someone at the end of the day. I don't know why the NHL is so scared of a player switching teams. It must have been awful for the boring, nameless Wild to get Parise and Suter in one day and completely energize their fan base. I remember that day being so terrible I didn't even want to get out of bed! And it must have been brutal for the guys who write for fantasy hockey websites to have to analyze it.

There it is. Lower the split on HRR, give players their contracting rights - either NHL provide some "non-cap counting" make whole provision or cancel the deals that were handed out this summer, and give the players their contract rights because it doesn't cost you anything. Increase revenue sharing. Fix your broken teams. Don't expect the players to pay for phoenix. Shut up and play hockey because I had a great draft this year.

And just as a small disclaimer, I'm not saying dobber shouldn't say these things, or I want him to shut up or anything like that. I just felt like no one was taking the other side.




November 21, 2012
Votes: +2

DuklaNation said:

DuklaNation
... Have to agree with your sentiment on the lockout. No way would I let a full yr's salary go. Even if they get better terms, you cant recoup those losses.
November 21, 2012
Votes: +0
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy