OT: 2012-13 Lockout Discussion Part X: Is There Any Hope? Edition

[RangerBoy]

The one I'm really having trouble pinning down is the amnesty buyout. It's very difficult to get a read on what's going to happen here because word is the commissioner is absolutely against anything that doesn't count against the salary cap. But you look at the possibility of a $60-million ceiling next season, see where some teams are and say, "This isn't possible without one."

One final note on Redden. It looks like the Rangers have all but guaranteed he is getting the buyout (if there is one) and the sense is there is going to be a lot of interest in him. Don't know what the final salary will be. But if he's willing to be reasonable -- and you have to believe he will be -- he's going to have options. Lots of execs think he will be good value at a lower number.

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/opinion/2012/12/only-nhl-game-being-played-is-waiting-game.html

 

[RangerBoy]

Don Fehr interview

http://www.sportsnet.ca/590/2012/12/19/fehr_blair/

Bill Daly was on the FAN590 later and he painted a different picture. The audio is posted around 3pm.

 

[Krams]

Still believe we'll see hockey this year. No progress will be made until the NHL sets a drop-dead date.

 

[chosen]

What's even worse is the people who feel they are the authority on what people should do after the lockout and say nobody should care about the NHL and hockey but continue to post on these boards on this subject.
Go post on a Knicks message board.

People who post emoticons are the same people who write lol so we know to laugh.

I don't care if you wish to show loyalty to those that abuse you. Beaten dogs act similarly at times.

It's time to grow up and face the facts that owners and players don't care about fans, nor should they.I will watch on TV whenever they return but the days of blind loyalty while being spit upon are over for me. I like the game of hockey but I am done shelling out exorbitant sums to see a game in February against Winnipeg and paying over a hundred bucks for the privilege.

 

[RangerBoy]

Bill Daly

http://www.sportsnet.ca/590/2012/12/19/daly_hockeycentral/

 

[Blueblood2]

People who post emoticons are the same people who write lol so we know to laugh.

I don't care if you wish to show loyalty to those that abuse you. Beaten dogs act similarly at times.

It's time to grow up and face the facts that owners and players don't care about fans, nor should they.I will watch on TV whenever they return but the days of blind loyalty while being spit upon are over for me. I like the game of hockey but I am done shelling out exorbitant sums to see a game in February against Winnipeg and paying over a hundred bucks for the privilege.

Of course the owners and players don't care about you as much as themselves but how are they abusing you and spitting on you? They are inconveniencing you while they try and get as much money for themselves as possible....like almost every person tries to do in their own profession. And you don't need to pay for a Winnepeg/Rangers game in February because someone else will. The Rangers will not see a decrease in attendance but some of the lesser clubs will.

 

[RangerBoy]

Time

http://business.time.com/2012/12/19...-problem-whats-really-behind-the-nhl-lockout/

Gary Bettman canceled his subscription.

 

[GAGLine]

Good points.

My issue is that people seem to be under some sort of illusion that we're going to be able to get rid of Gaborik without taking any salary back AND acquiring a top draft pick. Its just not going to happen. I dont think something like that has ever happened in the cap era.

If you want that coveted top tier 1st rounder, you can expect to take some garbage back, which wouldnt help the cap situation all that much.

I don't think we'll need to clear the entire 7.5 mil cap hit, but a lot depends on what happens with the CBA.

 

[Levitate]

Time

http://business.time.com/2012/12/19...-problem-whats-really-behind-the-nhl-lockout/

Gary Bettman canceled his subscription.

Those revenue sharing numbers are shameful, and ultimately a big reason why I can't stop coming back to the owners as being the true problem behind all of this. The NHL just isn't run very well.

The fact that the NHLPA has to push for more revenue sharing, something that doesn't necessarily directly benefit them, is a joke

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Time

http://business.time.com/2012/12/19...-problem-whats-really-behind-the-nhl-lockout/

Gary Bettman canceled his subscription.

This is a good article and hits in a lot of fundamental points -- chief among them being that the NHL can no longer afford to plunge its way into the south and just assume that the game will grow organically and those teams will be financially sound. Its just not going to happen.

This was a stupid decision from Bettman to begin with - instead of facing the music and making some tough choices, he seems to favor labor disputes.

The eventual remedy, when hes stripped all he can from the players, is going to be contraction and/or revenue sharing bordering on socialism.

 

[nevesis]

“@stevezipay: A "drop-dead" date for cancelling the NHL season? "Sometime in mid-January", deputy commish Bill Daly says in a Toronto radio interview”

“@stevezipay: Daly: “We have general sense of when we have to be playing hockey by. It’s fair to say it’s sometime in mid-January.”

 

[SupersonicMonkey*]

Gaborik will bring back value. And if the Rangers seek a first round pick in June, he will fetch one.

"these trade don't happen in a capped league" It's happened quite a few times actually.

Teams found a way before, they'll continue to.

 

[SupersonicMonkey*]

“@stevezipay: A "drop-dead" date for cancelling the NHL season? "Sometime in mid-January", deputy commish Bill Daly says in a Toronto radio interviewâ€

“@stevezipay: Daly: “We have general sense of when we have to be playing hockey by. It’s fair to say it’s sometime in mid-January.â€

If they want to be playing by mid-January, they need to man up and get a deal done by no later then late December-early January.

That means they have to get off their ass and do something...don't see the urgency.

 

[SupersonicMonkey*]

I don't think we'll need to clear the entire 7.5 mil cap hit, but a lot depends on what happens with the CBA.

Yea, we don't know what the CBA will entail. BUt if the trading money and cap space thing happens, it'll make these trades more prevalent.

They want excitement, attention, and movement during the trade deadline, July 1 (which may change), and the draft.

 

[RangerBoy]

Bill Daly ' yes we will have a season'

https://twitter.com/SiriusXMNHL/status/281508010147323905

Drop the puck.

 

[RangerBoy]

Daly wouldn't lie. Because, as Bettman said in New York, it's wrong to spin "us all into an emotional frenzy that maybe we're close."

https://twitter.com/cotsonika/status/281512028403814400

I remember watching the Bill and Gary show two weeks ago tomorrow. Gary made that comment.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

https://twitter.com/SiriusXMNHL/status/281508010147323905

Drop the puck.

Would like to hear the full context.

Cant help but feel like it started with "If the PA does this then....."

 

[The Gloaming]

People need to stop valuing draft picks like they're some rare blue diamonds around here. A 10-15 pick?
Sure, you can get lucky and do what the Habs did and Find McD at 12, or be like the Sens and find Karlsson at 15, but you can also get Paajarvi, and just get tired of him like the Oilers are.

Gaborik scored 41 goals. There will be teams offering more than a 50-50 pick.

 

[ColonialsHockey10]

https://twitter.com/SiriusXMNHL/status/281508010147323905

Drop the puck.

.....am I missing something here?

 

[ltrangerfan]

https://twitter.com/cotsonika/status/281512028403814400

I remember watching the Bill and Gary show two weeks ago tomorrow. Gary made that comment.[/QUOT

Yes if Daly did lie he'd start to sound like FEHR? LOL

"We're close to a deal".

 

[ltrangerfan]

This is a good article and hits in a lot of fundamental points -- chief among them being that the NHL can no longer afford to plunge its way into the south and just assume that the game will grow organically and those teams will be financially sound. Its just not going to happen.

This was a stupid decision from Bettman to begin with - instead of facing the music and making some tough choices, he seems to favor labor disputes.

The eventual remedy, when hes stripped all he can from the players, is going to be contraction and/or revenue sharing bordering on socialism.[/QUOTE



The fundamental problem of the article is that it was written with an agenda. The writer has some valid points mixed in with points that I failed to grasp. Perhaps he understands more than I do?

The southern strategy has failed? Tell us something new. We've been talking about this for quite awhile. Move franchises? Some might work but in the end most have to close (imo). If it helps to end the lockout, let's blame Bettman? Does a contracting strategy help the players? If the PA wishes job cuts this might help everyone but unless I read that the sides in discussion want this as a solution then we're wasting our time talking about it.

"Now the owners want a bigger piece of the pie, claiming financial hardship".

Is the writer saying 57% is the right number? According to many the PA already agreed to 50%. Why? To show that the understand the owners are making a fortune but need more but the PA wishes to promote peace and harmony?

Is the writer saying that even if owners are losing money It's only on paper? or There are tax benefits from the losses. Is he saying that it's good to lose money since it reduces one's taxable income?

What about rising franchise values? Franchise values rise if one believes there is:

A)future growth in the sport (higher TV contracts for instance)
B)More time is needed to grow the franchise.
c)A more favorable distribution of revenues.

If one believes that all prospects of growth, revenue sharing are over then tell me what franchise values will be in 10 years from now? If you can't fix the economics of a franchise than the value will diminish unless you need a tax deduction. LOL

Revenue sharing? IF one believes that the league profits are $280 million (pick your own no.) that will be the league profit after revenue sharing. Yes, you can redistribute profits but you can't increase profits. We can eliminate unprofitable teams and each team would make 9 million dollars. Imagine paying 1 billion dollars for the Leafs and expect a 9 million dollar return? In this scenario Dolan would become one of the biggest hawks.

Lastly, the writer talks about the need for the NHL to get it's act together since they face a "surly" rival in the likes of the KHL. NO other sport faces that kind of competition. I totally agree with the writer on this issue. It sounds like the NHL doesn't have an anti trust problem?

To answer the writer: NO the "greedy owners" aren't the only problem"

 

[JimmyG89]

People need to stop valuing draft picks like they're some rare blue diamonds around here. A 10-15 pick?
Sure, you can get lucky and do what the Habs did and Find McD at 12, or be like the Sens and find Karlsson at 15, but you can also get Paajarvi, and just get tired of him like the Oilers are.

Gaborik scored 41 goals. There will be teams offering more than a 50-50 pick.

Gabby could net similar to Nash. Two good players, a prospect, and a first. 41 goals is 41 goals. 40 in 2 of the last three years. Bonafide snipers still in his prime. A top 15 pick is not enough. And Gaborik can stay and we'll be fine with the cap. Only issue would be having him walk for nothing. Would not mind a similar package to Nash, even if it was 1 player, 1 prospect, 1 pick as lessvalue in rental.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

People need to stop valuing draft picks like they're some rare blue diamonds around here. A 10-15 pick?
Sure, you can get lucky and do what the Habs did and Find McD at 12, or be like the Sens and find Karlsson at 15, but you can also get Paajarvi, and just get tired of him like the Oilers are.

Gaborik scored 41 goals. There will be teams offering more than a 50-50 pick.

Im not doing that. At all.

What I am doing is bringing into question the willingness for teams to give away a cheap and notable asset like that for a 32 year old Gaborik, his questionable shoulder, and - most importantly - his $7.5M cap hit.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Gabby could net similar to Nash. Two good players, a prospect, and a first. 41 goals is 41 goals. 40 in 2 of the last three years. Bonafide snipers still in his prime. A top 15 pick is not enough. And Gaborik can stay and we'll be fine with the cap. Only issue would be having him walk for nothing. Would not mind a similar package to Nash, even if it was 1 player, 1 prospect, 1 pick as lessvalue in rental.

The whole point of trading Gaborik would be to clear cap space in the new NHL environment that will likely come with a lower cap in 13-14. The Nash trade was basically a wash when it came to cap space changing hands.

Can we step assessing value in vacuums?

 

[The Gloaming]

Gabby could net similar to Nash. Two good players, a prospect, and a first. 41 goals is 41 goals. 40 in 2 of the last three years. Bonafide snipers still in his prime. A top 15 pick is not enough. And Gaborik can stay and we'll be fine with the cap. Only issue would be having him walk for nothing. Would not mind a similar package to Nash, even if it was 1 player, 1 prospect, 1 pick as lessvalue in rental.

Thank you. Nash had a statistically worse season than Gabby, and we gave up 2 roster players, our best D prospect, and a first rounder. Nash was obviously on the worse team, but that doesn't account for the disparity between our package and what some are predicting here.

I'm not expecting Nathan MacKinnon in return, but a 10-15 pick? Come on.