Buds Board Keepers League

that offer is a an exploding one... NHL just did a smart PR move with that.

Mike wroteCOLONSalaries for NHLers playing in the AHL would be part of the cap.

Hmm how would BBKL deal with this (priorities)?

We'd follow suit!

Hopefully the NHLPA learns from this: next time open with offer to take 70% of HRR and no RFA. Media will be so proud when you agree on 65%!!

thom54 wroteCOLONHopefully the NHLPA learns from this: next time open with offer to take 70% of HRR and no RFA. Media will be so proud when you agree on 65%!!

All other major capped sports are at 50%..

Also, this is suddenly a VERY precarious situation -- if the PA turns this down, or their counter isn't very close -- I'd be shocked if the owner ever budged from 51+% and firm up on their contract caps, making the lockout UGLY.

LOL Thom, 18 teams in tough economic situations, not one player or union member even close to in trouble - it's easy to act like an US vs THEM mentality, but that's how a union can spell their own death.

btw I can not see it being all ahl players counting towards the cap likely only ones with 1 way contracts.
This essentially eliminates teams exiling bad contract players to the ahl to circumvent the cap.
There likely would be a 1 time amnesty buyout if this comes into effect IMO.

Nick wroteCOLON

Mike wroteCOLONSalaries for NHLers playing in the AHL would be part of the cap.

Hmm how would BBKL deal with this (priorities)?

We'd follow suit!

I expect it will be similar to now with low salary teams viewing these guys (redden etc) as assets.

What do they mean by "NHLers playing in the AHL"? I guess one-way contracts?

Mike wroteCOLON

Nick wroteCOLON

Mike wroteCOLONSalaries for NHLers playing in the AHL would be part of the cap.

Hmm how would BBKL deal with this (priorities)?

We'd follow suit!

I expect it will be similar to now with low salary teams viewing these guys (redden etc) as assets.

What do they mean by "NHLers playing in the AHL"? I guess one-way contracts?

they mean one-way deals ie. Jeff Finger, Wade Redden, etc.

bills09 wroteCOLONthey mean one-way deals ie. Jeff Finger, Wade Redden, etc.

Just the one for the Leafs then (Orr). Or has he retired?

Mike wroteCOLON

bills09 wroteCOLONthey mean one-way deals ie. Jeff Finger, Wade Redden, etc.

Just the one for the Leafs then (Orr). Or has he retired?

he hasnt retired he would still count.
he technically was not waived yet though

i haven't really sided either way throughout this process, but recently the PA and the players in general have really gotten under my skin (the propaganda videos, threatening to not come back, the woe-is-me interviews), but if they're response to this is an outright no, i may just become a bettman fan.

either way this is a brilliant PR move from the league.

Amazing PR move from the NHL here.

I think the players will counter a 5 year max on 2nd contracts perhaps. Let a UFA vets get a retirement contract at age 28-30 or whatever.

It's a good PR offer from the league and the encouraging part is that it's not a take it or leave it deal. It's negotiable, but the base is only on the table for 10 days because it's contingent on an 82 game schedule which would need to start by November 2nd.

Cautious optimism, but we've seen this shit before. NHLPA should fire back a reasonable counter offer and then lock yourself in a room until a deal is reached.

Getter done.

Just incase anyone is wondering, a 10-day tabled offer is not considered tight timeline in these situations, Less than 24 hours is. Often the opposition side will even request a shorter period of time to deadline in order to actually get a decision made. As long as terms are consistent, many of the scenarios should already have been laid out, just adding up each component to view offer as a single entity as acceptable or not.

Nick wroteCOLONJust incase anyone is wondering, a 10-day tabled offer is not considered tight timeline in these situations, Less than 24 hours is. Often the opposition side will even request a shorter period of time to deadline in order to actually get a decision made. As long as terms are consistent, many of the scenarios should already have been laid out, just adding up each component to view offer as a single entity as acceptable or not.

It's a 10 day timeline because it's contingent on an 82-game schedule. It'd be too compacted if they extended it longer than Nov. 2nd opening day.

Also, apparently John Shannon was mistaken and it's still a 3-yr ELC.

I could see players countering a 6-7 year max. But don't know how much the NHL will budge.

is there gonna be a window for us to sort out or cap situations once we actually know what the cap is.

Already posting in the CC, Anton. I've suggested dates of the 25th for the waiver draft, 31st for roster submission / end of free drop.

Shep wroteCOLON

Nick wroteCOLONJust incase anyone is wondering, a 10-day tabled offer is not considered tight timeline in these situations, Less than 24 hours is. Often the opposition side will even request a shorter period of time to deadline in order to actually get a decision made. As long as terms are consistent, many of the scenarios should already have been laid out, just adding up each component to view offer as a single entity as acceptable or not.

It's a 10 day timeline because it's contingent on an 82-game schedule. It'd be too compacted if they extended it longer than Nov. 2nd opening day.

Also, apparently John Shannon was mistaken and it's still a 3-yr ELC.

I could see players countering a 6-7 year max. But don't know how much the NHL will budge.

I like (your?) idea of capping the second contract.

If the PA outright rejects the NHL's proposal or does not counter impromptu they are going to have a PR nightmare on their hands.

The only real sticking point I see is contract length, if the PA can get that extended or removed outright, and I have little doubt that they can, this should be a done deal. My guess on the start of the season is November 9th, I think the two sides are going to need a little more than 10 days to come to an agreement, and clean up the smaller issues.