Chasing A Thought or an Idea...
I have been putting a couple of tapes together for someone special and in writing notes [YES, In write liner notes for my own compilations... you got a problem with that, Squarehead?] I have come face to face with myself.
The song in question is Mother Love Bone's Man of Golden Words; to quote "Words and Music - my only tools."
I have always have the love of both words and music. I have found when I am short of words I can use someone else's put to music, ala making tapes and CDs; and when words fail I can still enjoy the music. I find the joy in an instrumental like Eric Johnson's East Wes or Victory and Van Morisson's Spanish Steps [and Poetic Champions Compose album] and Santana's beautiful Incident at Neshabur as I can in something as nice as Hendix's Little Wing or thge Stones' Wild Horses or Zeppelin's Ten Years Gone or Televsion's Marqueee Moon or Guiding Light... depending on the mood you're in of course. If you feel like driving over every motherfucker blocking your way on the freeway, there's nothing better than Metallica's Master of Puppets album. If you want to drink youself into into a depression, Lou Reed's Berlin. Sitting on the balcony watching the traffic flow in the rain, Hendrix's Electric Ladyland or a Jerry Jeff Walker compilation set to random play... maybe the Eagles new 2 CD best of, disc 1, also set to random. Sad snot slinging drunk, some Replacements or George Strait.
But anyway, the point is, I have always linked words and music. I have never really been able to write music except for one or two things and a rip of of My Best Friend's Girl by the Cars. But I have these words. Am I like Lester Bangs, a frustrated lyricist in search of a band? [Of course Lester was a punk purist, where as I'd be more open in the musical end, despite my limitations on guitar and bass. I'd love to be Rick Danko putting great bass lines and great vocals out there. Of course I am not as NASAL as Rick. Maybe Phillip Lynott of the late great Thin Lizzy.] Anyway, I have always been able to use the words of others when my own have failed me. Those who have received compilations like this know what I mean. I can tell my own tale or tell people what is truly in my heart without having to come up with something to say myself. And I do occasionally run out of my own words.
Why do certain people have this aptitude? Why have I been blessed with the gift that allows me to hear the music so clearly in my head? Maybe that's the point; I hear the songs and string them together to help you all understand what goes on inside Chazzy World.
Go put on some album you have not heard for a long time, like BAD II's The Globe or Faster Pussycat's Wake Me When It's Over or ELO's opus Out of the Blue or Johnny Winter's Second Winter [now available expanded and remastered by Sony/ Columbia's excellent re-issues division Legacy Recordings, who I hope will be getting to the Dylan/Band Basement Tapes VERY SOON!!!] fall into the music and think of me sitting here struggling with the words...
Friday, October 08, 2004
My $ 1.25 Opinion on the NHL Lockout!!!
[or: Who's to Blame? The Rant You've Been Waiting For!]
Jumping into the Wayback Machine, I wasn't really affected by the NHL lockout of 94/95... I didn't have cable to catch many games and we'd only just begun watching playoff hockey the summer before with Jim off from school. There was playoff hockey and that was cool, even though I thought the 94/95 Red Wings would wipe the Devils off the face of the Earth... Fuck the TRAP !!!
But that was then, this is now. Having a team in Dallas, as mediocre even as the Stars were in 94/95 to about 1997, the beginning of the Ken Hitchcock years [Fucking Puck Possession TRAP!!!] provided spark, going to Fort Worth Fire, Dallas Freeze and Fort Worth Brahamas games provided cheap entertainment, kicking Tracey's ASS at Blades of Steel on Sega provided understanding and passion...
Now though, I understand the BUSINESS of hockey and IT SUCKS! It sucks to be a fan of a sport the only National Sports Network [ESPN] considers seventh or eighth [football, baseball, basketball, college fball, college bball, GOLF...] and 95% of America only knows from Slap Shot [yes, a classic, but... think about it, does America think of college as Animal House? Austin, maybe...]
Lok at this: in just the ten years I have been a hockey fan, the NHL has gone from an average salary of .73 mil to 1.81m [147%]. Current estimates indicate that player salary is taking up to 75% of 2 billion dollars revenue generated. National TV revenue [Canada] distributed among the teams to about 4m each. Local TV/radio and gate is not shared. Compare to other sports:
NFL Avg salary: .63m to 1.26m [100% increase; 53 man roster, players get 64% of 5 billion revenue; National TV: 18b/8 yrs, approx 75m/team; 40% gate pooled and split amongst all teams]
NBA: 1.8m to 4.92m [173% increase, 12 man roster, players getting 58% of 3.2 billion revenue; National TV:4.6/6yrs, approx 25.5m/team; gate not shared]
MLB: current avg salary 2.5m [no #s on last ten years], 25 man roster, estimate player salary taking 63% of 4.1 billion revenue; National TV: not given, 34% of gate pooled and distributed, approx 9.3m/ team
**source - The Hockey News 9/21/04
I know, that's a lot of numbers and they promised NO MATH, except that this is IMPORTANT, so stay with me! The NHL has all ready priced the everyday fan out of the arena and with almost NO US TV money coming [NBC will be airing the Stanley Cup playoffs [excuse me, almost typed layoffs there...] but the money is laughable and might as well be in Canadian dollars. I know owners [like baseball, where the Yankees created artificially high market... well, we'll get to that in a second] forked out for players and are now crying poverty, and teams like Detroit, Dallas and Colorado bank on many rounds of playoff games to BREAK EVEN, but we'll get to that in a minute.
Am I saying the NHL needs 'cost certainty/salary cap?' Boy, I am thinking so. SOMETHING must be done to halt the upward spiral. I can't believe a good, free market conservative [liberal in Friedman's terms, see Capitalism and Freedom or Free To Choose] like me just said such a thing... Lybbert would smacketh me down!
Players at this point have the pipe dream that offering a salary reduction [5% across the board; that's a $ 550,000 rebate on Jaromir Jagr; 500k on Nick Lidstrom, Sergei Fedorov, Chris Pronger, Alexei Yashin and my whipping boy for 'cost certainty' Bobby Holik; 450k on Mike Modano, who sucked last year and Bill Guerin...] and a luxury tax to force overpaying teams to share revenue ala baseball, some changes on the entry level structure [that's right, let the next generation take the hit] in order to drag salaries. All, of course, to avoid a cap. I think there are staring points in there, but I think we're looing for major overhaul here. Dallas billionaire and NBA owner Mark Cuban [rumoured at one time to be interested in the Stars] was quoted in THN 9/21 "...hockey economics...make the NBAs -and they aren't great, look like a dream."
NHLPA [union] President Trevor Linden stated in his article for THN that a salary cap would impose "severe and artificial limits on the market value of a player (and) salary caps also handcuff team management. To stay under cap limits clubs are forced to get rid of popular players or take a pass on signing players who can help improve the club."
This makes me think that the NHLPA leadership is sleeping under some sort of rock because this is all ready happening for many small market teams who cannot afford to keep up with the St Louis, Toronto, Detroit, NY Rangers, Colorado, Dallas et al. Look at the players who have exited or been forced out of places due to 'market value' in Pittsburgh, Edmonton, Buffalo, Washington, Chicago, Boston [two mediocre ownerships in those last two, but at least they are saying no to this salary spiral madness] and, until recently, Phoenix. We're still looking at a league in which we've had three teams in bankruptcy this decade [Pittsburgh, Buffalo and Ottawa] and the NY Islanders in a shaky ownership situation until Charles Wang stepped in.
My question becomes this: Would the NHLPA rather have 30 viable teams under some sort of salary rein or have 26 [losing 92 NHL level jobs] with no cap?
I understand [now] that the owners had the upper hand for so many years, like the 1920s to about 1970 and hockey didn't have a player making a million dollars until Wayne Gretzky. Wayne SHOULD have been paid that much, he brought a spotlight on the game and put asses in seats. I understand that the NHL has the most control over its players, basically controlling them from draft at age 18 until free agency at age 31. The players though have salary arbitration rights after age 25 [which I will get to, I promise] AND NHL salary qualifications MUST be made at a raise of 10% over the previous years salary.
These are areas that must be improved. The pendulum has swung to far the other. This game cannot afford to pay players the way other leagues can. Any business where salary takes up 75% of your income is not going to be viable very long. I have seen the arguments that 'hockey owners have other interests that they make money on.' Mike Illitch in Detroit has Little Ceasars, the NY Rangers MSG group has cable TV and the Knicks, the Waltons in St Louis have the Wal Mart fortune, etc etc. Which just goes to prove that you have to have some other source of income because you cannot make money as an NHL owner.
Granted, no on is holding owners feet to the fire to sign players to these contracts like the 45m/5yrs Bobby Holik signed for or paying 42 year old Mark Messier 6m or 39 yr old Ed Belfour 10m [though to be fair, the Leafs really have no farm system except other NHL teams and they will have to go buy another goalie when Eddie the Eagle's back finally gives out] or 11m for Jaromir Jagr who hasn't been within a sniff of a scoring title since being traded out of Pittsburgh; guess it was all about the guys setting him up, eh, Mario and Ron Francis? [I still say he's selfish and locker room poison.]
No, the biggest part of what's driving player salaries these days is ARBITRATION! [See, I told you we'd get there.] In the history of NHL salary arbitration, only ONCE has a player been forced to play at the rate of the previous year, and never has a salary been lowered. I have no problem using this as a tool, but players are getting an unfair boost. Rewarding players for growth is one thing, but raising salaries at the rate they are is ridiculous. Alex Tanguay [Colorado] has a raise from 1.5m to 4.25m [283%] and Milan Hejduk [also Colorado] raised from 3.2m to 5.7m [83%] this summer. Tanguay is showing steady growth from 47 to 67 to 79 pts the last three seasons while Hejduk leaped from 44 to 98 to only 75 points last season. These are two of the up ands coming guys in this league, but why should one get a 283% raise? Hejduk put up a couple less points last year, but gets 5.7m? Shouldn't he be back down around the 4.25 Tanguay is getting [or around 4.0m]? Is Hejduk being rewarded late for the 98 pts he put up two years ago? The NJ Devils [Fuck the TRAP!] forward John Madden had has salary bumped from 2m to 4m [100%] despite posting HALF the points [23/41/35] of Hejduk and Tanguay!
Two other high profile arbitration cases this summer were NJ Devils [Fuck the TRAP!] defenseman Scott Neidermeyer and Ottawa Senators giant defenseman Zdeno Chara. Neidermeyer was rewarded with a jump 4m to 7m [75%] raise for a good year, jumping from 33 to 39 to 54 points last year, though his +/- hovers near +15, which means he was on the ice for 15 more goals for his team than were scored against them. Chara was rewarded for steady growth in the offensive categories [23 to 39 to 41 pts] but his +/- has been around +30... which suggests he is twice as good a defenseman as Neidermeyer. Chara was given a raise from 2.4m to 4.6m [92%].
Wondering what's wrong with this picture yet? Arbitration is creating SEVERE AND ARTIFICIALLY HIGH MARKET VALUES ON PLAYERS, NHLPA/ TREVOR LINDEN!!!
Also the fact that players must be qualified with a raise of 10% no matter what... how manyb teams would consider qualifying and securing the services of a player they know if they could offer them 85% of what he made the year before. This would be GRAND for players in their twilight years, in a city they like making 2.5m who could sign on for one more year at the same or slightly lower money to allow the team to let them bow out gracefully. Or players knowing they had a crummy year or didn't play the year before or only played and handful of games[CHRIS PRONGER] to allow the team to recoup a little bit. And allowing the team to take underachievers to arbitration [ALEXEI KOVALEV, JAROMIR JAGR, BOBBY HOLIK, MIKE MODANO] and have someone say 'You stank last year, play this year for a reduced rate and prove yourself again.'
What's the answer them Answer Man? Well, a few years ago in his book, Bob Costas laid forth a plan for baseball that might work here. It includes revenue sharing and a salary cap, but also includes a floor cap, a minimum spending cap to keep owners from pocketing their shared revenue and putting crap teams out there... you know what I am talking about Milwaukee Brewers fans! So say there is a top cap [or even a luxury tax] of 40m; what would also be in place is a floor which would force ownership to pay out 25m in player salary. Philadelphia Flyers center [and never shy] Jeremy Roenick has proposed an individaul salary cap of 6-7m [but no limit on the number of capped players a team can carry, so the Rangers can continue to have their quota of 8 7 Million Dollar Men] and a cap on bottom level players.[THN 9/14/04] JR stated "We need to be creative here. We bring the minumim salary up for guiys at the other end, plus put caps on what rookies can make, depending on where they're drafted. The one thing we need is for each team to gaurantee it will spend a certain amount of money to make it fair across the board."
Two people surprisingly silent right now are two guys who should be able to clearly see both side of the issues: Phonix Coyotes owner Wayne Gertzky and Pittsburgh Penguins owner/cener Mario Lemieux. [Mario is busy trying to get a new arena or secure licensing for a slot machine palace in dahn-tahn to fund a new arena.]
On thing I had not considered was the possibility that an impass is declaired and ownership invites players to training camp. On ESPNs NHL page 10/6:
From lockout to strike? E.J. Hradek, ESPN The Magazine: If the NHL refuses move off its salary cap proposals, the two sides will remain hopelessly deadlocked. At some point in the process, the league will seek to have the dispute legally declared a labor impasse. Once that is accomplished, the NHL can unilaterally impose a salary cap system and invite the players back to their respective teams. The players likely will refuse that invitation, effectively turning the lockout into a strike. At that point, the league will have to determine whether or not it would like to go forward with replacement players. In this scenario, the work stoppage could last anywhere from 12 to 24 months. If, however, the league opts to negotiate a compromise luxury tax system, the two sides could solve their differences in a matter of days. That seems like a better route to take.
Ross McKeon, San Francisco Chronicle: I estimate a labor relations board will step in at some point, declare an impasse which will touch off the players' calling a strike. The season will be completely lost, then a compromise will be struck in time for next season with a new CBA featuring both a hard cap for top-salaries ($7 million), a minimum teams MUST spend ($30 million) and a luxury-tax mechanism for teams that don't eclipse top salaries for individuals, but who exceed a pre-set cap for team spending (i.e. $45 million).
Personally, I think if this lockout becomes a strike, the players lose in most people's eyes. They become greedy millionaires who refuse to compromise, no matter what the NHLPA puts out saying 'We've offered..."
My prediction is that serious negotiating will begin after Thanksgiving [US] to try and salvage a half a season ala 1994/95 with conference only games. The players will give on arbitration and owners will lower free agent ages and agree to a luxury tax. But in coming years, more players will see huge offers dwindling or see fewer free agents picked up as owners try to keep salaries in check. They'll scream collusion, but it will be their own doing. Also teams are realizing, as in baseball, that you can't buy championships anymore, you have to have homegrown talent ready to step up. The NY Rangers have FINALLY seen this and sold a bunch of players last year, as did the Washington Capitals. Detroit, NJ and Colorado have enough emerging talent to make retooling short term projects, but teams that started a few years ago [Pittsburgh, Calgary, Tampa Bay, Nasville, Atlanta] are al ready begining to show improvement and a changing of the 90s staus quo is now begining. If we ever see these guys in the NHL again.
Would NHL fans go see replacement players? I think there are enough minor leagues to stock teams again if they go that route, but I think there are enough minor, juinior, college, etc to allow true HOCKEY fans to get their fixes. No, it won't be the grandness of the best in the world, but it will be some good stuff. And I think owners would be hurt by bringing in replacements and saying "These are the Colardo Avalance" or whatever. It owuld make them look seedy and greedy when I really think they hold the high ground today.
OTHERS PREDICTIONS [ESPN/NHL 10/6]
The lap of luxury (taxes) Larry Brooks, New York Post: If the league holds to its percentage-of-the gross link, the season will be cancelled. If by the middle of November the league commits to negotiating a luxury-tax based system, a deal probably can be reached by Christmas.
Al Morganti, ESPN: This lock out is going to last through the Canadian Thanksgiving, American Thanksgiving, Christmas Day, Boxing Day, and into the first weeks of the new year. The maddening part is that the end result is something we can predict right now: there will be a luxury tax on payrolls over about $42 million, the arbitration process will be dramatically different, the age for free agency will drop to about 27 years old, and the Rangers will still stink. Figure that pressure from the owners on Bettman will start getting greater around November, the number of anonymous quotes in the media dramatically increase around the first of December, and a settlement sometime around Christmas will lead people to think the luxury tax was the NHL's idea in the first place. The season will resume with a conference-only schedule of 45 games, a fast-paced playoffs, and the Tampa Bay Lighting retaining the Stanley Cup.
[or: Who's to Blame? The Rant You've Been Waiting For!]
Jumping into the Wayback Machine, I wasn't really affected by the NHL lockout of 94/95... I didn't have cable to catch many games and we'd only just begun watching playoff hockey the summer before with Jim off from school. There was playoff hockey and that was cool, even though I thought the 94/95 Red Wings would wipe the Devils off the face of the Earth... Fuck the TRAP !!!
But that was then, this is now. Having a team in Dallas, as mediocre even as the Stars were in 94/95 to about 1997, the beginning of the Ken Hitchcock years [Fucking Puck Possession TRAP!!!] provided spark, going to Fort Worth Fire, Dallas Freeze and Fort Worth Brahamas games provided cheap entertainment, kicking Tracey's ASS at Blades of Steel on Sega provided understanding and passion...
Now though, I understand the BUSINESS of hockey and IT SUCKS! It sucks to be a fan of a sport the only National Sports Network [ESPN] considers seventh or eighth [football, baseball, basketball, college fball, college bball, GOLF...] and 95% of America only knows from Slap Shot [yes, a classic, but... think about it, does America think of college as Animal House? Austin, maybe...]
Lok at this: in just the ten years I have been a hockey fan, the NHL has gone from an average salary of .73 mil to 1.81m [147%]. Current estimates indicate that player salary is taking up to 75% of 2 billion dollars revenue generated. National TV revenue [Canada] distributed among the teams to about 4m each. Local TV/radio and gate is not shared. Compare to other sports:
NFL Avg salary: .63m to 1.26m [100% increase; 53 man roster, players get 64% of 5 billion revenue; National TV: 18b/8 yrs, approx 75m/team; 40% gate pooled and split amongst all teams]
NBA: 1.8m to 4.92m [173% increase, 12 man roster, players getting 58% of 3.2 billion revenue; National TV:4.6/6yrs, approx 25.5m/team; gate not shared]
MLB: current avg salary 2.5m [no #s on last ten years], 25 man roster, estimate player salary taking 63% of 4.1 billion revenue; National TV: not given, 34% of gate pooled and distributed, approx 9.3m/ team
**source - The Hockey News 9/21/04
I know, that's a lot of numbers and they promised NO MATH, except that this is IMPORTANT, so stay with me! The NHL has all ready priced the everyday fan out of the arena and with almost NO US TV money coming [NBC will be airing the Stanley Cup playoffs [excuse me, almost typed layoffs there...] but the money is laughable and might as well be in Canadian dollars. I know owners [like baseball, where the Yankees created artificially high market... well, we'll get to that in a second] forked out for players and are now crying poverty, and teams like Detroit, Dallas and Colorado bank on many rounds of playoff games to BREAK EVEN, but we'll get to that in a minute.
Am I saying the NHL needs 'cost certainty/salary cap?' Boy, I am thinking so. SOMETHING must be done to halt the upward spiral. I can't believe a good, free market conservative [liberal in Friedman's terms, see Capitalism and Freedom or Free To Choose] like me just said such a thing... Lybbert would smacketh me down!
Players at this point have the pipe dream that offering a salary reduction [5% across the board; that's a $ 550,000 rebate on Jaromir Jagr; 500k on Nick Lidstrom, Sergei Fedorov, Chris Pronger, Alexei Yashin and my whipping boy for 'cost certainty' Bobby Holik; 450k on Mike Modano, who sucked last year and Bill Guerin...] and a luxury tax to force overpaying teams to share revenue ala baseball, some changes on the entry level structure [that's right, let the next generation take the hit] in order to drag salaries. All, of course, to avoid a cap. I think there are staring points in there, but I think we're looing for major overhaul here. Dallas billionaire and NBA owner Mark Cuban [rumoured at one time to be interested in the Stars] was quoted in THN 9/21 "...hockey economics...make the NBAs -and they aren't great, look like a dream."
NHLPA [union] President Trevor Linden stated in his article for THN that a salary cap would impose "severe and artificial limits on the market value of a player (and) salary caps also handcuff team management. To stay under cap limits clubs are forced to get rid of popular players or take a pass on signing players who can help improve the club."
This makes me think that the NHLPA leadership is sleeping under some sort of rock because this is all ready happening for many small market teams who cannot afford to keep up with the St Louis, Toronto, Detroit, NY Rangers, Colorado, Dallas et al. Look at the players who have exited or been forced out of places due to 'market value' in Pittsburgh, Edmonton, Buffalo, Washington, Chicago, Boston [two mediocre ownerships in those last two, but at least they are saying no to this salary spiral madness] and, until recently, Phoenix. We're still looking at a league in which we've had three teams in bankruptcy this decade [Pittsburgh, Buffalo and Ottawa] and the NY Islanders in a shaky ownership situation until Charles Wang stepped in.
My question becomes this: Would the NHLPA rather have 30 viable teams under some sort of salary rein or have 26 [losing 92 NHL level jobs] with no cap?
I understand [now] that the owners had the upper hand for so many years, like the 1920s to about 1970 and hockey didn't have a player making a million dollars until Wayne Gretzky. Wayne SHOULD have been paid that much, he brought a spotlight on the game and put asses in seats. I understand that the NHL has the most control over its players, basically controlling them from draft at age 18 until free agency at age 31. The players though have salary arbitration rights after age 25 [which I will get to, I promise] AND NHL salary qualifications MUST be made at a raise of 10% over the previous years salary.
These are areas that must be improved. The pendulum has swung to far the other. This game cannot afford to pay players the way other leagues can. Any business where salary takes up 75% of your income is not going to be viable very long. I have seen the arguments that 'hockey owners have other interests that they make money on.' Mike Illitch in Detroit has Little Ceasars, the NY Rangers MSG group has cable TV and the Knicks, the Waltons in St Louis have the Wal Mart fortune, etc etc. Which just goes to prove that you have to have some other source of income because you cannot make money as an NHL owner.
Granted, no on is holding owners feet to the fire to sign players to these contracts like the 45m/5yrs Bobby Holik signed for or paying 42 year old Mark Messier 6m or 39 yr old Ed Belfour 10m [though to be fair, the Leafs really have no farm system except other NHL teams and they will have to go buy another goalie when Eddie the Eagle's back finally gives out] or 11m for Jaromir Jagr who hasn't been within a sniff of a scoring title since being traded out of Pittsburgh; guess it was all about the guys setting him up, eh, Mario and Ron Francis? [I still say he's selfish and locker room poison.]
No, the biggest part of what's driving player salaries these days is ARBITRATION! [See, I told you we'd get there.] In the history of NHL salary arbitration, only ONCE has a player been forced to play at the rate of the previous year, and never has a salary been lowered. I have no problem using this as a tool, but players are getting an unfair boost. Rewarding players for growth is one thing, but raising salaries at the rate they are is ridiculous. Alex Tanguay [Colorado] has a raise from 1.5m to 4.25m [283%] and Milan Hejduk [also Colorado] raised from 3.2m to 5.7m [83%] this summer. Tanguay is showing steady growth from 47 to 67 to 79 pts the last three seasons while Hejduk leaped from 44 to 98 to only 75 points last season. These are two of the up ands coming guys in this league, but why should one get a 283% raise? Hejduk put up a couple less points last year, but gets 5.7m? Shouldn't he be back down around the 4.25 Tanguay is getting [or around 4.0m]? Is Hejduk being rewarded late for the 98 pts he put up two years ago? The NJ Devils [Fuck the TRAP!] forward John Madden had has salary bumped from 2m to 4m [100%] despite posting HALF the points [23/41/35] of Hejduk and Tanguay!
Two other high profile arbitration cases this summer were NJ Devils [Fuck the TRAP!] defenseman Scott Neidermeyer and Ottawa Senators giant defenseman Zdeno Chara. Neidermeyer was rewarded with a jump 4m to 7m [75%] raise for a good year, jumping from 33 to 39 to 54 points last year, though his +/- hovers near +15, which means he was on the ice for 15 more goals for his team than were scored against them. Chara was rewarded for steady growth in the offensive categories [23 to 39 to 41 pts] but his +/- has been around +30... which suggests he is twice as good a defenseman as Neidermeyer. Chara was given a raise from 2.4m to 4.6m [92%].
Wondering what's wrong with this picture yet? Arbitration is creating SEVERE AND ARTIFICIALLY HIGH MARKET VALUES ON PLAYERS, NHLPA/ TREVOR LINDEN!!!
Also the fact that players must be qualified with a raise of 10% no matter what... how manyb teams would consider qualifying and securing the services of a player they know if they could offer them 85% of what he made the year before. This would be GRAND for players in their twilight years, in a city they like making 2.5m who could sign on for one more year at the same or slightly lower money to allow the team to let them bow out gracefully. Or players knowing they had a crummy year or didn't play the year before or only played and handful of games[CHRIS PRONGER] to allow the team to recoup a little bit. And allowing the team to take underachievers to arbitration [ALEXEI KOVALEV, JAROMIR JAGR, BOBBY HOLIK, MIKE MODANO] and have someone say 'You stank last year, play this year for a reduced rate and prove yourself again.'
What's the answer them Answer Man? Well, a few years ago in his book, Bob Costas laid forth a plan for baseball that might work here. It includes revenue sharing and a salary cap, but also includes a floor cap, a minimum spending cap to keep owners from pocketing their shared revenue and putting crap teams out there... you know what I am talking about Milwaukee Brewers fans! So say there is a top cap [or even a luxury tax] of 40m; what would also be in place is a floor which would force ownership to pay out 25m in player salary. Philadelphia Flyers center [and never shy] Jeremy Roenick has proposed an individaul salary cap of 6-7m [but no limit on the number of capped players a team can carry, so the Rangers can continue to have their quota of 8 7 Million Dollar Men] and a cap on bottom level players.[THN 9/14/04] JR stated "We need to be creative here. We bring the minumim salary up for guiys at the other end, plus put caps on what rookies can make, depending on where they're drafted. The one thing we need is for each team to gaurantee it will spend a certain amount of money to make it fair across the board."
Two people surprisingly silent right now are two guys who should be able to clearly see both side of the issues: Phonix Coyotes owner Wayne Gertzky and Pittsburgh Penguins owner/cener Mario Lemieux. [Mario is busy trying to get a new arena or secure licensing for a slot machine palace in dahn-tahn to fund a new arena.]
On thing I had not considered was the possibility that an impass is declaired and ownership invites players to training camp. On ESPNs NHL page 10/6:
From lockout to strike? E.J. Hradek, ESPN The Magazine: If the NHL refuses move off its salary cap proposals, the two sides will remain hopelessly deadlocked. At some point in the process, the league will seek to have the dispute legally declared a labor impasse. Once that is accomplished, the NHL can unilaterally impose a salary cap system and invite the players back to their respective teams. The players likely will refuse that invitation, effectively turning the lockout into a strike. At that point, the league will have to determine whether or not it would like to go forward with replacement players. In this scenario, the work stoppage could last anywhere from 12 to 24 months. If, however, the league opts to negotiate a compromise luxury tax system, the two sides could solve their differences in a matter of days. That seems like a better route to take.
Ross McKeon, San Francisco Chronicle: I estimate a labor relations board will step in at some point, declare an impasse which will touch off the players' calling a strike. The season will be completely lost, then a compromise will be struck in time for next season with a new CBA featuring both a hard cap for top-salaries ($7 million), a minimum teams MUST spend ($30 million) and a luxury-tax mechanism for teams that don't eclipse top salaries for individuals, but who exceed a pre-set cap for team spending (i.e. $45 million).
Personally, I think if this lockout becomes a strike, the players lose in most people's eyes. They become greedy millionaires who refuse to compromise, no matter what the NHLPA puts out saying 'We've offered..."
My prediction is that serious negotiating will begin after Thanksgiving [US] to try and salvage a half a season ala 1994/95 with conference only games. The players will give on arbitration and owners will lower free agent ages and agree to a luxury tax. But in coming years, more players will see huge offers dwindling or see fewer free agents picked up as owners try to keep salaries in check. They'll scream collusion, but it will be their own doing. Also teams are realizing, as in baseball, that you can't buy championships anymore, you have to have homegrown talent ready to step up. The NY Rangers have FINALLY seen this and sold a bunch of players last year, as did the Washington Capitals. Detroit, NJ and Colorado have enough emerging talent to make retooling short term projects, but teams that started a few years ago [Pittsburgh, Calgary, Tampa Bay, Nasville, Atlanta] are al ready begining to show improvement and a changing of the 90s staus quo is now begining. If we ever see these guys in the NHL again.
Would NHL fans go see replacement players? I think there are enough minor leagues to stock teams again if they go that route, but I think there are enough minor, juinior, college, etc to allow true HOCKEY fans to get their fixes. No, it won't be the grandness of the best in the world, but it will be some good stuff. And I think owners would be hurt by bringing in replacements and saying "These are the Colardo Avalance" or whatever. It owuld make them look seedy and greedy when I really think they hold the high ground today.
OTHERS PREDICTIONS [ESPN/NHL 10/6]
The lap of luxury (taxes) Larry Brooks, New York Post: If the league holds to its percentage-of-the gross link, the season will be cancelled. If by the middle of November the league commits to negotiating a luxury-tax based system, a deal probably can be reached by Christmas.
Al Morganti, ESPN: This lock out is going to last through the Canadian Thanksgiving, American Thanksgiving, Christmas Day, Boxing Day, and into the first weeks of the new year. The maddening part is that the end result is something we can predict right now: there will be a luxury tax on payrolls over about $42 million, the arbitration process will be dramatically different, the age for free agency will drop to about 27 years old, and the Rangers will still stink. Figure that pressure from the owners on Bettman will start getting greater around November, the number of anonymous quotes in the media dramatically increase around the first of December, and a settlement sometime around Christmas will lead people to think the luxury tax was the NHL's idea in the first place. The season will resume with a conference-only schedule of 45 games, a fast-paced playoffs, and the Tampa Bay Lighting retaining the Stanley Cup.
