2021 Season discussion (start date, # of games, etc)

[FLPensFan]

Kudos to the NHL and owners/players with proceeding as if there's going to be a season, but I'll stick by my prediction that they won't play in 2021.

As always, comes down to money - as it should quite frankly - and they can't make any without fans. Don't want to get overly political either, but the people have spoken and prefer to lock down the country (or keep it locked down in some states). There's many many consequences to the fear that's being pushed on us, and one of those is the fact that (some) sports is going bye bye again. Sure football will be fine because they don't need the fans, but the NHL is cooked.

Side question for the masses....Has anyone considering the fact that we may have seen Geno play his last game as a Penguin? It's a possibility whether you want to admit it or not. I'd say the odds are low, but not out of the realm of possibility.

I can't dismiss your view. Quite honestly, if I thought the league could skip the 2021 season and survive, I think it would be a no brainer. But, I don't think the league nor the teams have the reserve funds to survive without a 2021 season. If this was a planned lockout, they likely would have been stashing money away. But this wasn't planned, and no 2021 season....I'd suspect Arizona, Florida, Carolina as well as maybe a good half a dozen other teams won't be able to survive. Several owners have already said opening arenas with no fans would incur more losses than not playing at all.

I'm still in the belief that Geno will head back to Russia after his current contract expires. He has always said he wants to finish his career in Russia. There are a lot of others that think he will sign another 2-3 year deal. He could do that, but, I would think if he still wants to play in Russia, he would do so with a little left in the tank. He's won Art Ross, he's won Conn Smythe, he has 3 Cups....what more is there to win for him? It would be nice for him to win a 4th, but, with the virus and cap situation, odds are GMJR isn't going to be able to put together a strong contender for another Cup. Doesn't mean they can't win, but, the way the roster looks to start this season should be an indicator.

[FLPensFan]

I've been seeing rumblings of a vaccine coming out in December. Could be a game changer and could allow the league to open up in January.

Me personally....I'm not trying to jump to the front of the line to get the first, rushed vaccine that they create. I believe they already had one in October that they had to stop because the initial trials weren't working well or had bad side effects.

I have also read something that the first vaccine available has to be kept cold....like -80 degrees CELCIUS, until it is ready to be used. That creates a huge shipping and logistics issue. I've read that Ebola vaccine is the same way, and they have special containers to keep those vaccines cold, but, Ebola vaccines are usually shipped to some very targeted locations in Africa.....not all over an entire county, and not millions of vaccines that would be needed.

I still think we don't see a vaccine until at least January.

[LimerickPensFan]

I've been seeing rumblings of a vaccine coming out in December. Could be a game changer and could allow the league to open up in January.

Me personally....I'm not trying to jump to the front of the line to get the first, rushed vaccine that they create. I believe they already had one in October that they had to stop because the initial trials weren't working well or had bad side effects.

I have also read something that the first vaccine available has to be kept cold....like -80 degrees CELCIUS, until it is ready to be used. That creates a huge shipping and logistics issue. I've read that Ebola vaccine is the same way, and they have special containers to keep those vaccines cold, but, Ebola vaccines are usually shipped to some very targeted locations in Africa.....not all over an entire county, and not millions of vaccines that would be needed.

I still think we don't see a vaccine until at least January.

I've also seen that the US Military (don't remember branch or if it was national guard or what) has plans in place to distribute the vaccine, which should mitigate concerns about distribution.

Testing results on at least Pfizer's vaccine have been very positive, with the vaccine having a higher efficacy than expected (around 90%).

[dark_forces]

Let's get into a roster player prediction discussion.
What one player will surprise and exceed expectations and what one will provide the biggest fall off or disappointment from what was anticipated?

I'm going Jankowski to exceed expectations, and McCann for falling below.

[LimerickPensFan]

Let's get into a roster player prediction discussion.
What one player will surprise and exceed expectations and what one will provide the biggest fall off or disappointment from what was anticipated?

I'm going Jankowski to exceed expectations, and McCann for falling below.

Why would we get into that type of discussion in a thread about the season regarding start date and number of games? Isn't every other thread full of that type of discussion sufficient?

[FLPensFan]

Let's get into a roster player prediction discussion.
What one player will surprise and exceed expectations and what one will provide the biggest fall off or disappointment from what was anticipated?

I'm going Jankowski to exceed expectations, and McCann for falling below.

I'm going to go for Kapanen as exceeding expectations. I think Kapanen is going to be a good fit in this system, and will do well if he can remain on Crosby's line most of the season (and Sullivan recently, publicly stated his plan was to start Kapanen with Sid & Jake).

I too, am going to go with McCann as the disappointment. Based on the roster build, I don't see it being favorable to him taking that next step. If Poulin forces his way onto the team, that could force McCann to 3C. Even if Poulin doesn't make the roster, I still see McCann as 1st option to replace an injured Sid/Geno. I think he ends up bouncing around or having another revolving door of linemates that prevents him from really getting in sync and having that 20 goal, 50 point type season.

[Cow_Master66]

I don’t know a single person that plans on taking the vaccine.

I agree some teams probably are in danger of not surviving, but that’s just been par for the course for most of 2020. Imagine how many will businesses are gonzo with the next lockdown? I can’t imagine why the country voted for that type of viewpoint, but again not trying to make this political. The fact is you aren’t gonna have fans at indoor events for a long time, so unless the NHL finds another way to generate revenue, they are in some trouble.

[FLPensFan]

So, just some updates I saw from Frank Seravalli via Spector's

--NHL is still strongly pushing for a Jan 1 start date, but, this still isn't finalized. NHL Board of Governors thinks that Feb 1 may end up being more realistic.
--It appears NHL has given up on full 82 game schedule. Sounds like 48 or 62 game schedule are most likely options.
--No report date for players has been set yet.
--Sounds like own arenas or hybrid bubbles are both being considered, but the heavy preference is for own arenas. The cost of operating the hybrid bubbles, plus the loss of individual gate revenue, plus in-arena ad revenue and other items is a large factor. Teams are hoping that they can at least have a limited amount of fans at the start.
--Divisional realignment for the season is pretty much a certainty. All Canadian division is the only one always mentioned, due to the border constraints.
--The plan being talked about right now is divisional play, with teams traveling to other cities for a series, similar to how baseball does their game (no specifics on series length...would think 3 games).
--No word on if it would ONLY be divisional play, or if there would be some cross divisional play. (I would guess just divisional, to limit travel, and especially since Canada likely wouldn't be able to do non-divisional play. I would think a 3 game series at home against Team A, and then late in the season, a 3 game series at TeamA's location. There will be some kinks to work out, as I think divisions are likely going to be 7-8 teams in size, but, this would make the most sense.)
--The other stuff mentioned was all about the players pay, that they are going to have prorated salaries, but there was some discussion about something else that would determine WHEN they got paid.
--For this upcoming season, there are 16 players on the Return to Play committee (includes Ian Cole, Claude Giroux, Zach Hyman, and Ron Hainsey). There were only 5 over the summer.


There are some challenges with this, as Larry Brooks reports:
--NHL is trying to make Jan 1st work, with team reporting 14 days earlier for training camps. That presents a problem of how to deal with Christmas holiday.
--Brooks says Fehr is holding strong that the players won't accept pro-rated salaries for a season under 82 games.
--Brooks says there are sources that say 3-5 owners have spoken up and said under the current circumstances being discussed, their teams will not survive. Those teams feel they would be better off not playing at all this season.
--Brooks says on the pro-rated salary issue, the NHL is pitching a deferred payment instead of pro-ration of salaries.

There was a separate report that, the Sharks may not have a place to play. The city of San Jose has major development plans going on around the SJ arena, and that development would make it next to impossible for fans to get to the arena. SJ will likely have to find another place to play, and they aren't happy about it.

[Cow_Master66]

So, just some updates I saw from Frank Seravalli via Spector's

--NHL is still strongly pushing for a Jan 1 start date, but, this still isn't finalized. NHL Board of Governors thinks that Feb 1 may end up being more realistic.
--It appears NHL has given up on full 82 game schedule. Sounds like 48 or 62 game schedule are most likely options.
--No report date for players has been set yet.
--Sounds like own arenas or hybrid bubbles are both being considered, but the heavy preference is for own arenas. The cost of operating the hybrid bubbles, plus the loss of individual gate revenue, plus in-arena ad revenue and other items is a large factor. Teams are hoping that they can at least have a limited amount of fans at the start.
--Divisional realignment for the season is pretty much a certainty. All Canadian division is the only one always mentioned, due to the border constraints.
--The plan being talked about right now is divisional play, with teams traveling to other cities for a series, similar to how baseball does their game (no specifics on series length...would think 3 games).
--No word on if it would ONLY be divisional play, or if there would be some cross divisional play. (I would guess just divisional, to limit travel, and especially since Canada likely wouldn't be able to do non-divisional play. I would think a 3 game series at home against Team A, and then late in the season, a 3 game series at TeamA's location. There will be some kinks to work out, as I think divisions are likely going to be 7-8 teams in size, but, this would make the most sense.)
--The other stuff mentioned was all about the players pay, that they are going to have prorated salaries, but there was some discussion about something else that would determine WHEN they got paid.
--For this upcoming season, there are 16 players on the Return to Play committee (includes Ian Cole, Claude Giroux, Zach Hyman, and Ron Hainsey). There were only 5 over the summer.


There are some challenges with this, as Larry Brooks reports:
--NHL is trying to make Jan 1st work, with team reporting 14 days earlier for training camps. That presents a problem of how to deal with Christmas holiday.
--Brooks says Fehr is holding strong that the players won't accept pro-rated salaries for a season under 82 games.
--Brooks says there are sources that say 3-5 owners have spoken up and said under the current circumstances being discussed, their teams will not survive. Those teams feel they would be better off not playing at all this season.
--Brooks says on the pro-rated salary issue, the NHL is pitching a deferred payment instead of pro-ration of salaries.

There was a separate report that, the Sharks may not have a place to play. The city of San Jose has major development plans going on around the SJ arena, and that development would make it next to impossible for fans to get to the arena. SJ will likely have to find another place to play, and they aren't happy about it.

Again I don't see the season happening, but I would enjoy the "series" approach. It's hard for me to get aroused watching games without fans, but at least with a series type approach there could be some hostility build up much like home and home used to provide....Not much to get excited about with any of this.

[FLPensFan]

So, it is Kingerski, but, Kingerski did a piece today on Sam Poulin, and basically said that he believes Poulin is ready to play in the NHL, and doesn't have much left to improve at the Juniors level.

Kingerski said his skating is much improved. He's able to get to his offensive and defensive spots quicker and often ahead of the opposition.
He's currently listed as 6'2" for Sherbrooke, and 213 lbs.
Kingerski mentioned that he goes to the net, and will battle in the boards, but that he doesn't throw his weight around much (which he will need to use more at the NHL level).
Kingerski also mentioned that he needs to work on getting his shot off quicker, as he has time in Juniors, but in camp, he was a bit slow in terms of getting rid of the puck quick enough at the NHL level.

All in all, Kingerski said there's no reason Poulin shouldn't be in the NHL. Kingerski listed McCann-Jankowski-Poulin as a potential 3rd line. Says that while Poulin is LH and listed as a LW, if you watch his pay, he often gravitates to the right side of the ice more. This is something I saw with Daniel Sprong...even though he was always listed as a RW, when I watched some film on him before his camp, Sprong often tended to gravitate to the LW side of the ice and get better chances/shots from that side. To make LW/RW a little more moot, Sherbrooke currently lists Poulin as a RW on their team.

[longtimefan]

So, it is Kingerski, but, Kingerski did a piece today on Sam Poulin, and basically said that he believes Poulin is ready to play in the NHL, and doesn't have much left to improve at the Juniors level.

Kingerski said his skating is much improved. He's able to get to his offensive and defensive spots quicker and often ahead of the opposition.
He's currently listed as 6'2" for Sherbrooke, and 213 lbs.
Kingerski mentioned that he goes to the net, and will battle in the boards, but that he doesn't throw his weight around much (which he will need to use more at the NHL level).
Kingerski also mentioned that he needs to work on getting his shot off quicker, as he has time in Juniors, but in camp, he was a bit slow in terms of getting rid of the puck quick enough at the NHL level.

All in all, Kingerski said there's no reason Poulin shouldn't be in the NHL. Kingerski listed McCann-Jankowski-Poulin as a potential 3rd line. Says that while Poulin is LH and listed as a LW, if you watch his pay, he often gravitates to the right side of the ice more. This is something I saw with Daniel Sprong...even though he was always listed as a RW, when I watched some film on him before his camp, Sprong often tended to gravitate to the LW side of the ice and get better chances/shots from that side. To make LW/RW a little more moot, Sherbrooke currently lists Poulin as a RW on their team.

That's one of the problems during the age of the blogger. There was a lot of jumping to conclusions about him being a LW. Many went so far as saying he can play both sides but is more comfortable on the left. I tried to look into it a while back, and no one seemed to have a definitive answer. Videos I watched didn't seem to give a definitive answer, as I saw him on both sides of the ice a lot. Most sites listed him as a LW, which is what I believe the Pens labeled him at the draft. Which doesn't mean a thing. But NHL.com and hockeyreference.com both listed him as a RW. If the league's official site lists him as a RW, I take a bit more notice.

We had a debate a few years back about handedness and position. The European influence changed the thinking as it was, and is, very common for them to play their off wing. It does give a better shooting angle. The biggest concern is skill level, as you don't have the boards to help protect the puck on your off wing. I don't remember which game, but I saw Tanev give the puck away and it led to a goal in the Mtl series, and remember thinking a right shot wouldn't have made the same turnover. There's advantages and disadvantages. I do think it would be smart to put Poulin on one side or the other without moving him back and forth, at least as a rookie.

It would help if he can. I don't want to get caught up in trying to figure out exactly where he'd play, but O'Connor would seem to have the most promise among the other forward prospects that might be close to the NHL. He seems to be more pigeon holed as a LW, although we can only believe what a number of unreliable sources report. Miletic also seems to project as a LW. Legare looks to need another year in junior, and he's a RW. I don't expect him to push for a spot, but if he did, the thinking may change.

As I mentioned a while back, if Poulin can play RW, it might allow O'Connor to grab a spot on the left side. I'd be surprised if he grabbed a spot out of camp, but I could see him as a call up during the season who could make an impact. The combination of Poulin and O'Connor would give the forwards much needed size on the wings.

It will b an interesting camp. Unless he has a terrible camp, I expect Poulin to at least get a 9 game audition. Where he slots is anybody's guess. That's what camp's for. I know they seem hell bent on putting McCann on the wing, but I also believe he has the highest upside of anyone on the roster in terms of potential offensive production from the 3C position. Time will tell.

[FLPensFan]

So, it is Kingerski, but, Kingerski did a piece today on Sam Poulin, and basically said that he believes Poulin is ready to play in the NHL, and doesn't have much left to improve at the Juniors level.

Kingerski said his skating is much improved. He's able to get to his offensive and defensive spots quicker and often ahead of the opposition.
He's currently listed as 6'2" for Sherbrooke, and 213 lbs.
Kingerski mentioned that he goes to the net, and will battle in the boards, but that he doesn't throw his weight around much (which he will need to use more at the NHL level).
Kingerski also mentioned that he needs to work on getting his shot off quicker, as he has time in Juniors, but in camp, he was a bit slow in terms of getting rid of the puck quick enough at the NHL level.

All in all, Kingerski said there's no reason Poulin shouldn't be in the NHL. Kingerski listed McCann-Jankowski-Poulin as a potential 3rd line. Says that while Poulin is LH and listed as a LW, if you watch his pay, he often gravitates to the right side of the ice more. This is something I saw with Daniel Sprong...even though he was always listed as a RW, when I watched some film on him before his camp, Sprong often tended to gravitate to the LW side of the ice and get better chances/shots from that side. To make LW/RW a little more moot, Sherbrooke currently lists Poulin as a RW on their team.

That's one of the problems during the age of the blogger. There was a lot of jumping to conclusions about him being a LW. Many went so far as saying he can play both sides but is more comfortable on the left. I tried to look into it a while back, and no one seemed to have a definitive answer. Videos I watched didn't seem to give a definitive answer, as I saw him on both sides of the ice a lot. Most sites listed him as a LW, which is what I believe the Pens labeled him at the draft. Which doesn't mean a thing. But NHL.com and hockeyreference.com both listed him as a RW. If the league's official site lists him as a RW, I take a bit more notice.

We had a debate a few years back about handedness and position. The European influence changed the thinking as it was, and is, very common for them to play their off wing. It does give a better shooting angle. The biggest concern is skill level, as you don't have the boards to help protect the puck on your off wing. I don't remember which game, but I saw Tanev give the puck away and it led to a goal in the Mtl series, and remember thinking a right shot wouldn't have made the same turnover. There's advantages and disadvantages. I do think it would be smart to put Poulin on one side or the other without moving him back and forth, at least as a rookie.

It would help if he can. I don't want to get caught up in trying to figure out exactly where he'd play, but O'Connor would seem to have the most promise among the other forward prospects that might be close to the NHL. He seems to be more pigeon holed as a LW, although we can only believe what a number of unreliable sources report. Miletic also seems to project as a LW. Legare looks to need another year in junior, and he's a RW. I don't expect him to push for a spot, but if he did, the thinking may change.

As I mentioned a while back, if Poulin can play RW, it might allow O'Connor to grab a spot on the left side. I'd be surprised if he grabbed a spot out of camp, but I could see him as a call up during the season who could make an impact. The combination of Poulin and O'Connor would give the forwards much needed size on the wings.

It will b an interesting camp. Unless he has a terrible camp, I expect Poulin to at least get a 9 game audition. Where he slots is anybody's guess. That's what camp's for. I know they seem hell bent on putting McCann on the wing, but I also believe he has the highest upside of anyone on the roster in terms of potential offensive production from the 3C position. Time will tell.

Totally agree. It's hard to get a gauge on handedness and optimal spot. As you state, there are advantages and disadvantages. Add in that, some guys claim it doesn't matter, but look completely lost and ineffective on their off-wing (Hornqvist at LW, Kessel at LW, and Beau Bennett as LW are 3 that come to mind).

Zucker is a bit older, but with Guentzel and McCann also on the LW for now, I would probably be looking at Poulin as a RW. Gives the Penguins another possible top 6 option should they not be able to or want to pay Bryan Rust a hefty raise on his next contract.

I think this roster looks a lot better if Poulin is on the 3rd line somewhere, and Janikowski and Rodrigues are fighting each other for one of the other spots. If O'Connor can force his way onto the roster at some point, even better. I'm not sure if O'Connor has been loaned out to any teams yet. That's something I would hope they would take a look at doing for the next month or two.

[longtimefan]

So, it is Kingerski, but, Kingerski did a piece today on Sam Poulin, and basically said that he believes Poulin is ready to play in the NHL, and doesn't have much left to improve at the Juniors level.

Kingerski said his skating is much improved. He's able to get to his offensive and defensive spots quicker and often ahead of the opposition.
He's currently listed as 6'2" for Sherbrooke, and 213 lbs.
Kingerski mentioned that he goes to the net, and will battle in the boards, but that he doesn't throw his weight around much (which he will need to use more at the NHL level).
Kingerski also mentioned that he needs to work on getting his shot off quicker, as he has time in Juniors, but in camp, he was a bit slow in terms of getting rid of the puck quick enough at the NHL level.

All in all, Kingerski said there's no reason Poulin shouldn't be in the NHL. Kingerski listed McCann-Jankowski-Poulin as a potential 3rd line. Says that while Poulin is LH and listed as a LW, if you watch his pay, he often gravitates to the right side of the ice more. This is something I saw with Daniel Sprong...even though he was always listed as a RW, when I watched some film on him before his camp, Sprong often tended to gravitate to the LW side of the ice and get better chances/shots from that side. To make LW/RW a little more moot, Sherbrooke currently lists Poulin as a RW on their team.

That's one of the problems during the age of the blogger. There was a lot of jumping to conclusions about him being a LW. Many went so far as saying he can play both sides but is more comfortable on the left. I tried to look into it a while back, and no one seemed to have a definitive answer. Videos I watched didn't seem to give a definitive answer, as I saw him on both sides of the ice a lot. Most sites listed him as a LW, which is what I believe the Pens labeled him at the draft. Which doesn't mean a thing. But NHL.com and hockeyreference.com both listed him as a RW. If the league's official site lists him as a RW, I take a bit more notice.

We had a debate a few years back about handedness and position. The European influence changed the thinking as it was, and is, very common for them to play their off wing. It does give a better shooting angle. The biggest concern is skill level, as you don't have the boards to help protect the puck on your off wing. I don't remember which game, but I saw Tanev give the puck away and it led to a goal in the Mtl series, and remember thinking a right shot wouldn't have made the same turnover. There's advantages and disadvantages. I do think it would be smart to put Poulin on one side or the other without moving him back and forth, at least as a rookie.

It would help if he can. I don't want to get caught up in trying to figure out exactly where he'd play, but O'Connor would seem to have the most promise among the other forward prospects that might be close to the NHL. He seems to be more pigeon holed as a LW, although we can only believe what a number of unreliable sources report. Miletic also seems to project as a LW. Legare looks to need another year in junior, and he's a RW. I don't expect him to push for a spot, but if he did, the thinking may change.

As I mentioned a while back, if Poulin can play RW, it might allow O'Connor to grab a spot on the left side. I'd be surprised if he grabbed a spot out of camp, but I could see him as a call up during the season who could make an impact. The combination of Poulin and O'Connor would give the forwards much needed size on the wings.

It will b an interesting camp. Unless he has a terrible camp, I expect Poulin to at least get a 9 game audition. Where he slots is anybody's guess. That's what camp's for. I know they seem hell bent on putting McCann on the wing, but I also believe he has the highest upside of anyone on the roster in terms of potential offensive production from the 3C position. Time will tell.

Totally agree. It's hard to get a gauge on handedness and optimal spot. As you state, there are advantages and disadvantages. Add in that, some guys claim it doesn't matter, but look completely lost and ineffective on their off-wing (Hornqvist at LW, Kessel at LW, and Beau Bennett as LW are 3 that come to mind).

Zucker is a bit older, but with Guentzel and McCann also on the LW for now, I would probably be looking at Poulin as a RW. Gives the Penguins another possible top 6 option should they not be able to or want to pay Bryan Rust a hefty raise on his next contract.

I think this roster looks a lot better if Poulin is on the 3rd line somewhere, and Janikowski and Rodrigues are fighting each other for one of the other spots. If O'Connor can force his way onto the roster at some point, even better. I'm not sure if O'Connor has been loaned out to any teams yet. That's something I would hope they would take a look at doing for the next month or two.

I have a feeling the player has a great deal to say about playing overseas. Lee chose to go to Slovakia to get a head start, but, with the pandemic, I don't see the Pens putting pressure on anyone to play. It definitely complicates things. When O'Connor signed the expectation was he'd play for WBS down the stretch. Now he's never seen the ice since signing.

I'm higher on the two UFA signings. I'm not sure Jankowski is a 3C, but I think he may profile better than Blueger as a 4C. Teddy would have a shot at 3C, but could also shift to the LW on the 4th line. I also believe that Rodrigues has a chance to really surprise. He looked very good in his short stint here. He seemed capable of being slotted in anywhere and not look out of place, at least in short spurts. I think he's an upgrade over Simon for the jack of all trades role. Unlike Simon, he can kill penalties, and I think he fits in as an emergency center better. I think his game will fit well in the Pens system. My biggest concern is his slight build and ability to hold up. In that respect, his body type reminds me a bit of Tyler Kennedy. Both Jankowski and Rodrigues had off seasons, but they also seemed eager to sign early for a shot at redemption. They could possibly have gotten a bit more money if they waited like so many others. But they chose to bet on themselves where they saw opportunity. If nothing else, I expect them to be very motivated.

[FLPensFan]

LeBrun posted this morning that NHL and NHLPA are still trying to hammer out the details. Right now, they are still trying to make a January 1st target date work, but LeBrun states that time is running out for that to get hammered out. Basically said if they don't get things figured out by end of this month, January 1st date seems unlikely. Right now, sounds like 60ish game season is being discussed, with Stanley Cup awarded no later than July 15th.

[pens_CT]

LeBrun posted this morning that NHL and NHLPA are still trying to hammer out the details. Right now, they are still trying to make a January 1st target date work, but LeBrun states that time is running out for that to get hammered out. Basically said if they don't get things figured out by end of this month, January 1st date seems unlikely. Right now, sounds like 60ish game season is being discussed, with Stanley Cup awarded no later than July 15th.

The have the Summer Olympics in August boxing them in a little. NBC is going to cover the Olympics so the NHL playoffs need to finish up before that starts. I think the shortened season is going to become a pi**ing contest between the NHLPA and the owners. The league wants to prorate salaries based on the number of games played, and the NHLPA not wanting to go down that road. Could turn into what happened with the MLB this past season.

[Sigwolf]

Go in and tell your boss you are only going to work 30 hours a week instead of 40, but want the same pay. How well will that work out? If these prima donnas want to die on that sword, cancel the season and pay them nothing.

[FLPensFan]

Go in and tell your boss you are only going to work 30 hours a week instead of 40, but want the same pay. How well will that work out? If these prima donnas want to die on that sword, cancel the season and pay them nothing.

Two sides to every story. Owners don't have a revenue stream without the players. As well as the players don't have a paycheck if the league cannot financially survive the likely next 2 years of impacted revenue streams.

For all the McDavid's, Crosby's, and Ovechkin's in the NHL, there are quite a few players, probably a good 30-40% of the league, that doesn't make more than 1.5M before taxes, agents, etc, etc.

What I am hearing is that, instead of a true pro-rated reduction in salary, instead players will be asked to take deferred payments. They already did this for the remainder of last season and the playoffs. Something will have to be worked out to have a combination of deferred payments and additional escrow to get the league and the players on the same page and get a 2021 season started.

[Antonio]

For those people who work 40 hours a week at real jobs and make 30, 40, 50 thousand a year, those players play a game and even at 1.5 million, make what those people make in THIRTY TO FIFTY YEARS of full time work. I'm sorry but the players can **** themselves. The argument that "oh a players career is so short though so they need to make millions" is absolute ****. What is it about hockey (or any sport) that entitles you to be able to retire after a few years? Don't want to make the league minimum (which is still like 20x what most Americans make in a year) for a few years and have to find work like any other person to keep paying the bills? Then don't. I'm so tired if the grotesque greed and entitlement and the absurd apologist nonsense justifying it.

No season? No money. Half season, half money.

[Steve Dave]

Go in and tell your boss you are only going to work 30 hours a week instead of 40, but want the same pay. How well will that work out? If these prima donnas want to die on that sword, cancel the season and pay them nothing.

He said no.

[FLPensFan]

Go in and tell your boss you are only going to work 30 hours a week instead of 40, but want the same pay. How well will that work out? If these prima donnas want to die on that sword, cancel the season and pay them nothing.

The thing is, these players already agreed to two different types of paycuts for the upcoming season, and the owners want more. So, in the scenario as it is, it isn't me telling my boss I am going to only work 30 hours but still get paid for 40 hours, it's more equivalent to your boss telling you you are getting a 50% cut in pay but still need to work 40 hours a week. I don't think that will fly for more people in any job. I've worked for the same company for over 20 years, large company with over 10K in employees at times, and in those 20+ years, I've been through 4-6 rounds of layoffs. I've been lucky enough to survive them all, but, when sitting there wondering if I would have a job tomorrow, thoughts of "I'd gladly take a 5%, maybe even 10% paycut" if it meant we didn't have to have any layoffs. The job market isn't easy, and I know full well that if I left my current job, there is ZERO chance of finding a comparable paying job in my current location. But, at 30, 40, or 50% reduction in pay, you've reached a level of the effort I need to put in for the amount of pay I am getting is no longer worth it, and I know that there are other opportunities out there where I can make more than what I would get with a 30-50% pay reduction

Not going to change some of your minds on this, but, my understanding is the players already agreed to large salary cuts over the summer (applying to this season), and that is the contention:

--From what I have heard, over the summer, players agreed that for this upcoming season, they would take a 20% paycut off the top. Meaning, a 1M player is now an 800K player in 2021 season. Players do not get that money back, and, that paycut was based on the intent of having an 82 game schedule in 2021.
--In addition to the 20% paycut, players also agreed to have 13% of their salaries deferred. I believe the deferment schedule had the owners paying out those deferred payments over 3 years.

So, this is what was agreed to in the summer, before the playoffs, to prepare for a possible 2021 season. Now the owners see that they almost definitely cannot play a full 82 games, they are asking the players to take an additional paycut. My understanding is that players are not willing to lose additional revenue than what they already agreed to (20%), but would likely be willing to accept

--The players already agreed to a 20% paycut over the summer. If you go by number of games, a 65 game season would be a 20% reduction in games played....which is what the owners are already getting from the players according to their summer agreement. There is talk right now of somewhere between 48-68 games next season.
--If we look at the low end, 48 games, that is essentially a 40% reduction in games played. So do you ask the players to take another 20% paycut? Maybe that seems fair....until you then factor in that if the players take a 40% paycut, they've ALSO agreed to have another 13% deferred over 3 years. I can easily see why there needs to be some give and take right now.

If they went to a 48 game schedule, I think the fairest would be for the players to take another 10% paycut, and the owners to put another 10% in deferred payments. 48 game schedule, 30% paycut, 23% of salaries deferred over 3 years. If you were around 60 games, which is a little over 70% of the season, make the players take another 5% paycut and the owners put another 5% into deferral. There must be some give and take from both sides.

To illustrate some of these points using salary, here's a look at a league minimum 700K player, versus a 5M AAV player. For discussion purposes, I am assuming 30% tax rate and 10% agent/account rate.

In a normal NHL season, your 700K player loses 210K to taxes, and 70K to agent/accountant. Take home pay in this scenario is 420K.
--in the summer agreed upon scenario, that 700K player loses 140K to the agreed upon paycut, 168K to taxes, 56K to agent/accountant. His immediate take home pay is 263.2K, and he has to wait 3 years to recover 72.8K of his salary via deferral for a final take home pay of 336K
--in a 48 game season, if there was no extra deferral and all additional salary cut (40% total paycut)
------> 700K player loses 280K off the top topay cut, 126K to taxes, 42K to agent/accountant. Immediate take home pay is 197.4K, and he has to wait 3 years to recover 54.6K for a final take home pay of 252K.

For the 5M AAV player, in a normal season, they lose 1.5M to taxes and 500K to agent/accountant. Take home pay is 3M in this scenario.
--in the summer agreed upon scenario, the 5M player loses 1M to the agreed paycut, 1.2M to taxes, and 400K to agent/accountant. His immediate take home pay 1.88M is and he has to wait 3 years to recover 520K for a final take home pay of 2.4M
--in a 48 game season, if there was no extra deferral and all additional salary cut (40% total paycut)
------> 5M player loses 2M off the top to the agreed paycut, 900K to taxes, and 300K to agent/accountant. His immediate take home pay 1.41M is and he has to wait 3 years to recover 390K for a final take home pay of 1.8M total.

[Sigwolf]

"it's more equivalent to your boss telling you you are getting a 50% cut in pay but still need to work 40 hours a week"

You entire post loses a ton of credence right there. They are not being asked to do the same amount of work for less pay. They are payed to play a game... they will be playing fewer games... there is no argument that will show they deserve to earn the full amount of money for less games. Previously agreed upon pay cuts are based on the current global economic situation, and losses already experienced. If they agreed on those cuts based on an 82 game schedule, that does not give them some divine right to the same amount if less than 82 games are played. They are separate cases, with separate reasons. It sucks to get less pay, but this is a global freaking pandemic, and a lot of people are being hurt by it financially. There are plenty of arguments that owners make too much money, but this is not the time to be championing those causes, that is why they have the CBA process.

The numbers you use for take home pay are even more useless. No one that is employed legally takes home their full salary. We all lose a ton to taxes, and almost anyone making the kind of money these guys are is also losing money to accountants and money managers. There could not be a more irrelevant point to this discussion.

Maybe they'll continue to stomp their feet and refuse to play if they don't get their way. Maybe the season will be scrapped because of it, and maybe the league will fold and they'll each have to come up with some other way to earn a living. Or maybe they can adapt to the crappy situation we are all facing right now.

[FLPensFan]

"it's more equivalent to your boss telling you you are getting a 50% cut in pay but still need to work 40 hours a week"

You entire post loses a ton of credence right there. They are not being asked to do the same amount of work for less pay. They are payed to play a game... they will be playing fewer games... there is no argument that will show they deserve to earn the full amount of money for less games. Previously agreed upon pay cuts are based on the current global economic situation, and losses already experienced. If they agreed on those cuts based on an 82 game schedule, that does not give them some divine right to the same amount if less than 82 games are played. They are separate cases, with separate reasons. It sucks to get less pay, but this is a global freaking pandemic, and a lot of people are being hurt by it financially. There are plenty of arguments that owners make too much money, but this is not the time to be championing those causes, that is why they have the CBA process.

The numbers you use for take home pay are even more useless. No one that is employed legally takes home their full salary. We all lose a ton to taxes, and almost anyone making the kind of money these guys are is also losing money to accountants and money managers. There could not be a more irrelevant point to this discussion.

Maybe they'll continue to stomp their feet and refuse to play if they don't get their way. Maybe the season will be scrapped because of it, and maybe the league will fold and they'll each have to come up with some other way to earn a living. Or maybe they can adapt to the crappy situation we are all facing right now.

I'll drop it. Having a better conversation with my wall right now.

[interstorm]

"it's more equivalent to your boss telling you you are getting a 50% cut in pay but still need to work 40 hours a week"

You entire post loses a ton of credence right there. They are not being asked to do the same amount of work for less pay. They are payed to play a game... they will be playing fewer games... there is no argument that will show they deserve to earn the full amount of money for less games. Previously agreed upon pay cuts are based on the current global economic situation, and losses already experienced. If they agreed on those cuts based on an 82 game schedule, that does not give them some divine right to the same amount if less than 82 games are played. They are separate cases, with separate reasons. It sucks to get less pay, but this is a global freaking pandemic, and a lot of people are being hurt by it financially. There are plenty of arguments that owners make too much money, but this is not the time to be championing those causes, that is why they have the CBA process.

The numbers you use for take home pay are even more useless. No one that is employed legally takes home their full salary. We all lose a ton to taxes, and almost anyone making the kind of money these guys are is also losing money to accountants and money managers. There could not be a more irrelevant point to this discussion.

Maybe they'll continue to stomp their feet and refuse to play if they don't get their way. Maybe the season will be scrapped because of it, and maybe the league will fold and they'll each have to come up with some other way to earn a living. Or maybe they can adapt to the crappy situation we are all facing right now.

I'll drop it. Having a better conversation with my wall right now.

When debating what business owners pay their employees - when confronted that they are often giving themselves a salary (or net proceeds) many multiples the average compensation of their employees, one of the "go to" responses is always that as the business owner, they're assuming all the risk (i.e. not that an employee doesn't have risk but they can get up and leave during troubled times whereas the owner has to stick it out).

SO...

Is that not the case here? Are we to say that business owners, NHL franchise owners in this discussion, should only assume risk when there really is no risk? They can't justify the large portions of retained renevue by playing that card year after year and especially during contract negotiations and then - when true risk happens - they scoff. Granted, this may have been a risk that was on the edge of possibilities but still - risk is risk and if that's the model, then that's the model! The players have given some concessions which I believe show their willingness to work with the owners. By owners in turn saying it's not enough - well, how about they use some of the equity in the sky-high values of their franchises to justify the existence of these very same fanchises (duh). And for those who maybe maxed out such equity, took loans against their franchises to spend on other business ventures - well that's a moral hazard and they deserve what they get.

As far as I am concerned, if the players are pushed beyond covering what would basically be the prorated portion of their salary (which they actually have been with the additional 13%) -- then the option for them to nuke the NHL and start their own league should be available to them. Yeah - that won't happen because whatever league that would be would have nowhere near the revenue...but if the owners don't want to negotiate in good faith then they should be allowed to die by the same sword they've been living on for decades.

[Cow_Master66]

This is more exciting than the playoffs without fans...

This season isn’t happening so this is all moot.

[interstorm]

This is more exciting than the playoffs without fans...

This season isn’t happening so this is all moot.

Who knows? I wasn't in favor of finishing the season and thought it was best to call it then and prepare for October. Could they have done that? Would they play a full season without fans? Who know -- but what is clear is that a sizable portion of the league will go the better part of a year playing somewhere between 0 and 12 games. That's not good. They potentially sacrificed the 2021 season for the ho-hum playoffs - cancelled so many more games to crown a champion - we'll see if this decision was worth it.