Current state of the NHL and NHLPA (Pens related)

[Bioshock]

-What are the thoughts of the game currently as opposed to the game when it was fresh out of the lockout?

-PP opportunities have dropped by over 50% since the new CBA was administered and the Clutch and Grab that was once prevalent in the league seems to have returned. Even more so since the new year.

-The new CBA was de-certified by the owners earlier in the week. That means they are the first to say publicly they want changes to the current system where the players get 57% of the revenue. Labor strife will hit the NHL as soon as the last game is played in the finals and no one seems to have a clear direction as to why their is strife in the first place. A lot of people seem to think that the motivations of both sides are based in the "Because they can" attitude and that is rather strange and disturbing because the NHL has never been healthier for both sides. The NHLPA voting down re-alignment was the shot across the bow of the owners 3 months ago and now this turn of events earlier in the week by the owners seems to be just about having the first move and taking control. If things go as normal and the cap goes up to 69 or 70 million, that will make things interesting. If Fehr has his way, the cap could be even higher. As much as 75 million some say.

-How does this all affect the Pens? Do they need to address the new "rules" by the officials or just continue to play their brand of hockey? Do they need to just sign Sid and then wait on the new Salary Cap numbers or do they jump on a large name UFA on July 1st? Do they bring back Staal as a center if the cap goes up by so much that they can fill out their lineup even with him in it? Do they need a "Hal Gill" type with the change in the game?

[Bioshock]

Hopefully i'm asking the right questions to at least be thought provoking enough to make this topic entertaining and interesting until July 1st comes.

[Bioshock]

Also, Three interviews that give and interesting view into the offseason for the Pens and the NHL:

Dejan:
http://www.1059thex.com/player/?station=WXDX-FM&program_name=podcast&program_id=MarkMadden.xml&mid=22104499

Molinari:
http://www.1059thex.com/player/?station=WXDX-FM&program_name=podcast&program_id=MarkMadden.xml&mid=22100168

Steve Mears:
http://www.1059thex.com/player/?station=WXDX-FM&program_name=podcast&program_id=MarkMadden.xml&mid=22100590

[Streaks House]

The game has definitely regressed since the lockout. Based on the various hot button topics over the past few months (realignment, concussions, rules, suspensions, etc.) and the feedback from owners, GMs, coaches, and players, it seems that the various parties involved are split on some of these items. Thhe influence of Donald Fehr with the NHLPA will complicate the process. Despite this, I think all parties involved will realize that a lockout is not in the best interest of the game, given the growth of viewership, as it would destroy goodwill.

[Pensfan2010]

The gap between what the owners want revenue wise compared to the previous CBA is pretty good size. It'll be interesting to see how the negotiations go this summer. The owners look like the bad guys having opted out, I wonder if they try to salvage the season offering a 1 year extension of the current CBA, as an attempt to save face. I could see this taking a while with Fehr repping the players. If (and thats a big if) a deal gets done before the season starts, it won't be up until right before training camp, IMO.

[no name]

You will see a drop in the salary floor, to help the small market teams who are still bleeding money.

I think the players will want a lowering in the age a player can reach free agency.

Owners will want a limit on players contracts in years, and restrictions on how the money can be laid out over the contract. The Kovalchuk rule if you may, long term deals made to lower the cap hit owers will reword it.

Players will want in the owners books to see how much money is really made.

And of course money distribution, 57%to players, owners want it reduced, players want it the same.

[Nizzy]

You will see a drop in the salary floor, to help the small market teams who are still bleeding money.

I think the players will want a lowering in the age a player can reach free agency.

Owners will want a limit on players contracts in years, and restrictions on how the money can be laid out over the contract. The Kovalchuk rule if you may, long term deals made to lower the cap hit owers will reword it.

Players will want in the owners books to see how much money is really made.

And of course money distribution, 57%to players, owners want it reduced, players want it the same.

I remember when the cap got to 50M I said, wow they need to cap that cap and keep it steady/locked or if it gets too high the same 4 organizations: Flyers/Rangers/Detroit/Tor will just be the ones spending the most money every year while 20 other organizations can't do that. Now its rumored to hit 70M....

In 3 more years at this pace it will be 2001-2004 all over again.

[owtahear]

What both sides need to realize....the NHL is the most gate driven league of all 4 major pro sports.

So........it is hard to burden the fans much more in an economy that in most cities are far from robust.

[RisslingsMissingTeeth]

I see the stats and I get it and all that, but for me, this past season was one of the most exciting ones I've watched. not just the Pens, but for other teams as well. Teams seem to be able to have their own 'style' during the regular season. But, just like in football, in the playoffs, defense wins games. Especially in a best of 7.

I think the biggest issue in all sports is concussions and the NHL had a really BAD year. If you watch games from the 50s-60s, guys didn't even barely check each other. granted the games were boring as crap, but it shows that the foundations of hockey were in stick work and team play. Since the 70s, hitting and enforcing swung too far over and need to be lowered (not eliminated) a bit to get the balance right. In a sense though it is working, the Kings are not physical and neither are the Rangers for that matter.

[mikey287]

You will see a drop in the salary floor, to help the small market teams who are still bleeding money.

I think the players will want a lowering in the age a player can reach free agency.

Owners will want a limit on players contracts in years, and restrictions on how the money can be laid out over the contract. The Kovalchuk rule if you may, long term deals made to lower the cap hit owers will reword it.

Players will want in the owners books to see how much money is really made.

And of course money distribution, 57%to players, owners want it reduced, players want it the same.

I remember when the cap got to 50M I said, wow they need to cap that cap and keep it steady/locked or if it gets too high the same 4 organizations: Flyers/Rangers/Detroit/Tor will just be the ones spending the most money every year while 20 other organizations can't do that. Now its rumored to hit 70M....

In 3 more years at this pace it will be 2001-2004 all over again.

But it's tied to a set of a numbers. In 2004, it was just whatever money you had under the mattress, so the Rangers would spend $80 million and the Wild would spend $24 million. Now the amount that teams can spend is tied to how much league revenue is brought in. Also, how much a team has to spend is tied to the same number. It's regulated now. Who cares if the number becomes $425 million, the point is that it's tied to growth.

The NHL has more parity than any other sport, period. You can't cap the cap and expect the players to be happy because you're also capping their earning power which they collectively bargained for. Also, why can't bigger market teams spend more? Why does it have to be communistic? Why can't Detroit spend $65 million to Minnesota's $45 million? You can still more than compete with a $45 million payroll...there's a lot of means to acquire players, the whole world is open, coaching is getting better every day...we haven't had any expansion teams in 12 years, so it's not like there's any weak sisters...

I mean, I don't want a Yankees/Red Sox/Phillies vs. all deal in the NHL, but I"m also confident that will never happen. The big market teams also put money back into the pot for the lesser teams, so why shouldn't they be able to flex their spending muscle a little if that's the way they feel is best? I mean, look at the Rangers: yeah, they got Richards and Gaborik as big free agents, sure...but a lot of that team is homegrown (Girardi, Staal, Del Zotto, Kreider, Hagelin, Anisimov, Callahan, Dubinsky, Lundqvist all have called the Rangers their only organization), they'll eventually need to pay them too...

The system isn't doing that poorly. Yeah, the salary cap floor is a little wonky, but you can iron that out. Is it perfect? No. Far from it. But I don't have better solution and it seems to be working adequately.

[no name]

Mikey287:

Letting teams flex their spending muscle would quickly make the NHL like MLB baseball, even if you open it up a little more. drop the floor and raise the ceiling you are creating a market that is harder and harder for the small guy to compete. The big clubs already open that gap by offering long term, low cap hit deals. The flyers do it by putting players on the unable to perform list so they don't count against the cap hit. Big market teams will find a way, and exercise buy outs more often to save money on the cap. They spend money to free up cap space. Let them do that. Don't give them a little more room, give them a inch they will take a mile. Look at the baseball rules, spend over x and you have to pay the other club Y, Y is so small it doesn't level the playing field.

The Pens are in a nice place right now spending to the ceiling, once big name draws like Crosby and Malkin are gone, we are going to be concidered a small market and once again be glad the ceiling and floor are the way they are.

[RisslingsMissingTeeth]

My absolute pure hatred of baseball stems from 20%, the game is a stupid waste of time, and 80%, it is the biggest joke of a league in modern sports where small teams feed big teams and everyone loses. Saying anything to suggest that the NHL should look like that train wreck and not the complete success that the NFL is, is not worthy of any further discussion.

[Idoit40fans]

My absolute pure hatred of baseball will be all that you get out of this post.

Yup.

[columbia]

My absolute pure hatred of baseball stems from 20%, the game is a stupid waste of time, and 80%, it is the biggest joke of a league in modern sports where small teams feed big teams and everyone loses. Saying anything to suggest that the NHL should look like that train wreck and not the complete success that the NFL is, is not worthy of any further discussion.

Just to flesh that out, you'd like a more compressed cap range and perhaps revenue sharing?

[RisslingsMissingTeeth]

My absolute pure hatred of baseball stems from 20%, the game is a stupid waste of time, and 80%, it is the biggest joke of a league in modern sports where small teams feed big teams and everyone loses. Saying anything to suggest that the NHL should look like that train wreck and not the complete success that the NFL is, is not worthy of any further discussion.

Just to flesh that out, you'd like a more compressed cap range and perhaps revenue sharing?

The NFL realized that by giving every team hope, you engage a nation. When the nation is engaged, TV and other rights go through the roof because interest is mega. The NFL's view is that when everyone has a chance, everyone wins. MLB decided that a few would have a chance and only a few would win.

[mikey287]

Mikey287:

Letting teams flex their spending muscle would quickly make the NHL like MLB baseball, even if you open it up a little more. drop the floor and raise the ceiling you are creating a market that is harder and harder for the small guy to compete. The big clubs already open that gap by offering long term, low cap hit deals. The flyers do it by putting players on the unable to perform list so they don't count against the cap hit. Big market teams will find a way, and exercise buy outs more often to save money on the cap. They spend money to free up cap space. Let them do that. Don't give them a little more room, give them a inch they will take a mile. Look at the baseball rules, spend over x and you have to pay the other club Y, Y is so small it doesn't level the playing field.

The Pens are in a nice place right now spending to the ceiling, once big name draws like Crosby and Malkin are gone, we are going to be concidered a small market and once again be glad the ceiling and floor are the way they are.

Perhaps I didn't make myself clear. The Upper Limit remains tied to revenue, the lower limit drops a bit so that teams on the bottom don't have to utilize revenue sharing as much. I don't want it to be like baseball at all. I also don't want each team spending $50 million per year, not a dollar more, not a dollar less. I don't want the high side to be higher than it needs to be, I just want to low side to be lowered to where it should be. That's all.

[Fire0nice228]

Am I the only one who isn't convinced 'clutch and grab' is back? Yes, PP are down from the season after lockout, but can we not agree that penalties were 'over called' right after the lockout. It was ridiculous.. 5v5 scoring is still strong since the lockout I believe.

NHL games are averaging 5.44 goals per game this season, down a half a goal per game since the league returned from the lockout for the 2005-2006 season.

2003-04 - 5.14 goals per game (pre-lockout)

2005-06 - 6.16 goals per game

2006-07 - 5.89 goals per game

2007-08 - 5.56 goals per game

2008-09 - 5.82 goals per game

2009-10 - 5.68 goals per gam

2010-11 - 5.59 goals per game

2011-12 - 5.44 goals per game
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/316276/ ... m?page=all (source)

Yes, scoring is down a bit, and PP opportunities are down, but I for one, enjoy seeing the battles along the boards and having to fight to earn every inch on the ice. I like the game right now. Go watch clips of Mario from before the lockout.. THAT is clutch and grab and hack and hook crap hockey.. the game now isn't anything like that.

As long as they dont put in the amnesty buyout, thats one big thing I'm anxious to see what they do about.. And max years on a contract, not a fan of the 'lifer' contract or the Kovalchuk contract..

[mikey287]

Buzz words like "clutch and grab" and "trap" and "dead puck era" are nothing but fluff to explain away scoring going down. This isn't the so-called, clutch and grab era that we saw pre-lockout, not even close...

[sil]

Buzz words like "clutch and grab" and "trap" and "dead puck era" are nothing but fluff to explain away scoring going down. This isn't the so-called, clutch and grab era that we saw pre-lockout, not even close...

It's also serving as scapegoat for some people as to why Philly beat the pens.

[mikey287]

Buzz words like "clutch and grab" and "trap" and "dead puck era" are nothing but fluff to explain away scoring going down. This isn't the so-called, clutch and grab era that we saw pre-lockout, not even close...

It's also serving as scapegoat for some people as to why Philly beat the pens.

As it was in 1996 when we lost to Florida...

[Nizzy]

You will see a drop in the salary floor, to help the small market teams who are still bleeding money.

I think the players will want a lowering in the age a player can reach free agency.

Owners will want a limit on players contracts in years, and restrictions on how the money can be laid out over the contract. The Kovalchuk rule if you may, long term deals made to lower the cap hit owers will reword it.

Players will want in the owners books to see how much money is really made.

And of course money distribution, 57%to players, owners want it reduced, players want it the same.

I remember when the cap got to 50M I said, wow they need to cap that cap and keep it steady/locked or if it gets too high the same 4 organizations: Flyers/Rangers/Detroit/Tor will just be the ones spending the most money every year while 20 other organizations can't do that. Now its rumored to hit 70M....

In 3 more years at this pace it will be 2001-2004 all over again.

But it's tied to a set of a numbers. In 2004, it was just whatever money you had under the mattress, so the Rangers would spend $80 million and the Wild would spend $24 million. Now the amount that teams can spend is tied to how much league revenue is brought in. Also, how much a team has to spend is tied to the same number. It's regulated now. Who cares if the number becomes $425 million, the point is that it's tied to growth.

The NHL has more parity than any other sport, period. You can't cap the cap and expect the players to be happy because you're also capping their earning power which they collectively bargained for. Also, why can't bigger market teams spend more? Why does it have to be communistic? Why can't Detroit spend $65 million to Minnesota's $45 million? You can still more than compete with a $45 million payroll...there's a lot of means to acquire players, the whole world is open, coaching is getting better every day...we haven't had any expansion teams in 12 years, so it's not like there's any weak sisters...

I mean, I don't want a Yankees/Red Sox/Phillies vs. all deal in the NHL, but I"m also confident that will never happen. The big market teams also put money back into the pot for the lesser teams, so why shouldn't they be able to flex their spending muscle a little if that's the way they feel is best? I mean, look at the Rangers: yeah, they got Richards and Gaborik as big free agents, sure...but a lot of that team is homegrown (Girardi, Staal, Del Zotto, Kreider, Hagelin, Anisimov, Callahan, Dubinsky, Lundqvist all have called the Rangers their only organization), they'll eventually need to pay them too...

The system isn't doing that poorly. Yeah, the salary cap floor is a little wonky, but you can iron that out. Is it perfect? No. Far from it. But I don't have better solution and it seems to be working adequately.

I see you're point but a lot of teams will always have internal cap numbers for whatever reason(s).

Good post though thanks.

[It'sagreatdayforhockey!]

The NHL has more parity than any other sport, period. You can't cap the cap and expect the players to be happy because you're also capping their earning power which they collectively bargained for. Also, why can't bigger market teams spend more? Why does it have to be communistic? Why can't Detroit spend $65 million to Minnesota's $45 million? You can still more than compete with a $45 million payroll...there's a lot of means to acquire players, the whole world is open, coaching is getting better every day...we haven't had any expansion teams in 12 years, so it's not like there's any weak sisters...

Clearly both systems can work. See MLB/NCAA vs NFL like has been mentioned. The problem with widening of the cap limits is that it creates scenarios where star players are lost from small market teams to the larger market teams, which doesn't allow for them to compete and draw in increased revenue. This is fine for fans of the large market teams because they are bringing in these players and creating more entertaining teams; clearly the pens are not one of them (see early 2000's). Ideally in a widened cap limit system, the small market teams would have incentives built in to sign home grown players (similar to NBA) to fair market value. That would create a system that allows for small market teams to compete (solid drafting/development) and large market teams to outbid for stars and create increased revenue for the league.

[no name]

I think the current CBA is working, revenue is going up every year, the gap between spending markets and saving markets is perfect.This next CBA i think you will see the cap raise, 69m and the floor dropped a bit more since some teams are still losing money.

But the spending markets still can take advantage of the system with lifer contracts, contract buyouts, and leaving players on injure reserve to get around some cap issue.