2011-2012 NHL Thread
- Thread starter Leafaholic99
- Start date
maplesyrup
New member
Scot4bz said:
Yes, those too... Hopefully its all part and parcel.
hockeyfan1
New member
The NHL in the year 2025.....
http://www.canadianbusiness.com/article/48064--the-nhl-in-2025
http://www.canadianbusiness.com/article/48178--interactive-the-nhl-in-2025
http://www.canadianbusiness.com/article/48064--the-nhl-in-2025
http://www.canadianbusiness.com/article/48178--interactive-the-nhl-in-2025
hockeyfan1
New member
http://www.canadianbusiness.com/article/48060--canada-s-team-i-the-phoenix-coyotes-i
"Even with the [U.S.] contract almost 50% of TV revenues are coming from Canada," says Keller. "It's still a case where Canadian television is a large supporter of [U.S. teams]."
Tony Keller, a Canadian journalist and author of "The New Economics of the NHL," a report published last April by Toronto's Mowat Centre for Policy Innovation, says in his report that of the estimated $100 million paid by the CBC to the NHL, only $20 million is allocated to Canadian teams; the other $80 million is distributed to the U.S. "The bottom-line is that two-thirds of the NHL's national TV revenues are earned in Canada and distributed across all of the NHL's?primarily American?franchises," he writes.
But the flow of Canadian taxpayer money to the U.S. doesn't end there, says Keller. The league has an arrangement where the better performing teams pay a portion of their revenues to the struggling franchises. So a lot of the money Canadian teams do get from the CBC, and other channels like TSN or RDS, inevitably find their way back into American hands. Keller estimates that $40 million a year is paid into the revenue sharing pool by Canadian teams. While it's not clear what percentage of TV revenues end up in the pool, Keller says, "the actual percentage of Canadian national TV revenue going to American teams is perhaps as high as 90%."
"Even with the [U.S.] contract almost 50% of TV revenues are coming from Canada," says Keller. "It's still a case where Canadian television is a large supporter of [U.S. teams]."
Tony Keller, a Canadian journalist and author of "The New Economics of the NHL," a report published last April by Toronto's Mowat Centre for Policy Innovation, says in his report that of the estimated $100 million paid by the CBC to the NHL, only $20 million is allocated to Canadian teams; the other $80 million is distributed to the U.S. "The bottom-line is that two-thirds of the NHL's national TV revenues are earned in Canada and distributed across all of the NHL's?primarily American?franchises," he writes.
But the flow of Canadian taxpayer money to the U.S. doesn't end there, says Keller. The league has an arrangement where the better performing teams pay a portion of their revenues to the struggling franchises. So a lot of the money Canadian teams do get from the CBC, and other channels like TSN or RDS, inevitably find their way back into American hands. Keller estimates that $40 million a year is paid into the revenue sharing pool by Canadian teams. While it's not clear what percentage of TV revenues end up in the pool, Keller says, "the actual percentage of Canadian national TV revenue going to American teams is perhaps as high as 90%."
WhatIfGodWasALeaf
Active member
At least one of the major cable networks in the U.S. has dropped 'NHL Network' from their channel lineup, apparently the contracts for each carrier's use of this channel are coming to an end the NHL are asking for double the previous price consumers paid.
hockeyfan1 said:
This guy is nuts regarding two teams in some cities - no current NHL team is going to allow another team to use their arena. Suggesting the Leafs would entertain "sharing" the ACC with another franchise is laughable.
He says them doing it with the Raptors is proof it can be done.
Ummm... They own the Raptors! Is he suggesting that MLSE own both teams and compete against itself?
While some shift of American teams northward is seemingly inevitable (Quebec is very likely to get a team), second teams in Toronto, Montreal or Vancouver are highly unlikely IMHO - and sharing arenas is crazy.
Sucker Punch
New member
From Darren Dreger's twitter;
Can someone explain the reasoning behind this bonus? Brayden Schenn is more likely to break Gretzky's records than he is to achieve that bonus.
Not a single forward averaged 25 minutes per game last year. In the league, only 3 players averaged 25 minutes and played all 82 games. They're all defensemen, and none of them came even close to recording 25 minutes in every single game they played.
It seems like the only reason that bonus exists is to artificially raise his cap hit. I don't understand why either party would want that.
Can someone explain the reasoning behind this bonus? Brayden Schenn is more likely to break Gretzky's records than he is to achieve that bonus.
Not a single forward averaged 25 minutes per game last year. In the league, only 3 players averaged 25 minutes and played all 82 games. They're all defensemen, and none of them came even close to recording 25 minutes in every single game they played.
It seems like the only reason that bonus exists is to artificially raise his cap hit. I don't understand why either party would want that.
Yeah, I'm a little confused myself here too, and I'm not sure Dreger is talking about.
First, if Dreger's wording is precise and Schenn has to play 25 minutes or more in all of 82 games, and not just average 25 minutes over 82 games, then technically all the Flyers would have to do would be to not play Schenn 25 minutes in his first game. That would nullify any chance he has at achieving the bonus and thus reduce his cap hit. It serves the same purpose as sending him down but you don't have to send him to the AHL.
Second, and this makes my first point completely unnecessary, I'm not even sure "playing/averaging 25 minutes or more in all 82 games" is even a potential bonus in the CBA. All the possible "B" bonuses are clearly outlined in the CBA and it's not there. A player can get a bonus for winning a major award (or just finishing top-5), like Toews did when he won the Conn Smyth. A player can also get a bonus for finishing top-10 in goals/assists/points/points per game. The only place it mentions ice-time as a performance bonus is in the "A" bonus section, and even then it's a little different from what Schenn apparently has. Schenn would have to finish top-6 in ice-time among forwards and the maximum amount payable for achieving that bonus is only $212,500.
Third, Dreger posted this at the end of his article about the situation:
The CBA states that a player is automatically eligible for a performance bonus if he has an All-Star season, finishes among the league's point leaders, and wins a major award. He wouldn't have to achieve all 3 in order to get paid.
So yeah, something seems fishy here. Maybe I'm interpreting the CBA wrong here, but I'm not sure. The CBA does state that a player and club could negotiate their own bonuses for the League-wide Awards/Trophy Bonuses and League Performance set out in the CBA, but it doesn't mention anything about creating a new criteria to meet or making it mandatory to achieve 3 different types of criteria before earning a bonus for them.
First, if Dreger's wording is precise and Schenn has to play 25 minutes or more in all of 82 games, and not just average 25 minutes over 82 games, then technically all the Flyers would have to do would be to not play Schenn 25 minutes in his first game. That would nullify any chance he has at achieving the bonus and thus reduce his cap hit. It serves the same purpose as sending him down but you don't have to send him to the AHL.
Second, and this makes my first point completely unnecessary, I'm not even sure "playing/averaging 25 minutes or more in all 82 games" is even a potential bonus in the CBA. All the possible "B" bonuses are clearly outlined in the CBA and it's not there. A player can get a bonus for winning a major award (or just finishing top-5), like Toews did when he won the Conn Smyth. A player can also get a bonus for finishing top-10 in goals/assists/points/points per game. The only place it mentions ice-time as a performance bonus is in the "A" bonus section, and even then it's a little different from what Schenn apparently has. Schenn would have to finish top-6 in ice-time among forwards and the maximum amount payable for achieving that bonus is only $212,500.
Third, Dreger posted this at the end of his article about the situation:
The CBA states that a player is automatically eligible for a performance bonus if he has an All-Star season, finishes among the league's point leaders, and wins a major award. He wouldn't have to achieve all 3 in order to get paid.
So yeah, something seems fishy here. Maybe I'm interpreting the CBA wrong here, but I'm not sure. The CBA does state that a player and club could negotiate their own bonuses for the League-wide Awards/Trophy Bonuses and League Performance set out in the CBA, but it doesn't mention anything about creating a new criteria to meet or making it mandatory to achieve 3 different types of criteria before earning a bonus for them.
bustaheims
Active member
CarltonTheBear said:
There are two types of "B" bonuses - the ones paid paid the league, which you're referring to, and ones negotiated by the team, which is what I imagine Dreger is referring to. The league bonuses are automatic based on individual accomplishments, but those negotiated with the team can conceivably have the condition that multiple things have to be accomplished in order for them to kick in - there's nothing in the CBA that says such conditions cannot be imposed.
Leafaholic99
New member
4th Liner said:
I don't think the same owner can own 2 teams in the NHL, he would have to sell one team and have no ownership part at all of them, to buy a different team.
Peter D.
Moderator
I for one am quite excited to see Jagr back in the NHL. Outside of Gretzky and Lemieux, I think he's been the best NHLer in the last 25 years.
What's remarkable, and kind of disappointing, is that had he not left the NHL for those three years, he'd likely be on his way to becoming the second highest point producer in NHL history. He was only 288 points away from catching Messier. That's one heckuva career.
What's remarkable, and kind of disappointing, is that had he not left the NHL for those three years, he'd likely be on his way to becoming the second highest point producer in NHL history. He was only 288 points away from catching Messier. That's one heckuva career.
Kin
New member
Peter D. said:
I agree completely. People often underrate him because he played his prime years in the clutch and grab post-Roy era but I think his scoring accomplishments, if not right up there with Lemieux and Gretzky, are only a step behind them. He won the Art Ross despite playing in only 63 games. He won an Art Ross without anyone coming within 20 points of him.
I think there was a media driven attempt to make him appear to be a troublemaker or not as valuable as he really was that got bought into by a lot of people. I think it's pretty telling that he won only one Hart trophy despite winning three Pearsons.
Busta Reims said:
I agree that it is conceivable that a club could make it a condition that a player has to reach multiple accomplishments before a bonus is kicked in. Although it seems strange that a player would agree to that since he could get those bonuses by default anyway. Maybe he sacrificed that in order to gain something else, who knows.
My main point though was that this "25-minutes a game for all 82 games" bonus doesn't seem plausible. A club can definitely negotiate bonuses paid by the team for the 'B' bonuses, but from what the CBA says it sounds like those accomplishments must be the ones stated in the CBA:
A Player and Club may also negotiate individual bonuses payable by the Club for the
League-wide Awards/Trophy Bonuses and League Performance Bonuses set forth below, except
where specifically stated otherwise, in amounts to be individually negotiated between a Club and
a Player (the Club and Player could agree to pay more, or less, than the amounts payable by the
League, set forth below).
Nowhere in my reading does it say that a club can make up a new type of 'B' bonus. Maybe the teams were able to interpret the CBA differently or stretch it a little, but from that paragraph it seems like that's not how it works.
bustaheims
Active member
CarltonTheBear said:
THey have to be in the same category as the league's B bonuses, but they can work differently. The ice time thing is a little confusing, since it's a valid B bonus for defencemen, but, not listed as one for forwards.
hockeyfan1
New member
The people at EA Sports correctly predicted the 2010-2011 winners/competitors/losers of that season's final team standings, including playoffs and Stanley Cup finalists.
Now, EA Sports does their simulation for this season, with some surprises....namely, the Leafs squeaking into the playoffs... and, the Penguins vs Black Hawks for the Cup Final (with Pittsburgh the clear winner). They also have Ovechkin pegged to win the Hart Trophy, etc., etc.,
Have a look..... http://www.ea.com/nhl/blog/nhl-12-season-simulation
Now, EA Sports does their simulation for this season, with some surprises....namely, the Leafs squeaking into the playoffs... and, the Penguins vs Black Hawks for the Cup Final (with Pittsburgh the clear winner). They also have Ovechkin pegged to win the Hart Trophy, etc., etc.,
Have a look..... http://www.ea.com/nhl/blog/nhl-12-season-simulation
hockeyfan1
New member
CTE found in donated brain of the late ex-Sabre Richard Martin, a non-enforcer...
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2011/10/05/martin_cte/
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2011/10/05/martin_cte/