2012 CBA Negotiations Thread

[GhostofPotvin29]

So trash talk that players face every game?  Oh the horror.

 

[Bates]

So a fine to a billionaire.  I wonder if the Illich's will be able to buy groceries.  It's just rhetoric.  Stop falling for it.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Fehr is running the show for the players.  He has an inner circle that makes the call on whether a vote will be taken.  They obviously made the call not to vote on last offer as a vote was not taken.  A player relayed that info to adater.  I have not heard of a players poll for or against vote so someone made the call not to hold one.  I believe that to be the inner circle at the advice of Fehr.

So?  Are the owners taking a vote on every proposal?  No.  I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that isn't how these sports CBA negotiations work.  Considering this isn't the first dance for either side, I'm going to defer to their knowledge on the subject.

 

[Kin]

Fehr is running the show for the players.

Well, if by "the show" you mean the negotiations then yes. That's what they hired him to do.

  He has an inner circle that makes the call on whether a vote will be taken.

Well, it's a negotiating committee but everyone's free to be on it.

They obviously made the call not to vote on last offer as a vote was not taken.

That stands to reason but, again, that was their call, not Fehr's.

  A player relayed that info to adater.

His name is Adrian Dater, but moving on.

  I have not heard of a players poll for or against vote so someone made the call not to hold one.  I believe that to be the inner circle at the advice of Fehr.

Yes. That is the negotiating committee's job. They decide whether or not to take a proposal back to the membership at large. To do otherwise would be impractical.

So far, all you've thrown at the NHLPA is that the negotiating committee is doing their job.

 

[Bates]

I agree.  This little bit started after I post that adatar had tweeted that a player had contacted him suggesting that players wanted to vote and Fehr told them to hold on and he could get them more.  Here are adatar's tweets on this:

From deep inside players side: "We were ready to play again. But Don came in (Wed.) and told us we could get more and to hold out"

That deep-inside-players quote came from depth player. They want to play, but top players still in Fehr camp. Could explode soon

Fehr did not hold a player-wide conference call in saying that, important to note. Came from top down, trickle-down

Bottom line here: Players say they are unified, but not what I'm hearing from this depth player. They'll deny that publicly, but...

We're seeing now the fruition of a two-tier economic system among players. Top guys in Europe, taking jobs, making $. Bottom guys suffering

 

[Kin]

I agree.  This little bit started after I post that adatar had tweeted that a player had contacted him suggesting that players wanted to vote and Fehr told them to hold on and he could get them more.  Here are adatar's tweets on this:

From deep inside players side: "We were ready to play again. But Don came in (Wed.) and told us we could get more and to hold out"

That deep-inside-players quote came from depth player. They want to play, but top players still in Fehr camp. Could explode soon

Fehr did not hold a player-wide conference call in saying that, important to note. Came from top down, trickle-down

Bottom line here: Players say they are unified, but not what I'm hearing from this depth player. They'll deny that publicly, but...

We're seeing now the fruition of a two-tier economic system among players. Top guys in Europe, taking jobs, making $. Bottom guys suffering

1. Using anonymous sources is lousy journalism
2. First and foremost, the problem here is that the reporter is using this one anonymous source to do exactly what players fear will happen when guys like Hamrlik speak out in the media as opposed to internally. People, like you sadly, will take what one or two players among 700 say and assume that they're speaking for vast constituencies. That is absolutely baseless conjecture and one guy in Hamrlik and one anonymous depth player doesn't contradict that. One of the reasons the negotiating committee, who is far better informed as to the situation than you are, might not have decided to taken the vote back to the PA as a whole is because they, who are in contact with the other members, know that it'll lose and lose by a wide margin.

 

[Kin]

And if we're just dwelling in the realm of who is being a bigger jerk, there's this from Elliotte Friedman:

Winnipeg's Ron Hainsey may not have the Q Rating of a Sidney Crosby, but he has been heavily involved in lockout negotiations -- even, perhaps, at his peril. I stress I've never heard it on- or off-the-record from any owner, general manager or negotiator -- but there is a rumbling going around that Hainsey will never again get an NHL contract. (He is an unrestricted free agent next summer.) When I brought it up to him on Friday morning, he nodded in anticipation of the question.

But yeah, good to see you're looking out for Roman Hamrlik against the big mean union there Bates.

 

[Bates]

Not sure what that has to do with me.  I think both sides are being a little stupid with all the rhetoric and have stated so numerous times.  If Hainsey has been in numerous battles with owners in the negotiation while I don't agree and don't think it is fair, you could hardly blame those owners for not wanting him on their team.  I do, however doubt he will be black-balled as NHL owners and gm's have really not shown any regard for each other in previous dealings.  I do doubt Hainsey gets the deal he now has again.

Again my posts here were in reference to Fehr "telling" the players what to do.  I don't think you really believe that he just simply "advises" the players and let them make the decision.  The players hired him for a reason and it was more to drive the deal and the players than it was to guide.  I think we both know that. 

 

[Kin]

If Hainsey has been in numerous battles with owners in the negotiation while I don't agree and don't think it is fair, you could hardly blame those owners for not wanting him on their team.

I absolutely can and would blame the owners for that.

Again my posts here were in reference to Fehr "telling" the players what to do.

Right, something he doesn't have the authority to do. 

I don't think you really believe that he just simply "advises" the players and let them make the decision.  The players hired him for a reason and it was more to drive the deal and the players than it was to guide.  I think we both know that.

Well, I do believe that because I've read books that dealt in great detail with how Don Fehr ran the MLBPA. He didn't decide things for players, he didn't tell them what to do. He educated, listened and advised but he didn't lead. The players hired him for a reason and that reason is that with the exception of the recently deceased Marvin Miller nobody in history has more success as the head of a professional sports league's players association. That gives his advice weight, sure, but it doesn't fundamentally change the relationship between Fehr and the players. Fehr is a smart enough guy to know that a PA's only real power is in it's solidarity and for that reason it makes absolutely no sense for him to tell players to do something that doesn't have the majority of not just a majority of the players but a vast majority of them.

 

[Bates]

Just on the Hainsey part.  If you were Jeremy Jacobs and Hainsey called you a stupid C*** several times in meetings in the last month you would be trying to sign him to a contract next season.  And this question is specific to Hainsey.  He really is just a utility player and probably won't change the outlook for your team.

 

[Kin]

Just on the Hainsey part.  If you were Jeremy Jacobs and Hainsey called you a stupid C*** several times in meetings in the last month you would be trying to sign him to a contract next season.  And this question is specific to Hainsey.  He really is just a utility player and probably won't change the outlook for your team.

If he would help the team? Sure. I don't think the rules should be different for Hainsey than they should be for a better player. If owners want to selectively punish marginal players for taking an active role in the union then all they'll end up doing is making sure the negotiating committee is full of nothing but all-stars which punishes all marginal players by effectively silencing their voice within their own union.

Think of it this way. Would you think it ok if because Jacobs was a jerk, the NHLPA decided that no player would ever sign with the Bruins again?

 

[Bates]

This is not the result of being active in union.  There have been rumors of heated arguements that crossed the line between Hainsey and some owners.  Same was said for Campoli.  Now from what I have heard and read this has been blow out of proportion by media and exchanges were nowhere near disrespectful.  I have not heard anyone back up talk of Hainsey never getting another contract.  I would guess it was something said in the heat of the moment and never meant to be written in stone.  I think once they conclude CBA cooler heads will prevail and it will be back to business as usual.

 

[Bates]

By the way if anyone watches Hockey Central News at Noon they have had some heated exchanges and great guests in the last few weeks.  In particular Campoli, Hainsey, and Westgarth have been fantastic getting the PA's point across and all have handled MacLean weel and he is really pro-owner.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Now it's Don Fehr's turn. He's got an ace, the Mariano Rivera of last year's NBA lockout in Jim Quinn.

Quinn's bio is here and it's, uh, not bad.

Thirteen months ago, Quinn reached out to the NBA and the National Basketball Players' Association to settle their insane, tortuous and destructive lockout. The union had filed its disclaimer of interest and things were disintegrating rapidly.

Quinn, who spent almost two decades as the NBPA's lead outside counsel and had a good working relationship with NBA commissioner David Stern, was invited to step in. Approximately 10 days later, he played a pivotal part in brokering a deal, thanks to several phone conversations with the particulars and a marathon 15-hour bargaining session.

He is available to do it again with the NHL's own insane, tortuous and destructive lockout.

...

"There are a lot of similarities" between the NBA and NHL lockouts, Quinn said. "But a different dynamic of people."

The good news is Quinn's familiar with both, having known Stern for 40 years and NHL commissioner Gary Bettman for almost 30.

"We've always got along," Quinn said of Bettman.

The only criticism he delivers is that owners making "take-it-or-leave-it proposals ... doesn't work with professional athletes," so the opposite approach makes more sense.

"You look for a way to build some trust, make it so that people on each side understand what they are being told is something they can agree to build with ... What often happens is you get a lot of rhetoric, so both sides are pushing back. You say to them, 'Wait a second, there's got to be a way to talk things out and get something done in the interest of having a season.'"

Quinn declined to get into detail. But after we spoke, one source said that when things threatened to go wrong, he pointed out the importance of playing. Do you think the NHL and NHLPA could use that message?

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/opinion/2012/12/30-thoughts-nhl-players-could-turn-to-nba-lockout-fixer.html

 

[rdowdall]

Just on the Hainsey part.  If you were Jeremy Jacobs and Hainsey called you a stupid C*** several times in meetings in the last month you would be trying to sign him to a contract next season.  And this question is specific to Hainsey.  He really is just a utility player and probably won't change the outlook for your team.

If he would help the team? Sure. I don't think the rules should be different for Hainsey than they should be for a better player. If owners want to selectively punish marginal players for taking an active role in the union then all they'll end up doing is making sure the negotiating committee is full of nothing but all-stars which punishes all marginal players by effectively silencing their voice within their own union.

Think of it this way. Would you think it ok if because Jacobs was a jerk, the NHLPA decided that no player would ever sign with the Bruins again?

Yes, yes I would be okay with that.

 

[Bates]

So you changed the stance Nik.  I said I would understand why an owner who was in the heated arguement wouldn't sign Hainsey, not all owners.  I would suggest that in the same way Hainsey would choose a team not owned by Jacobs if he had a chance to choose.  If in fact it was Jacobs that Hainsey had the alleged rude exchange with.  For the record, from what I have read and heard, I would highly doubt Chipman would be someone who would treat a players that way.  I just finished reading Journeyman by Sean Pronger and he spoke very highly of how much Mark Chipman.  One story was that Pronger got cut in a game(fightmaybe) and while he was donwstairs getting stiched up Chipman came down to personally make sure he was alright.  Pronger said he had never seen something like that in all his years of hockey.

 

[maplesyrup]

Aaron Ward ‏@aaronward_nhl
CBA meetings between NHL and NHLPA that are to take place at undisclosed location WILL involve a mediator. #TSN

Good. Hopefully the gap is narrow enough that it'll work. - I think it is.

 

[Kin]

Yes, yes I would be okay with that.

Well, alright, but in the abstract.

 

[Corn Flake]

Aaron Ward ‏@aaronward_nhl
CBA meetings between NHL and NHLPA that are to take place at undisclosed location WILL involve a mediator. #TSN

Good. Hopefully the gap is narrow enough that it'll work. - I think it is.

I'm just going to assume nothing is going anywhere until I hear "we have a deal" from both sides. 

*chugs beer* *waits*

 

[maplesyrup]

I'm just going to assume nothing is going anywhere until I hear "we have a deal" from both sides. 

*chugs beer* *waits*

That's probably the most sane thing to do.