Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Sporting Events Discussion centered around sporting events.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-07-2012, 12:46 PM   #7276
Ketter
grinder
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 403
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nootka View Post
from fehr's email to the players last night:



anyone have thoughts on the bolded? i don't know much about the nba cba or how it has affected salaries. i wasn't under the impression that the middle class was squeezed in the nba when i hear about mediocrities like trevor ariza making 6.8 million.

if there's still going to be a restriction on the max salary any one player can make (has anyone heard if this is included in the current negotiations?), then how would limiting contract term polarize salaries? seems like this could be a ploy by fehr to galvanize support from the rank and file who are probably closest to rebelling against him.
My laymans opinion on the bolded:

Devastating the middle class ... this is total BS, I have no idea WTF he is talking about. Well, actually I do know what he is saying but I don't agree.

The second part (letting clubs sign their own players to longer deals) impacting the value of becoming a free agent, yeah that makes some sense.

Personally, I think some maximum contract length across the board makes sense and is reasonable. The owners are dumb ofc for signing some of deals they have signed but I can understand these turkeys wanting to have safeguards in place to protect them from their own stupidity.
Ketter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 12:48 PM   #7277
Nootka
Pooh-Bah
 
Nootka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Santa Monica
Posts: 5,655
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Triumph36 View Post

Nootka: That's semantics, though. I understand your point, but I don't consider it a legitimate concession - it's a concession wrapped in a non-concession. The players are going to agree to it, but let's call a spade a spade.
meh, maybe it is. i don't think so, but if everyone's just arguing over the meaning of "concession" then so be it. i just know that when i negotiate a deal, i'm making what i would call a concession when i make a move off of my previous offer.
Nootka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 12:52 PM   #7278
jjshabado
Carpal Tunnel
 
jjshabado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 22,729
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Triumph36 View Post
there almost certainly will be but no one is close to the maximum salary right now in the NHL. the biggest cap hit is alex ovechkin at 9.5, but the maximum salary allowable under the cap as is is 14.05M. that's an enormous disparity - it's nearly 50% higher than the highest cap hit.
If they end up with a max 5 year contract length though I think this becomes more relevant. If you can't offer ridiculous lengths than you're going to increase salary.
jjshabado is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 12:54 PM   #7279
Ketter
grinder
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 403
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Having said that, re. free agency, giving clubs an advantage in signing their own players might actually be a good thing.

Look at the NBA - there are only a few top teams where players want to go. It would suck if the NHL ended up like that, everyone wants to play for the Rangers or WE. It just sucks so bad for fans in small markets where they KNOW that their top stars will inevitably leave for a bigger market team.

Am I wrong to think thatever the salary cap is, the owners will end up paying as much as they can under the cap? So if that is the case, the rest of the rules are just details that will have no impact on salaries overall? If that's the case, what's the harm in giving teams a bit of an edge when trying to resign their own players?
Ketter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 12:54 PM   #7280
Hold'em 07
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Hold'em 07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 18,312
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

I didn't know ..m/....i..../c'..r.!.....o...../b..;"..o/.!./b had so many gimmick accounts
Hold'em 07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 01:04 PM   #7281
Nootka
Pooh-Bah
 
Nootka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Santa Monica
Posts: 5,655
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Triumph36 View Post
there almost certainly will be but no one is close to the maximum salary right now in the NHL. the biggest cap hit is alex ovechkin at 9.5, but the maximum salary allowable under the cap as is is 14.05M. that's an enormous disparity - it's nearly 50% higher than the highest cap hit.
using some quick math, the max under a 50/50 split would be 11.7 for 2012-13 if the same 20% max salary figure is used. i guess fehr is implying that short term contracts for superstars will push toward the max, squeezing out everyone else. but unless the 20% is increased, that wouldn't happen.

Last edited by Nootka; 12-07-2012 at 01:06 PM. Reason: damn you, hold em
Nootka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 01:43 PM   #7282
Geddy Lee
Good Ol' Canadian Boy
 
Geddy Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Obi-Sean, you're our only hope
Posts: 25,361
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nootka View Post
from fehr's email to the players last night:

anyone have thoughts on the bolded? i don't know much about the nba cba or how it has affected salaries. i wasn't under the impression that the middle class was squeezed in the nba when i hear about mediocrities like trevor ariza making 6.8 million.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Triumph36 View Post
maybe we can get someone from the NBA thread in here, but i'm of the opposite opinion than Fehr - I think the NBA middle class is overvalued because basketball talent is distributed far more unevenly than talent in MLB or the NHL - salaries to top players are limited, so more trickles down to the hoi polloi. I think he is dead wrong, but I think it has to be rhetorical because there's no way NHL players inherently understand how the NBA works.
And surely the roster size and dynamics of the actual sport need to be taken in consideration, right?

Kinda preoccupied at the moment but that was the first thing that popped into my mind - the intrinsic value of a Manny Malhotra-esque periphery player to his team's success has to be exponentially greater than a Brian Scalabrine...so that would be reflected in wage distribution I think...right?

Again, please don't crucify me, just trying to verbalize the first stuff that came into my head.
Geddy Lee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 01:52 PM   #7283
jjshabado
Carpal Tunnel
 
jjshabado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 22,729
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nootka View Post
using some quick math, the max under a 50/50 split would be 11.7 for 2012-13 if the same 20% max salary figure is used. i guess fehr is implying that short term contracts for superstars will push toward the max, squeezing out everyone else. but unless the 20% is increased, that wouldn't happen.
I agree with this. I think its definitely true that the top players are going to be getting significantly higher per-year salaries with a 5-year contract length. But to assume that its going to be so much more to noticeably decrease other salaries seems like a stretch.
jjshabado is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 02:35 PM   #7284
JaredL
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
JaredL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 22,523
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geddy Lee View Post
And surely the roster size and dynamics of the actual sport need to be taken in consideration, right?

Kinda preoccupied at the moment but that was the first thing that popped into my mind - the intrinsic value of a Manny Malhotra-esque periphery player to his team's success has to be exponentially greater than a Brian Scalabrine...so that would be reflected in wage distribution I think...right?

Again, please don't crucify me, just trying to verbalize the first stuff that came into my head.
There's also just value. I have no clue on the numbers, maybe grind can jump in on the NBA side, but wins generated by labron vs even prime Ovechkin compared to average player in the league is massive. Just look at playing time alone; top NBA players probably play 90+% of all the time when healthy while the best NHL forwards play something like 35%. The NBA should naturally be a league with higher variance in salary.

As Triumph says, this isn't really the case because basically all the stars hit their max salary and the guys that are role players are overpaid compared to what they might get in a free market, at least compared to the money the top guys are getting.
JaredL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 02:37 PM   #7285
Triumph36
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Triumph36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Osi Ukin'-yora
Posts: 40,914
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geddy Lee View Post
And surely the roster size and dynamics of the actual sport need to be taken in consideration, right?

Kinda preoccupied at the moment but that was the first thing that popped into my mind - the intrinsic value of a Manny Malhotra-esque periphery player to his team's success has to be exponentially greater than a Brian Scalabrine...so that would be reflected in wage distribution I think...right?

Again, please don't crucify me, just trying to verbalize the first stuff that came into my head.
Well, the other argument would be thus - seeing as how there's a giant shortage of NBA talent and the gaps in talent are so wide, above-average players might get overcompensated leaving less money for below-average guys. But yes - just think of it in terms of playing time. As an example, let's take the Knicks, they have 4 players over 30 minutes a game (so > 62.5% of the game), 3 above 20 (so > 41.7%), 3 above 10 (so > 20.8%), and then 3 with less than that. NHL players tend to be around 45% maximum down to around 20% minutes for anyone playing above the 4th line. Then there's a player's effect on the game, where NBA players also have an edge. Fehr probably doesn't think that way, he sees the NBA and NHL as having close-ish to the same revenues but the top players make nearly double of what the top NHLers make and he says 'the middle class is undercompensated'. Phooey, I say.
Triumph36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 03:03 PM   #7286
Geddy Lee
Good Ol' Canadian Boy
 
Geddy Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Obi-Sean, you're our only hope
Posts: 25,361
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Personally, I was kinda hoping the pandering to the middle class would end after the American election.

I want my Dennis Wideman back. What the **** guys...
Geddy Lee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 03:12 PM   #7287
aislephive
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
aislephive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Waiting for you to pull me back in
Posts: 19,317
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

All the posturing on both sides would make me laugh if it wasn't leading to the third work stoppage in the last 15 years of my favorite sport. Bettman says all of the concessions they made, in particular make whole, are now off the table. LOL, yeah right. Didn't he make similar comments prior to this? It's completely bizzare to me. Does he really believe that those kind of amateur negotiation / PR tactics are going to get Fehr to budge an inch?

I've tried not to take sides to this point but the rhetoric from Bettman and the owners makes me want to gouge my eyes out every time I see them in front of a podium. You don't shut down talks and throw a tempter tantrum every time you don't get your way. It's a negotiation. The premise presented by Bettman in itself was probably completely insulting to the players association. "Here, we're willing to partially concede on a few important issues but only if you give us a bunch of things exactly how we want them with no exceptions."

I still think the season will be played if Fehr's description of the negotiations are to be believed. Despite the way things unraveled they both found a lot of middle ground on various issues, which should make future negotiation sessions more productive since they already have the framework of a deal in place.
aislephive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 03:22 PM   #7288
sylar
Ivan Drago's homeslice
 
sylar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Znaroks fan club
Posts: 20,311
cwise, who is A Huskins?

Nootka, whatever the new cba will be, it's a unilateral move in favor of the business on every single major point from the last agreement. At a time when the product has generated massive growth. if the owners want something in the spirit of cost-certainty, it is entirely within reason to ask for a rollback here in exchange of something else. Yet they haven't.

why is there an expectation by the owners that the salary cap and linkage are here to stay? Besides decertification talk, the union hasn't moved in the players direction at all. Although you could say it moved in the players direction during the old CBA, because percentages moved every year. But still, the owners could very easily accomplish rollback of the percentage AND guarantee every signed contract, by simply raising or removing the salary cap, but that kind of proposal would be a complete non-starter for Bettman.
sylar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 03:33 PM   #7289
Bryant Reeves
Pooh-Bah
 
Bryant Reeves's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,139
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geddy Lee View Post
And surely the roster size and dynamics of the actual sport need to be taken in consideration, right?

Kinda preoccupied at the moment but that was the first thing that popped into my mind - the intrinsic value of a Manny Malhotra-esque periphery player to his team's success has to be exponentially greater than a Brian Scalabrine...so that would be reflected in wage distribution I think...right?

Again, please don't crucify me, just trying to verbalize the first stuff that came into my head.
this is true imo

in the NHL you basically NEED at least 10F/5D/2G to be +contributors if your team is gonna be any good (and prob more in reality due to injuries, 7-8 D is almost a must today), it's much more of a team game than the NBA, which is prob the best example of a star driven league. NBA teams can be very successful with a good 7-9 man rotation, and much depends on how good your top 2-3 guys are.

the NBA system probably actually depresses the salary of the top guys. like Lebron James is making $17.6m this year, but his true value, and what he could actually get on the open market is probably twice that, at least. instead he's making basically the exact same amount of money as Dwyane Wade & Chris Bosh on his team.

and the middle class seem fine, the Heat have 6 other players making $3-4m, and one at $5.8m. that seems about fair for players who are neither massive contributors, or any kind of draws in any way for fans. but at the same time if the Heat are going to win another title, you need good play from those guys, so it seems about right overall. you could argue that a guy like Ray Allen got squeezed there and be right, but afaik he intentionally took less to go to Miami, and could have gotten more elsewhere.

basically i think Fehr is prob fear-mongering to the guys in the middle (and the guys at the bottom who want to get to the middle one day) with this, bc the league is trying to win these guys over.
Bryant Reeves is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 03:33 PM   #7290
aislephive
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
aislephive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Waiting for you to pull me back in
Posts: 19,317
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sylar View Post
cwise, who is A Huskins?

Nootka, whatever the new cba will be, it's a unilateral move in favor of the business on every single major point from the last agreement. At a time when the product has generated massive growth. if the owners want something in the spirit of cost-certainty, it is entirely within reason to ask for a rollback here in exchange of something else. Yet they haven't.

why is there an expectation by the owners that the salary cap and linkage are here to stay? Besides decertification talk, the union hasn't moved in the players direction at all. Although you could say it moved in the players direction during the old CBA, because percentages moved every year. But still, the owners could very easily accomplish rollback of the percentage AND guarantee every signed contract, by simply raising or removing the salary cap, but that kind of proposal would be a complete non-starter for Bettman.
This is an excellent point. Bettman and co. basically started the negotiations by forcing the players to make huge concessions in all sorts of areas without conceding anything on their behalf. I'm not a huge follower of labor negotiations in sports but that seems very strange to me, especially in a sport that is coming off 5 years of record revenues (which Bettman loves to bring up, shocking he hasn't mentioned it lately).
aislephive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 03:36 PM   #7291
Bryant Reeves
Pooh-Bah
 
Bryant Reeves's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,139
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sylar View Post
cwise, who is A Huskins?

Nootka, whatever the new cba will be, it's a unilateral move in favor of the business on every single major point from the last agreement...
doesn't matter, the old agreement is irrelevant now

concessions from the 1st offer on the new agreement are what matters

so if Gary came in and demanded 100% of revenue, but it now offering a 50/50 split, over a 10-year deal...

ZOMG HE'S MADE CONCESSIONS TO THE TUNE OF $16.5 BILLION, FU GREEDY PLAYERS!!!
Bryant Reeves is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 03:46 PM   #7292
jjshabado
Carpal Tunnel
 
jjshabado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 22,729
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by aislephive View Post
I've tried not to take sides to this point but the rhetoric from Bettman and the owners makes me want to gouge my eyes out every time I see them in front of a podium.
This. Take just the make whole money and the contract length argument. League moves half-way towards NHLPA on make whole - claims thats a massive conession.

NHLPA moves approximately half way to the NHL on contract lengths (10 to 8, no variability to max 25% variability) and the NHL just bitches that they didn't get the 5 years they wanted.
jjshabado is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 03:49 PM   #7293
Ketter
grinder
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 403
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Another cool quote from Bettman was

"the 50-50 split that we wanted all along".

LOL

Or howbout

"the magnificence of hockey" that used to be there but isn't any more because ... because ... because ... oh yeah, because the owners haven't gotten absolutely everything they want ... yet. What a bunch of crap, that entire presser was about most ridiculous bunch of rhetoric I have ever heard.
Ketter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 04:05 PM   #7294
Nootka
Pooh-Bah
 
Nootka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Santa Monica
Posts: 5,655
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ketter View Post
Another cool quote from Bettman was

"the 50-50 split that we wanted all along".

LOL

wtf is so lol about this? it's obviously true, and i said so as soon as the 43% offer was made. the fact that fans and certain members of the press keep calling the opening offer insulting to the players just shows they have no idea how negotiations work.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryant Reeves View Post
doesn't matter, the old agreement is irrelevant now

concessions from the 1st offer on the new agreement are what matters

so if Gary came in and demanded 100% of revenue, but it now offering a 50/50 split, over a 10-year deal...

ZOMG HE'S MADE CONCESSIONS TO THE TUNE OF $16.5 BILLION, FU GREEDY PLAYERS!!!
i know you're kidding, but yes, that's correct. except for the fu players part.

sylar and others: i obviously understand and agree that the owners' offers have been worse for the players than the last cba on every issue. i just think it's irrelevant.
Nootka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 04:09 PM   #7295
aislephive
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
aislephive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Waiting for you to pull me back in
Posts: 19,317
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nootka View Post
sylar and others: i obviously understand and agree that the owners' offers have been worse for the players than the last cba on every issue. i just think it's irrelevant.
Why do you think it's irrelevant exactly? Should the upper hand in negotiations go to the side which sent the first joke of a CBA proposal?
aislephive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 04:19 PM   #7296
Ketter
grinder
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 403
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nootka View Post
wtf is so lol about this? it's obviously true, and i said so as soon as the 43% offer was made. the fact that fans and certain members of the press keep calling the opening offer insulting to the players just shows they have no idea how negotiations work.




i know you're kidding, but yes, that's correct. except for the fu players part.

sylar and others: i obviously understand and agree that the owners' offers have been worse for the players than the last cba on every issue. i just think it's irrelevant.

Um, that IS the LOL part. Because they offered 43%, Bettman now saying they wanted 50-50 all along is LOL. What's hard to understand about that? It's almost like he thinks nobody remembers. The fact that this was an initial offer and "this is how negotiations work" doesn't change that.

As to the second part, irrelevant in what regard - what is the point you are trying to make with that comment?
Ketter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 04:20 PM   #7297
sylar
Ivan Drago's homeslice
 
sylar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Znaroks fan club
Posts: 20,311
Nootka,

Yes, it's irrelevant, but the obvious economic argument is "why change anything if it worked through the last 7 years". Yeah, there are clubs that are losing money, but surely it's not because the players did anything wrong.

Also, its just hypocritical to claim Fehr is doing a disservice to the players when I don't think he has shown any teeth. Publicly he hasn't advocated things like de-linkage or removing the salary cap, which should be irrelevant right now, but somehow is the status quo.
sylar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 04:24 PM   #7298
Nootka
Pooh-Bah
 
Nootka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Santa Monica
Posts: 5,655
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

Quote:
Originally Posted by aislephive View Post
Why do you think it's irrelevant exactly? Should the upper hand in negotiations go to the side which sent the first joke of a CBA proposal?
it just keeps coming back to my view that there is no such thing as "fairness" in any of this. the side with the most leverage will get the better deal from their perspective. i couldn't care less about the ultimate resolution of the revenue split or make-whole issues. the only things that matter to me are getting the deal done so i can watch some hockey and how the new terms will affect my team.
Nootka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 04:32 PM   #7299
Bryant Reeves
Pooh-Bah
 
Bryant Reeves's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,139
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

who's talking about fairness? most of us are just saying that we're not surprised a deal hasn't been reached if this is the attitude of the owners, if they're disingenuously treating fake concessions as concessions (ok maybe make whole is a real one, but that only became necessary bc some teams boxed themselves into a corner by getting capped out when they knew they weren't stopping until the cap came down big time). it's obv stupid and insulting. if the owners were serious about getting something done, it could have been done a long time ago, and a lot more easily.

and the fact that they're also gunning for a 10-year deal means this is gonna grind out to the last minute.
Bryant Reeves is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 04:32 PM   #7300
Nootka
Pooh-Bah
 
Nootka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Santa Monica
Posts: 5,655
Re: Bettman Lockout III Thread (aka NHL Offseason: Now & Forever)

i've already tarded up the thread enough so this will be my last post on this stuff for a while.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ketter View Post
Um, that IS the LOL part. Because they offered 43%, Bettman now saying they wanted 50-50 all along is LOL. What's hard to understand about that? It's almost like he thinks nobody remembers. The fact that this was an initial offer and "this is how negotiations work" doesn't change that.
43 was a clear signal that they wanted 50 based on the status quo of 57. i said so at the time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sylar View Post
Nootka,

Yes, it's irrelevant, but the obvious economic argument is "why change anything if it worked through the last 7 years". Yeah, there are clubs that are losing money, but surely it's not because the players did anything wrong.

Also, its just hypocritical to claim Fehr is doing a disservice to the players when I don't think he has shown any teeth. Publicly he hasn't advocated things like de-linkage or removing the salary cap, which should be irrelevant right now, but somehow is the status quo.
i agree that's a problem that doesn't seem to be getting addressed. i thought the players initially proposed some kind of increased revenue sharing between clubs, but haven't heard anything about that since.

i'm not sure what you're getting at with your second point. afaict fehr is doing a good job representing his side to the best of his limited power. the only leverage the players have is in winning the p.r. war of being the good guys who want to play. he's been pretty effective in that, exhibit 1 being the sunny press conference he gave last night that he knew would force bettman/daly into immediately looking like the villains when they disclaimed it.
Nootka is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive