Kukla's Korner

Kukla's Korner Hockey

Bill Daly On The Proposed 50/50 Deal

TORONTO (October 18, 2012) -- Bill Daly, Deputy Commissioner of the National Hockey League, released the following statement regarding the third Union proposal:

 “The so called 50-50 deal, plus honoring current contracts proposed by the NHL Players’ Association earlier today is being misrepresented. It is not a 50-50 deal. It is, most likely a 56- to 57-percent deal in Year One and never gets to 50 percent during the proposed five-year term of the agreement. The proposal contemplates paying the Players approximately $650 million outside of the Players’ Share. In effect, the Union is proposing to change the accounting rules to be able to say ‘50-50,’ when in reality it is not. The Union told us that they had not yet ‘run the numbers.’ We did.”

Filed in: NHL Talk, NHLPA, | KK Hockey | Permalink
  Tags: bill+daly



‘50-50,’,  ‘run the numbers.’  ‘We did.” focus group words.

Bill forgot to mention They hid the players rollback to confuse fans and sway public opinion in the last offer on honoring contracts.

Posted by FlyersFan on 10/18/12 at 06:34 PM ET

henrymalredo's avatar

The NHL decrying accounting gimmicks that make a deal seem more “fair” then it actually is?  Pot, meet kettle.

Posted by henrymalredo from Lansing on 10/18/12 at 06:49 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

Hahaha Bill Daly complaining about tricky math is like Andrew Golota crying about nut-punches.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 10/18/12 at 07:03 PM ET


It is not a 50-50 deal

Sort of like how the NHL proposal is more like a 43-57 deal with the changes in HRR?


Posted by jwad on 10/19/12 at 06:10 AM ET


When is 50/50 not 50/50 ? When Daly says so!

Posted by hockey1919 from mid-atlantic on 10/19/12 at 09:33 AM ET

Nathan's avatar

Here’s a fun idea. Let’s have a six year CBA deal. The players’ share from year one to six would be:

56, 54, 52, 50, 50, 50

No major changes to the HRR definition from the recently expired deal. Players agree to the limited contract length and the 2 year entry-level deals that the most recent league proposal asked for. League increases revenue sharing burden on top earning teams and moderately opens the gap between the floor and ceiling to do their part for fixing their financial problems in exchange for the players doing their part by reducing their share of the pie. In return for the concessions of the top teams in increasing revenue sharing, the small teams allow for trading cap space. In return for the players’ concessions, the league goes with its proposal to have players on NHL salaries always count against the cap, to dissuade teams from burying underperforming NHL talent in the minors. Lastly, the players’ get a little giveback in the form of increased playoff bonuses. Shouldn’t make a big difference on the bottom line, but is a gesture of goodwill between the parties.

Probably not realistic for a whole host of details that none of us can be privy to. But goddamn it doesn’t seem that irrational.

Posted by Nathan from the scoresheet! on 10/19/12 at 09:42 AM ET


My proposal

duration 7 years, all previous contracts are honored.

Salary cap: 90 mil. - fixed for duration, includes all roster and non-roster
                        players(AHL, ECHL, etc.), actual salary is counted.

Salary floor: 1st year 40 mil.
                subsequent years ((HRR*0.5)/30 - 8 mil), includes only roster players
                there should be a mechanism that it can’t rise above 60 mil.

Escrow - no escrow unless HRR falls by more than 5% of the previous year, then the percentage by which it falls comes off every roster players salary

Entry level contracts: 1-3 years, min. 0,4 mil , max 1 mil, signing bonus max. 0.2 mil, no performance bonuses.

Arbitration: remains as it is, both player and team can elect arbitration for RFA’s

Free agency: 29 years old, or 9 years of nhl play

Revenue sharing: every team eligible, the money comes from all national tv contracts, so it is at least 200 mil., all teams keep their playoff revenue, their arena luxury box revenue etc.

I don’t think Bettman, some lower revenue teams and some fans will like big spread between cap and floor, big market teams might not like no national tv money. Players might fear collusion amongst owners.

Posted by murphy from Slovakia on 10/19/12 at 11:10 AM ET

Add a Comment

Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.

Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.

Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.


Notify me of follow-up comments?


Most Recent Blog Posts

About Kukla's Korner Hockey

Paul Kukla founded Kukla’s Korner in 2005 and the site has since become the must-read site on the ‘net for all the latest happenings around the NHL.

From breaking news to in-depth stories around the league, KK Hockey is updated with fresh stories all day long and will bring you the latest news as quickly as possible.

Email Paul anytime at pk@kuklaskorner.com


haberistanbul evden eve nakliyat affenspiele.net mimispiele.comgebze evden eve nakliyat solitaire oyna
turkce.yurtdisi-fx.com agario.surf agario paper.io