According to this articlthe agreement is not close to beingn done. NHL fans are real frustrated. I hope they can reach an agreement before the next season. Link
Why don't the owners just jointly come to an agreement that they won't offer long contracts to players? If there's an owner on some other team who's willing to give a player a 7-year contract, that will look very appealing to him. It isn't the players' responsibility to "give up" those contracts. It's the owners' responsibility not to offer them. What am I missing here?
First I think we are talking about the NBA not NHL, and second i think the negotiations are about 7-year guaranteed contract, the owners what guaranteed contract to be limited to 4-year, basically that means if a player signs a 7-year contact only the first 4 years would be guaranteed. Correct me if i am wrong
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting B-Baller:</div><div class="quote_post">First I think we are talking about the NBA not NHL, and second i think the negotiations are about 7-year guaranteed contract, the owners what guaranteed contract to be limited to 4-year, basically that means if a player signs a 7-year contact only the first 4 years would be guaranteed. Correct me if i am wrong</div> What is a "non-guaranteed" contract? That sounds like a contradiction to me. But anyways, owners should set their own terms of the contract. If they don't want players to have guaranteed 7-year contracts, then they should stop offering them. This is an issue that owners should work out. They can jointly agree not to offer guaranteed 7-year contracts. And players can either accept the contract offers they get, or not play. So how is this a problem?
Well a Non-Guaranteed contract means that after 4 years NBA owners would be able to void a players contract, and would not count against the salary cap if the player was released after 4 years. Much like the NFL does, the main difference is that in that NFL contracts have no guaranteed years the only guaranteed money NFL player get is the Signing Bonus. As for owners agreeing to not give 7 year deals between them. I am not employment expert but such a deal would probably constitute "Conspiring to violate Equal employment rights" it would basically be the same thing as corporate America making a deal to not employ people for more that 5 years, or not giving them full-time hours so the don't have to give people benefits, Some companies do that (like walmart) but a cross company arangement would be a major violation of Employment Law. Like i said i could be totally of base with that but it's how i understand it works because i said the same think a few years ago when the NFL worked out its new deal with the NFL P.A.
