NHL Canadian Corner – August 16, 2012.

Chris Phillips and Shawn Horcoff with their views on the CBA negotiaitons, Canadiens will give Alex Galchenyuk a chance to make their roster, and a memorial is held for the late Rick Rypien.

OTTAWA SUN: Senators defenseman Chris Phillips expressed optimism over the NHLPA’s proposal moving CBA negotiations forward. His remarks came prior to NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman’s comments claiming the two sides remained far apart.

Horcoff considered league’s initial proposal an unfair deal.

EDMONTON SUN: Oilers forward Shawn Horcoff said some players weren’t impressed by the league’s initial proposal (which Horcoff claimed wasn’t a fair deal) and talk of making a lowball offer,  but they calmed down and put their focus into crafting the PA’s counter-proposal.

SPECTOR’S NOTE: The players patience and resolve will continue to be tested by the league, as the team owners intend to continue squeezing them for as much as they can get.

MONTREAL GAZETTE: Canadiens GM Marc Bergevin believes a knee injury which cost Canadiens prospect Alexander Galchenyuk most of last season could hurt his chances to crack the Habs lineup this season, but Bergevin intends to give him a chance.

SPECTOR’S NOTE: A lockout could actually work in Galchenyuk’s favor, as he’ll be able to continue playing Junior hockey until such time as the league returns to action, providing him with a better opportunity to play his way onto the Habs roster in training camp.

VANCOUVER PROVINCE: Canucks fans held a memorial yesterday on the anniversary of the death of former Canucks forward Rick Rypien.


  1. LOL unbiased are we Lyle????

    Well the one thing you cannot say is that Fehr is stupid. This time around he has the players being nice, everyone repeating the mantra “we just want to play”, which instantly paints the ownership as the bad guy since they have bluntly said there will be a lockout if no agreement signed by Sept 15. Read some of the players tweets, the republicans couldn’t get their campaign as organized as this. And all along Fehr has the players subtly stalling negotiations, taking over a month to respond to the owner’s proposal, which was exactly what everyone knew it would be. Now, with the player’s proposal, we truly see Fehr’s genius. First the proposal does not respond to a single issue that the ownership brought up, thereby not locking the players into any single bargaining position. Secondly, the proposal itself, is extremely well worded in the way it hides the fact the players would not give a penny (in fact the salary cap would rise 2%, 4% and 6% for those three locked in years), and then ingeniously if the league revenue does not rise over those 3 years then they revert to right where the owners don’t want to be…..but making it sound like they are giving up revenue (that $430 mill is hypothetical market inflation). And the last and most brilliant of all the things Fehr has done with this proposal, is to try put a crack between big market and small market owners. His entire proposal amount to larger market teams going back to the 80’s where they can “buy” and “trade” cap space allowing them to spend to ridiculous amounts thereby taking smaller markets out of the running. And we all saw how well that worked in the 80’s and 90’s. Fehr wants to repeat his success of the MLB, but isn’t willing to acknowledge that the biggest difference between the two……..market revenue, mostly in TV revenue, isn’t even close. So teams like the Yankees can afford to put $100 million into revenue sharing. Do you think even the Leafs could afford that? I once again hope the owners and Bettman, stick to their guns, and give Bettman a break people, do you really think 30 owners are letting him make the decisions? He’s a mouthpiece and facilitator, if you have a problem, blame the owners.

    • So, you believe the owners should “stick to its guns”? Well, we’ve already seen that their current CBA – which lacked significant revenue-sharing and imposed a triple-tier cap system upon the players, ensuring they never get more than 57% of revenue in any season – didn’t resolve their problems. The rich got richer, and the struggling markets continued to struggle.

      Please explain, therefore, how slashing the players share of revenue again, this time down to 43-46 percent of HRR, combined with another significant salary rollback, without a significant improvement in revenue sharing, improves things, Old Soldier? How will the results be any different? If the intent is to truly make all 30 NHL teams profitable, how does this work?

      Sure, you’ll likely call for relocation or contraction of franchises which can’t work in their current markets, yet that goes against everything the league has been doing for years, trying to keep those franchises in their respective markets.

      Slashing the players share didn’t work under this CBA, and won’t work under the new one, not without an improved system of revenue sharing.

  2. Well said Old Soldier

  3. Well said Lyle