Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction
The notion that the CBA allows things like this happen, therefore it's fine, isn't a strong argument IMO. The CBA constantly has to be revised to reflect the current realities and issues that harm competitiveness and franchise stability. It's why the salary cap was brought in for example. I recall a time when people said there would never be a salary cap, therefore there was no point in even talking about it. Eventually it got to a point that the NHL couldn't ignore it anymore. At one time, players and teams could renegotiate contracts, which led to things like Nieuwendyk and Yashin refusing to play unless the teams renegotiated a current and valid contract. It was within their CBA rights to do that, but that didn't mean that it wasn't harmful.
I don't know if American college draft picks refusing to play in Canada is at the point that it needs to be addressed, but I think it is trending that way and will eventually happen.
|
The CBA isn’t really “constantly revised.” It has a set duration and is re-negotiated when it expires or when the two parties want to extend the duration.
And I actually think “it’s fine because the CBA allows it” is a very strong argument, because that’s the legal framework that defines what is and isn’t allowed. The same things that are advantageous to players at the detriment to teams can also be advantageous to teams at the detriment to player, but as fans we only take issue with one of the two.
Any revision to the article that defines rules around ownership rights of drafted players that removes or restricts the freedom of those players is going to cost the owners something in return. Or the solution will likely only cost the owners something, and leave the player freedom intact.
A couple of proposals I’ve read that make sense are changing the compensation element so that signing teams have to supply an equivalent draft pick to the drafting team (i.e. you sign a 2nd round college player, you give the team that drafted him your 2nd round pick in the next draft) or give teams the ability to sign the players they draft to higher ELCs than the players they don’t. Both scenarios leave the player’s freedom intact while costing the teams, but both are more likely.
What will never happen is extending the team’s ownership rights over the player without compensation. Nobody, from owners to players, want to be in a situation where a player finishes college and the team either doesn’t want to or can’t sign him, and then he has nowhere to play until he waits for a trade or the team’s rights to expire.