Final CBA released

[MissTeeks]

In case anyone wanted a little bit of light summer reading!

http://www.nhlpa.com/inside-nhlpa/co...ning-agreement

[Northendzone]

surprising, i spotted fore spelling errors

[opendoor]

Looks like they cleaned up the language from the O'Reilly fiasco to more clearly spell out that he indeed would've needed to go through waivers:

13.23

In the event a professional or former professional Player plays in a league outside North America after the start of the NHL Regular Season, other than on Loan from his Club, he may thereafter play in the NHL during that Playing Season (including Playoffs) only if he has first either cleared or been obtained via Waivers. For the balance of the Playing Season, any such Player who has been obtained via Waivers may be Traded or Loaned only after again clearing Waivers or through Waiver claim. This section shall not apply to a Player on the Reserve List or Restricted Free Agent List of an NHL Club with whom the Player is signing an NHL SPC or is party to an existing SPC with such NHL Club.

So it's not just "any" Reserve List or RFA List that exempts the player, they have to be on the list of the team signing the player to the SPC.

[Rubicant]

Originally Posted by opendoor

Looks like they cleaned up the language from the O'Reilly fiasco to more clearly spell out that he indeed would've needed to go through waivers:

So it's not just "any" Reserve List or RFA List that exempts the player, they have to be on the list of the team signing the player to the SPC.

That's the first thing I looked for too.

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by MissTeeks

In case anyone wanted a little bit of light summer reading!

http://www.nhlpa.com/inside-nhlpa/co...ning-agreement

The Challenge - Through The Next Ten Years, How Would You Defeat This CBA As An Armchair GM or Armchair Agent?

Cowperson

[Joborule]

Still dumb from an owners perspective to have the CBA end right when the season is about to start. They should've never put themselves in that position and fixed it in previous negotiations.

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by Joborule

Still dumb from an owners perspective to have the CBA end right when the season is about to start. They should've never put themselves in that position and fixed it in previous negotiations.

Ending on July 1, as one random example, makes no difference as the NHLPA will simply delay until owners call a lockout.

Sept 15 is fine. Doesn't matter. You'll get there and then January again anyway.

Its the way it will roll again.

Players will never in a million years be allowed to be in a position to strike towards the end of a season.

Any work stoppage across all major sports leagues will always, for the next half century, be an owner lockout. They work well for owners and have yet to leave any serious damage to any sports league anywhere for the last quarter-century or longer.

Player strikes, always at the end of a season and always threatening a post-season, are damaging. But they'll never happen again in any pro sports league.

The playbook is well-established.

Sept 15 or July 1? It doesn't matter.

My two cents.

Cowperson

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

Ending on July 1, as one random example, makes no difference as the NHLPA will simply delay until owners call a lockout.

Sept 15 is fine. Doesn't matter. You'll get there and then January again anyway.

Its the way it will roll again.

Ending the night before free agency would be best for the league as teams wouldn't then promise tons of money that could turn right around and hamstring them via any changes the next CBA brings along. It would also cost players signing bonuses that could cushion them during a lockout. Of course, the NHLPA would fight hard to prevent an earlier expiration date for the very same reasons.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by opendoor

Looks like they cleaned up the language from the O'Reilly fiasco to more clearly spell out that he indeed would've needed to go through waivers:

So it's not just "any" Reserve List or RFA List that exempts the player, they have to be on the list of the team signing the player to the SPC.

I am amazed that the players association allowed their RFA's to lose power. Essentially an RFA now has to sit out and not play hockey if they want to keep their ability to sign an offer sheet. They can't apply more leverage by going to Europe or the KHL.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by GGG

I am amazed that the players association allowed their RFA's to lose power. Essentially an RFA now has to sit out and not play hockey if they want to keep their ability to sign an offer sheet. They can't apply more leverage by going to Europe or the KHL.

RFAs actually gained rights with this new rule. Under the old CBA they'd have to go through waivers regardless of who signed them. The new CBA creates an exemption if that player signs with with team that holds his rights.

[TurnedTheCorner]

Originally Posted by opendoor

RFAs actually gained rights with this new rule. Under the old CBA they'd have to go through waivers regardless of who signed them. The new CBA creates an exemption if that player signs with with team that holds his rights.

That kind of further restricts the ability of a restricted free agent to move.

[Resolute 14]

That's kind of the point of restricted free agency.

[sureLoss]

Summary of some of the changes:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...ticle12424074/

Derek Boogard rule:

This one could be known as the Boogaard rule: “Prescription Drugs. Each Club shall identify one (1) individual who is responsible for monitoring on an ongoing basis, or auditing on a regular basis, prescription drugs that have been given to each Player on the Club, with a particular emphasis on monitoring controlled substances and sleeping pills, if any, that have been prescribed.”

Interesting for upcoming relocations:

On relocation: “Any player forced to move as a result of being claimed in an expansion draft, or as a result of a team relocation, shall be paid $6,000.” Potentially some big money for members of the Phoenix Coyotes.

- Speaking of relocation, the NHL included language to state that it maintained sole control over those types of decisions: “Each Club, and, where appropriate, the League… shall in addition to its other inherent and legal rights to manage its business, including the direction and control of its team, have the right at any time and from time to time to determine when, where, how and under what circumstances it wishes to operate, suspend, discontinue, sell or move and to determine the manner and the rules by which its team shall play hockey.”

Some revenue sharing details:

Here’s one specific item on revenue sharing: “For each Playoff Game that a Club hosts in its home arena during a League Year, such Club shall contribute the dollar value equivalent of thirty-five (35) per cent of the Playoff Gate Receipts” to the pool of money
- And one more that affects teams like the New York Islanders and New Jersey Devils: “Any Recipient Club that is in a Designated Market Area with 3 million or more households shall only be eligible to receive fifty (50) per cent of a ‘full share’ ”

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by TurnedTheCorner

That kind of further restricts the ability of a restricted free agent to move.

Not really. If an RFA wants to be open to offer sheets after the start of the regular season, he simply needs to not play in Europe which is what unsigned RFAs had to do for the entirety of the last CBA (and maybe even since the 1995 one, I don't have that one on hand) if they wanted to avoid being waiver eligible for that season.

That's why I found the confusion around the issue (particularly from O'Reilly's camp and the Avs) kind of odd. Even if they didn't know about the new rule, you'd think they'd have understood the existing rule that any RFA that plays in Europe after the start of the NHL regular season needs to clear waivers after being signed.