Let’s be clear about this. Any negotiated settlement on a NHL collective bargaining agreement will be measured by the scope of player givebacks — and player givebacks, alone.
There is not now, and never has been, a quid pro quo approach from the owners’ side throughout this lockout, now in its third month. One giveback from the players begets another from the players. Oh, and that second giveback? It begets a third, and a fourth.
If this is a trade, then it’s the NHL as Boston getting Rick Middleton with the NHL Players’ Association as the Rangers getting Ken Hodge.
But this also is the reality the players face following last night’s meeting with the league, in which the NHL made it clear nothing from their side will be on the table unless and until the NHLPA presents a proposal featuring a straight percentage split of hockey related revenue rather than a guarantee of hard dollars that translates into percentages based on growth projections.
The NHLPA leadership caucused with 18 players — including Rangers Brad Richards, Ryan Callahan, Marc Staal, Marian Gaborik and Jeff Halpern — before and after last night’s session with the league on Sixth Avenue. It is believed the union is contemplating a plan under which it would offer a “soft landing” decline to the NHL’s Magic 50-50 in Year 3 or 4 of the new CBA.
Based on projections of annual 5-percent growth, the players calculated their take under the last union proposal would have hit 50-50 by the fourth year of a new agreement. The league, however, has taken the stance that growth projections are not based in reality, given the unknown fallout of the lockout.
Sources within the union have told The Post the NHLPA does anticipate contracts would be pro-rated for a truncated 2012-13, though the players at this time do not seem willing to bear equal responsibility for damage caused by the lockout that was unilaterally initiated by the league on Sept. 16.
There is the “make-whole” provision and the topic of transition with which to deal, but negotiations on these matters are dependent upon the NHLPA’s willingness to go to 50-50. That, in turn, would be dependent upon the league yielding on its demands regarding widespread contract system restrictions that are anathema to the players.
If a hard-dollars guarantee is a non-starter for the league, so is the phalanx of restrictions — including most notably a five-year contract term limit, minimal variance in annual salary and delayed eligibility for free agency and arbitration — a non-starter for the NHLPA.
It is believed the players would be willing to give on dramatically front-loaded contracts, but not much more than that. For at some point, and even fast approaching the holiday season, the proverb “ ’Tis better to give than receive” becomes a fantasy.
And if the league draws a hard line on the package of restrictions that would have significant material impact on the bargaining power of every player in the league for the first eight years of their respective careers, then it’s more likely than not the NHL will be in court before it is back on the ice.
The league is going to get the equivalent of Middleton for Hodge. It’s beyond the bounds of greed to insist on Ron Greschner, too.