Union Says NHL Wrong About Proposal’s Effect

The gulf between the NHL and the players’ association widened Thursday, when the union contended the NHL had “mixed up some statistics in a blender” in spurning its Dec. 9 proposal to end the owners’ lockout.

The NHL rejected a union plan structured around a 24% salary rollback and luxury tax, saying savings would evaporate after a few years.

The union Tuesday rejected a league counteroffer that featured a graduated salary rollback and linked payrolls to 54% of revenue.

Ted Saskin, the union’s senior director, said the NHL’s calculations were “illusory” in projecting salaries would rise 15% a year, as happened over the last decade, but that revenue would increase only 3% annually. Revenue rose an average of 9.4% a year over the last decade.

Using the NHL’s data from the last decade and incorporating the 24% rollback, Saskin said the union plan would produce a profit of $275.5 million in 2006-07, not the $568.5-million loss projected by the NHL. “In their zeal to misrepresent our offer, they used distorted assumptions,” he said.

Bill Daly, the NHL’s chief legal officer, said the league stood behind its 3% projection, “particularly for a business that will be coming out of an extended shutdown.” Other factors were the impracticality of raising ticket prices, minimal national TV revenue, and the fact most clubs have maximized revenue streams by moving to new arenas.

No new talks are scheduled to end the 94-day-old dispute.