Players fear for league’s future

TORONTO – National Hockey League veterans Chris Pronger and Jim McKenzie think this lockout is far worse than the one that wiped out half a season 10 years ago.

They don’t think they’ll be playing again until 2006.

“I think you’re looking at, at the very earliest, January ‘06 for the start of a season,” said McKenzie, a forward with the Nashville Predators.

Pronger is just as pessimistic.

“I think Jimmy hit it on the head. Probably December of ‘05 and going into January ‘06 we’re going to be in the same position we are in now, trying to come to a resolution,” Pronger said Wednesday.

On Tuesday, the season moved a step closer to being lost when the league rejected the players’ association proposal and made a counteroffer that was turned down by the union.

No new meetings have been scheduled, making it quite possible the NHL will become the first North American sports league to cancel a full season because of a labor dispute.

The major roadblock between the sides is a possible salary cap. The NHL wants a cap to achieve what it calls cost certainty. The players’ association said it will never accept that.

There might be a month left to salvage the season, but the sides could be too far apart when it comes to a cap. The last NHL lockout ended with a deal on Jan. 11, 1995, allowing for a 48-game season.

“It’s very disheartening. The majority of the players that I’ve talked to are worried about the fact that if there is no season, how is the league going to be able recover?” said Pronger, a St. Louis Blues defenseman. “I hear Gary talk and say, ‘Oh, we’ll be able to recover.’ He doesn’t know.”

The union rejected NHL commissioner Gary Bettman’s salary cap proposal on Tuesday, ending the meeting that came on the 90th day of the lockout.

The league proposal contained a cap, which, based on last year’s economics, would see team player payrolls range between a minimum of $34.6 million and maximum of $38.6 million.

The league also revamped the union’s 24 percent rollback offer by significantly reducing the salaries of the richest players and leaving others untouched. Players making less than $800,000 would not have their salary decreased. Those making $5 million or more would have 35 percent taken away from their existing contracts.

McKenzie’s $700,000 salary wouldn’t be affected, but Pronger, the league’s Most Valuable Player in 2000, would see his $10 million salary reduced to $6.5 million.