• Print
  • Comment

Screen Shots: Q&A with NHLPA executive director Paul Kelly

The NHLPA's executive director isn't afraid to speak his mind on issues that affect the game. (Photo courtesy of the NHLPA)

Zoom Image

The NHLPA's executive director isn't afraid to speak his mind on issues that affect the game. (Photo courtesy of the NHLPA)

In early August, I sat down with NHL Players’ Association executive director Paul Kelly in his Toronto office for an hour-long conversation regarding his first year on the job.

Portions of that interview – including Kelly’s thoughts on European expansion, building unity amongst his constituents, potential labor unrest, and more – can be found in my Proteau Type column that will appear in an upcoming issue of The Hockey News magazine.

However, because there were more noteworthy aspects to the interview than could fit into the column, here are some additional highlights:

THN:
Let’s talk about the integration of European players into NHL upper management and coaching. Europeans account for 30 percent of the league’s players, yet there’s nowhere near the same representation off the ice. Is that a concern players speak to you about?

Paul Kelly:
I haven’t really given that issue a great deal of thought, and I haven’t studied it, but my sense is there’s probably a few reasons for that. First, a lot of European guys go back home when their playing days are over, and those who do go home, I think a number of them become scouts for NHL teams in their home countries.

But it may be a cultural thing; they want to play, and they don’t necessarily want to find themselves in positions of authority. That’s my sense, but I think we’ll see some improvement in that regard over time.

We would like to see more European players become actively involved in what we do at the union. We were very pleased recently in Rome, where we had our European player meetings. We had a great turnout, and many of the guys in the room were prominent European players who were very interested in the business.

But we’d like to have more European guys as player reps. Last year, the only European player rep we had was Jarkko Ruutu, and we’d like to see more of a reflection of that 30 percent. And I’d like to see more European players on some of the committees we have.

THN:
Turning to the NHL ownership picture, there’s a sense some observers get that there’s an elaborate shell game going on here, that the league is operating in a shaky U.S. economy, that three to five teams may be on the market. If there are teams that are relocated, do the players deserve to be heavily involved in the process?

PK: A couple things here: No. 1, we haven’t heard about any plans at all to relocate teams or to expand. But under the collective bargaining agreement, the players have no voice and no role, in a technical manner, as it pertains to relocation or expansion. And we don’t derive any financial benefit from that, which I think is a mistake.

If the league wants to consider us partners – which I think is a misnomer, but at least ‘joint venturers’ – then players ought to have a say in the relocation or expansion of teams and share in some of the revenues there.

My view is that it is difficult for some of those teams, particularly in the American sunbelt, where they don’t have the establishment of hockey at a youth level. I grew up in Boston and there were youth hockey leagues everywhere. Every town had two or three rinks in it, and the game was and is part of our upbringing there.

But if you’re in Phoenix or you’re in Florida, it’s really tough for those teams to put people in the seats and sell the game. We understand that and maybe the revenue-sharing system is part of the answer. But our view is that if teams in any region suffer (financial) losses three or four years in a row, then stop complaining about it in a (business) system you created and imposed here, and start asking the question whether you’re in the right place.

Related Links

Rather than complain about it, maybe you ought to start saying, ‘Okay, folks, it ain’t working,’ and maybe you ought to find a place it will work.

THN: The Nashville ownership situation in particular has become somewhat of an embarrassment to the league. How can it better vet potential owners who could be frauds?

PK: You know, I was a federal prosecutor for 10 years and a white-collar practitioner for 12 years thereafter, so I know a little bit about due diligence and financial fraud. We at the NHLPA don’t get involved with any of this, but I think if someone is a sophisticated fraudster, they can conceal anything from anybody. It’s pretty hard to find.

I mean, is it troubling in general when you read about some stories that could be true where one owner loans a valuable chunk of money to another prospective owner without disclosing it to the league? Definitely, that’s a problem. Somebody should’ve thought about that at the time they were loaning money. But by-and-large, I believe we do have a group of owners who care about the game.

THN: The league and NHLPA worked together on the goalie-working group this summer. Was that a success?

PK:
I think you’re going to see some of the results of that group this coming season and more results the year after that. I’m very proud of the goalie-working group because that’s an initiative that was spearheaded by the players. Players recommended it and players drove it, and this is one of those issues where meaningful change is going to have to come from the players.

Changes you’ll see next year are changes that could be made without altering the manufacturing processes of goalie equipment. So you’re going to see goalie pants get shortened a bit; you’re going to see some of the padding on the inner side of goalie pads be removed, strapped down or contoured; you’re going to see, in the upper body protector, these clavicle protectors cinched down, so that when a goalie goes into a crouch, the clavicle protector goes down with him.

These are changes that won’t impact the safety of the goaltender, but will open up some space for shooters. Now, will we see a meaningful change in the number of goals scored? I don’t know yet. I think goal-scoring is less a product of goalie equipment than it is a product of style of play – blocking the net with five of your players, that type of strategy.

But I think you’ll see some change in the goalies this season and more substantial change next year, because when the manufacturing issues kick in and we contour equipment in ways that ensure safety, but open up shooting space, you’re going to see real improvement.

Adam Proteau is The Hockey News' online columnist and a regular contributor to THN.com. His blog appears Mondays and Wednesdays, his Ask Adam feature appears Tuesdays in the summer, and his column, Screen Shots, appears Thursdays.

For more great profiles, news and views from the world of hockey, Subscribe to The Hockey News magazine.

Chris (Posted 2008-09-02 12:04:55)
Flyer and Red, that makes sense. Anything they can do to avoid another lockout would be most appreciated.

Flyer guy 16 (Posted 2008-09-01 17:36:59)
I agree with Red, you don't have to put the players in charge but the league is big on "partnership" and working together with the players and then treats the players the same as always, do what your told and keep your mouths shut. Take their paycheck out of the equation and listen to what the players have to say, it only makes sense. And Chris, we all agree that players make a lot of money,but don't forget, the owners are doing just fine also.

RedToronto (Posted 2008-09-01 13:52:35)
Chris: Letting the players have some say is an extremely intelligent idea, after all they are quite integral to the success of the league. To exclude them entirely only breeds confrontational feelings and that will only lead to another lockout. The players are the ones who have experienced certain markets first hand. I am not saying the players deserve the final say but, in my opinion, to exclude them entirely is disrespectful and unhealthy for the league. Is that what it is like in your household, a dictatorship? No one has any say in family matter other than the parents?

RedToronto (Posted 2008-09-01 13:41:49)
Steve: PLEASE enlighten us all as to what the weaker markets in the league have done to "earn" their team over stronger Canadian markets? Winnipeg and Quebec City lost their teams primarily due to the weak loonie at the time and Bettman's "grand vision". And Hamilton surely would support a team far better than some American markets support their teams. Or better yet PLEASE enlighten us as to why Winnipeg, Quebec City and Hamilton have not "earned" a team? And please, in the cases of QC and Wiinnnipeg, do not tell us that they had their chance and failed...California had a chance with the Golden Seals and still earned San Jose and Anaheim...Atalanta blew it with the Flames and still got another chance...Colorado blew it with the Rockies and still got anothe chance...Minnesota blew it with the North Stars and still got another chance, and quite quickly on top of that.

Chris (Posted 2008-08-31 21:52:05)
So far I think Paul Kelly is a complete idiot. Players should have a say in the relocation of teams? Give me a break. That's about the most absurd thing I've ever heard. Why would you let a group of guys tell ownership where they would like the team to move to when they will all move on to different teams in a few years anyway? The players should benefit financially when a team moves? Why? They get paid to play hockey. You don't see your average joe getting any kind of financial benefit because the company that he works for is moving. Why should NHL players that already make entirely too much money make even more just because their team is moving? This guy is a complete joke.

Flyerfan52 (Posted 2008-08-29 21:41:21)
Don't stop with the goalies. Downsize the equipment the skaters wear to about '60s level. The body armor makes them think they're invincible. Take out the instigator rule. You'd most likely have elbows but a guy wouldn't use his stick. Maybe once.

dave (Posted 2008-08-29 16:48:09)
1st they tried changing the rules to make more goals, now the goalie equiptment. The game was fine. Stop trying to change it!

Steve (Posted 2008-08-29 08:35:09)
As much as I would like to see more NHL teams in Canada, I would be loathe to see another city (sunbelt or otherwise) have their team taken away. Canadian cities that are still interested in pursuing an NHL franchise must earn it and follow due process. We should refrain from those generalized, blanket statements like " this city or that city does not deserve a team..." Until all air (and money) has gone out of the balloon, the team belongs where it is.

Matt (Posted 2008-08-28 21:58:36)
I don't know how old your issue of Forbes magazine is because both Calgary and Minnesota sold out almost every home game last season- with Minnesota actually selling out every single game since they came back into the league. Also Calgary has the highest grossing mechandise sales in the League.

bostonblueline.blogspot.com (Posted 2008-08-28 15:22:45)
According to Forbes, the two franchises bleeding money the fastest are both located in New York, where hockey culture is well-ingrained. Other money-losers include Boston, Minnesota, Chicago, Buffalo and Calgary... in addition to sunbelt teams like the Thrashers and Predators. I question why pundits are so quick to suggest the NHL should abandon the sunbelt when it's clear that the income problem is league-wide. When competitive teams in traditional markets are losing money at the same rate as recent expansion franchsies, the problem is not overexpansion. Perhaps we could look to the NHL's bush-league television contract or its lack of promotion in American markets for a much more comprehensive explanation of the league's troubles.

Add a comment

Daily Dish - All the News in one click This Week - Subscribe Now

What should the Ottawa Senators do?






THN Newsletter - Sign Up Now

"Nothing happened there. He had his glove in my mouth, but I didn't bite him."

- Ottawa's Jarkko Ruutu on allegedly biting the hand of Buffalo's Andrew Peters during play Tuesday night.

Our Partners