Rumour: $64 million salary cap

[dash]

From Bob McKenzie:

I'm told the upper limit of the 2011-12 NHL salary cap will be $64 million. The lower limit, or floor, will be $48 million.

To think that we came out of the lockout with a $39 million salary cap. The only cost-certainty we have is that salary costs certainly continue to climb.

 

[SLY]

If it goes up to 64 mill, that'll be ridiculous.

 

[Eddie_Shack]

From Bob McKenzie:

I'm told the upper limit of the 2011-12 NHL salary cap will be $64 million. The lower limit, or floor, will be $48 million.

To think that we came out of the lockout with a $39 million salary cap. The only cost-certainty we have is that salary costs certainly continue to climb.

We lost a season of hockey because the owners wanted even less than that... kind of burns your britches, doesn't it?

 

[sabresfaninthesouth]

The owners got what they wanted in a hard cap, but they're getting hurt now by directly linking the cap to total league revenues with no upper limit.

I'd be surprised if the owners don't go for some type of year-over-year maximum increase in the next CBA.

 

[jerseyjigroe]

64 mill...great news for the Flyers!

 

[devs30rko]

and for the devils c'mon parise get you're pen ready

 

[dash]

Maybe the Flames can send some former Panthers back to Florida to help that team reach the salary floor...Load up on draft picks and do a mini-rebuild.

 

[maddogmark25]

Pretty high salary floor, I wouldnt be surprised if a few teams wouldn't be able to reach it

the next CBA will tone down these large yearly cap increases, IMO

 

[dash]

Pretty high salary floor, I wouldnt be surprised if a few teams wouldn't be able to reach it

the next CBA will tone down these large yearly cap increases, IMO

All I know is we hockey fans better not lose another season of hockey while billionaire owners and millionaire players squabble over how to divide $3 billion in revenues.

 

[sbb122]

Maybe the Flames can send some former Panthers back to Florida to help that team reach the salary floor...Load up on draft picks and do a mini-rebuild.

JayBo???

 

[pixburgher66]

Well...as a fan of a team pretty close to the cap...I'm happy with this. But, yeah, it's dangerous.

 

[dash]

JayBo???

Yeah, and I've been a big supporter of his, but for the dollars he's being paid, it's just not working out. Down the stretch when the Flames were trying to make the playoffs, he had some pretty terrible games.

/If they want Niklas Hagman back, they're welcome to him as well...

 

[sbb122]

Yeah, and I've been a big supporter of his, but for the dollars he's being paid, it's just not working out. Down the stretch when the Flames were trying to make the playoffs, he had some pretty terrible games.

/If they want Niklas Hagman back, they're welcome to him as well...

He never really impressed me much in Florida either. He makes close to 7m if i remember correctly. Way too much for him imo.

 

[dash]

He never really impressed me much in Florida either. He makes close to 7m if i remember correctly. Way too much for him imo.

6.68 million is the cap hit. At least 2 million too much per season. I think the Flames are stuck with him to be quite honest.

 

[sbb122]

6.68 million is the cap hit. At least 2 million too much per season. I think the Flames are stuck with him to be quite honest.

Ouch, that hurts. Flames are my Western Conference team.... At least it isn't as much as Brian Campbell...

 

[loki604]

Good for the Pens. We can get a few $1.5 million scrubs to play around our superstars instead of $1 million scrubs.

 

[puckhead]

From Bob McKenzie:

I'm told the upper limit of the 2011-12 NHL salary cap will be $64 million. The lower limit, or floor, will be $48 million.

To think that we came out of the lockout with a $39 million salary cap. The only cost-certainty we have is that salary costs certainly continue to climb.

NHLPA's rejected offer for the salary cap back then was $49 mill.
the floor will now be just a million less than that.

you've come a long way, baby! :eek2:

 

[elocomotive]

I have two questions about this I am unclear on.

(1) Why is there concern about this? If I own a company and we are selling more product, why would I be concerned that I have to invest in producing more product if I'm selling more? Maybe I'm just not getting something here, but it seems to me that if it's linked to revenue as a percentage, it can't harm the business b/c there is a built in control for those "production" costs (player salaries in this instance). It seems to me the damage would potentially be in the percentage changing, not the actual dollar number.

(2) Does the cap increasing change any present salaries? I thought I had read on here something about slight adjustments made to players already under contract, but wasn't clear on what that meant. Does a player at $5.0 million per year automatically go up to $5.2 million per year because the ceiling is higher.

Anybody have any answers to these? I'd appreciate it.

 

[jerseyjigroe]

I have two questions about this I am unclear on.

(1) Why is there concern about this? If I own a company and we are selling more product, why would I be concerned that I have to invest in producing more product if I'm selling more? Maybe I'm just not getting something here, but it seems to me that if it's linked to revenue as a percentage, it can't harm the business b/c there is a built in control for those "production" costs (player salaries in this instance). It seems to me the damage would potentially be in the percentage changing, not the actual dollar number.

(2) Does the cap increasing change any present salaries? I thought I had read on here something about slight adjustments made to players already under contract, but wasn't clear on what that meant. Does a player at $5.0 million per year automatically go up to $5.2 million per year because the ceiling is higher.

Anybody have any answers to these? I'd appreciate it.

I'm pretty sure that is not how it works.

 

[dash]

I have two questions about this I am unclear on.

(1) Why is there concern about this? If I own a company and we are selling more product, why would I be concerned that I have to invest in producing more product if I'm selling more? Maybe I'm just not getting something here, but it seems to me that if it's linked to revenue as a percentage, it can't harm the business b/c there is a built in control for those "production" costs (player salaries in this instance). It seems to me the damage would potentially be in the percentage changing, not the actual dollar number.

(2) Does the cap increasing change any present salaries? I thought I had read on here something about slight adjustments made to players already under contract, but wasn't clear on what that meant. Does a player at $5.0 million per year automatically go up to $5.2 million per year because the ceiling is higher.

Anybody have any answers to these? I'd appreciate it.

For (1), the main issue is that there are several teams struggling to get to the cap floor (which will rise to approx. $48 million this season). These teams also need to meet attendance criteria in order to qualify for full revenue sharing and some of these teams fall short in that regard.

For (2), salaries don't change, but the amount that the league claws back in escrow payments from the players is directly tied to overall league revenues. This is the main reason the players have agreed each season to activate the 5% inflator to boost up the salary cap as high as possible.