Rumour: $64 million salary cap

[elocomotive]

Interesting. Thanks Dash.

 

[puckhead]

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.

1) a) People pissed that we lost a season over this, for apparently no reason.
b) There are several teams struggling, and a $48m cap floor isn't going to make it any easier on them. that has the potential to reduce stability.

2) no. There are escrow clawbacks in certain scenarios, and if the league is making all this cake, then those are unlikely to be triggered. but there is no salary escalation clause.

 

[elocomotive]

b) There are several teams struggling, and a $48m cap floor isn't going to make it any easier on them. that has the potential to reduce stability.

Can't we just move one of them to a large market with an insatiable appetite for hockey - like Atlanta?

 

[SLY]

Can't we just move one of them to a large market with an insatiable appetite for hockey - like Atlanta?

lmao

 

[jerseyjigroe]

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.

This is why I think the League should scale back the number of teams.

 

[puckhead]

This is why I think the League should scale back the number of teams.

not going to happen.
NHLPA won't stand for the reduction of 50 pro contracts * however many teams you have in mind.

 

[jerseyjigroe]

not going to happen.
NHLPA won't stand for the reduction of 50 pro contracts * however many teams you have in mind.

The union can go scrump on some poop.

 

[DaBoltsNIsles]

Well the Grabner & Okposo deals will add more money to the Isles cap while saving Wang actual money. So just like last year the Islanders will spend less than the actual cap. Last season I think the actual figure Wang spent was 39 million. It's going to be yet another year in which the Isles reach the cap floor due to bonus clauses.

I have a feeling a number of owners are going to cry foul after this season. Get ready for some difficult negotiations.

 

[MadCaptain]

So how much will Brad Richards get now? $8.5 or $9 mil a year cap hit?

There's now an extra $120 mil (theoretically) to spread out through this years crop of free agents

 

[sabresfaninthesouth]

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.

(1) There's a definite cause and effect problem there though, because at some point you're going to hit the max that consumers can handle. Every year they raise ticket prices (and food, parking, merchandise, etc.) to compensate for the higher payroll, which drives up total revenues and raises the cap for the next season, which drives up ticket prices....

The owners' mistake was in tying it to total revenue with no "out" related to profitability. Most of the teams aren't making any more money at the end of the day because their costs are going up relative to their revenues (or one could argue that their revenues are going up relative to their costs).

 

[Nasty_Magician]

Well the Grabner & Okposo deals will add more money to the Isles cap while saving Wang actual money. So just like last year the Islanders will spend less than the actual cap. Last season I think the actual figure Wang spent was 39 million. It's going to be yet another year in which the Isles reach the cap floor due to bonus clauses.

I have a feeling a number of owners are going to cry foul after this season. Get ready for some difficult negotiations.

Any interest in Brian Rolston? His 5 million cap hit will go a long way in helping the Isles reach the cap floor.

 

[Nasty_Magician]

not going to happen.
NHLPA won't stand for the reduction of 50 pro contracts * however many teams you have in mind.

You're right, contraction will not happen, but think of the impact it would have on the quality of the game. How many teams have a handful of talented players just wasting away (Rick Nash, Tomas Vokoun, etc.). Baseball needs contraction a lot more though.

 

[pixburgher66]

You're right, contraction will not happen, but think of the impact it would have on the quality of the game. How many teams have a handful of talented players just wasting away (Rick Nash, Tomas Vokoun, etc.). Baseball needs contraction a lot more though.

No...baseball needs a cap and floor. Gotta make teams spend money and stop the friggin' Yankees and Red Sox from spending 5x's the smaller markets.

 

[DaBoltsNIsles]

Any interest in Brian Rolston? His 5 million cap hit will go a long way in helping the Isles reach the cap floor.

The Islanders aren't going to have a problem reaching the cap floor. They have yet to sign Blake Comeau & Josh Bailey. The defense needs an upgrade so signing a UFA or two for the blueline is a possibility.

Besides if the Islanders wanted Rolston they could have had him for free last year. Why should they give anything up for him now? Sorry I just don't see it as a possibility.

 

[puckhead]

The NHLPA executive board has voted to trigger their 5% growth factor in salary cap, ensuring it'll settle around $64 million.

 

[beantownmaniac]

No...baseball needs a cap and floor. Gotta make teams spend money and stop the friggin' Yankees and Red Sox from spending 5x's the smaller markets.

No need to get nasty now!!!

 

[DaBoltsNIsles]

No...baseball needs a cap and floor. Gotta make teams spend money and stop the friggin' Yankees and Red Sox from spending 5x's the smaller markets.

5x, I thought it was 10x? What MLB allows is truly disgusting. No team should be allowed to have a 200 million dollar plus payroll.

 

[BlueandWhiteForever]

If this is true, the Leafs will have 20+ million to spend up to the cap

Time to bring back the good old days. Overpaying for aging players!!

 

[jstewismybastardson]

so Florida needs to spend 30 mill to get to the floor

I see tsn was all over a "logical" Luongo back to the Panthers rumour yesterday ... slight matter of that NTC stands in the way though

 

[Automattic]

YAY!