26 NHL teams have payrolls over $40 million

RangerBoy

Dolan sucks!!!
Mar 3, 2002
44,912
21,238
New York
www.youtube.com
The National Hockey League owners cried their way through the 2004-05 lockout that they could no longer afford the salary demands of today's player.

The blubbering has stopped, but the spending spree has continued, as exhibited in league-wide salary cap numbers obtained today by globesports.com.

Of the 30 teams, only four clubs — Nashville, St. Louis, Pittsburgh and Washington — have payrolls less than $40-million (all figures U.S.). If you rewind back to the 2004 trade deadline, you would have found 11 teams with payrolls less than $40-million

http://www.globesports.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20061004.Wcapdata4/GSStory/GlobeSportsHockey/home

What did Gary Bettman say about the upper limit acting as a "magnet"?
 

Oilslick941611

slapshot into the empty net...utterly irrelevant
Jul 4, 2006
13,722
12,541
Ottawa
who really cares? there is a set limit the owners adn GMs can spend. they cant go over it. unless your GM LL but thats a different story...
 

pld459666

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
25,776
7,800
Danbury, CT
.

who really cares? there is a set limit the owners adn GMs can spend. they cant go over it. unless your GM LL but thats a different story...

I don't think that that was the point he was making or trying to make.

I think that he was pointing out that having a cap would allow (and to a certain degree entice) teams to spend a little more knowing full well that the competition cannot open up the check books even further to keep their off-ice competitive edge as theri strong point.

With a cap in place, teams that were under 40 million now have the confidence to open the wallet to go after players they normally would have passed on due to knowing that for the most part, the dollars from team to team are going to be relatively the same.

at least that what I interpeted.
 

X0ssbar

Guest
That article is actually misleading. Payrolls and salary cap hits are two different things. For instance the Columbus Blue Jackets actual salary paid this year now sits around the $36 million mark although their actual salary cap hit is right around the 39/40 million mark.

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=254017
 

Ted Hoffman

The other Rick Zombo
Dec 15, 2002
28,859
8,113
Exactly. In theory, a team could be spending $90 million in actual dollars this year but be in compliance with the cap if the contracts are structured correctly; a team could also be spending $12 million in actual dollars and still be in compliance.

How much in real $ a team is spending doesn't matter - it's how it counts for cap purposes. Only 6 teams have $4 million in cap space available right now, and 2 of those are because of potential bonuses. On the other hand, 17 teams have less than $2 million in cap space - many of those have bonuses that are inflating that number, and both Boston and New Jersey have making use of the injury exemption on players to ice the team they currently have.
 

Wetcoaster

Guest
For a league that wanted a $31M cap because only a handful of teams could spend $40M then?


Please
Amazing how the figures have changed from the Levitt work of fiction now that the teams have actually had to open the books and account for "Hockey Related Revenue".:eek:
 

X0ssbar

Guest
For a league that wanted a $31M cap because only a handful of teams could spend $40M then?


Please

31 million was the starting point in negotiations for the NHL...The league obviously wasn't going to start w/ their high number just as the NHLPA wasn't going to start w/ their low number. There is always middle ground -- to bad it took both sides a lost season to get there :banghead:
 

Foredeck

Registered User
Jan 20, 2006
121
0
What is the total payroll expense pre and post cap? I think total player salaries went down slightly.

Plus, there is the escrow.

One major difference in the past 5 years is the Canadian dollar. They've probably increased their revenue by 5 million each simply by having a stronger dollar. Edmonton and Calgary are strong and able to compete mostly because of the canadian dollar.
 

AdmiralPred

Registered User
Jun 9, 2005
1,923
0
Amazing how the figures have changed from the Levitt work of fiction now that the teams have actually had to open the books and account for "Hockey Related Revenue".:eek:

Has revenue sharing helped in this regard? Get a few extra $$ to be able to spend up to the $40 mil plateau? Theoretically.
 

SuperUnknown

Registered User
Mar 14, 2002
4,890
0
Visit site
Amazing how the figures have changed from the Levitt work of fiction now that the teams have actually had to open the books and account for "Hockey Related Revenue".:eek:

According to the Levitt report, the cap could really have been around $40M. Heck, fans on the board, before the lockout, had gathered figures on revenues and a $40M cap would have made sense then.

Plus, what about the people laughing at Bettman for saying the cap was a magnet? It is a magnet...
 

discostu

Registered User
Nov 12, 2002
22,512
2,895
Nomadville
Visit site
What is the total payroll expense pre and post cap? I think total player salaries went down slightly.

Plus, there is the escrow.

One major difference in the past 5 years is the Canadian dollar. They've probably increased their revenue by 5 million each simply by having a stronger dollar. Edmonton and Calgary are strong and able to compete mostly because of the canadian dollar.

The Canadian dollar was worth about .65 cents (US) in 2002, and it's worth about .88 cents (US) today.

If a Canadian team was earning $50M US in 2002 in local revenues, that translated to $77M Cdn that it was actually pulling in. If that same team is earning the same revenues today, that $77M Cdn is now worth $68M, and $18M increase.

The wide swing of the exchange rate has had a major impact on the Canadian teams.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->