ESPN radio reporting

[chriswild]

I'm optimistic. Partly because of the Ecklund rumors, but I think they may have some teeth. Going back to last week...why on earth would Ted Saskin have stayed at the meetings despite the death of his mother unless the two sides were really starting to make some headway? Of course both sides stuck to the party lines publicly, but behind the scenes I think they're making headway. I sure hope so!!!

 

[Morbo]

The league said no luxury tax because a luxury tax, on its own, doesn't create "linkage". Remember, all money from the luxury tax goes into different owners pockets, who can then spend that money on players. So if the NYR spend 80 mil on payroll, and 40 mil on luxury tax, that 40 mil in tax is STILL going to go to the players, driving salaries up. Unless a luxury tax REMOVES money from the system (and I have no idea how you would set it up to make it work like this), it will not suceed in controlling salaries.

You're assuming that small market/poor teams would automatically put that luxury tax money back into payroll.

I don't think that's a slam-dunk, but even if they did do this 100% of the time, you can't convince me that the per-team share of the tax pool is going to be enough to offset the several extra talented players that the rich teams sign.

 

[SENSible1*]

You're assuming that small market/poor teams would automatically put that luxury tax money back into payroll.

I don't think that's a slam-dunk, but even if they did do this 100% of the time, you can't convince me that the per-team share of the tax pool is going to be enough to offset the several extra talented players that the rich teams sign.

Not to mention the overall salary inflation it would create, thus broadening the gap with every signing.

The NHL needs long-term salary deflators and that is why they have stuck to the concept of linkage, to avoid the inflationary effects of a luxury tax.

 

[Benji Frank]

Anyone else thinking that Linden should take over for Goodenow?

I was saying to a buddy the toher day it wouldn't surprise me if Linden retires once this agreement is signed and moves directly into the chair currently occupied by Goodenow. He's been quite vocal each time the contract has come up & seems to have the confidence of both the players and the owners........

 

[Bruwinz37]

So perhaps Eklund was right??

Where is that goof Flyline when ya need him!?

 

[John Flyers Fan]

The NHL has NEVER, EVER been fixated on a Hard Cap. The NHL has been fixated on ensuring that TOTAL player costs comprise a known % of leage revenue. The Current NBA system ALMOST accomplishes this (the luxury tax probably kicks in too high, but that is the ONLY thing that is keeping salaries too high). So, as long as the "soft" cap will keep player salaries below a set % of league revenue, the NHL will have NO PROBLEM taking that type of deal.

I've heard Bettman a number of times on radion interviews on WFAN in NY, and has been asked specifically about NFL or NBA style caps. Everytime Bettman has said it's NFL or bust ....he wants no part of an NBA soft cap/luxury tax/escrow account/multiple exceptions etc.

 

[bhawk24bob]

I've heard Bettman a number of times on radion interviews on WFAN in NY, and has been asked specifically about NFL or NBA style caps. Everytime Bettman has said it's NFL or bust ....he wants no part of an NBA soft cap/luxury tax/escrow account/multiple exceptions etc.

some of you people amaze me. do you realize he's putting himself in position to bargain?

 

[SPARTAKUS*]

I've heard Bettman a number of times on radion interviews on WFAN in NY, and has been asked specifically about NFL or NBA style caps. Everytime Bettman has said it's NFL or bust ....he wants no part of an NBA soft cap/luxury tax/escrow account/multiple exceptions etc.

You are right he doesn't want the NBA systeme because it wouldn't work for the NHL. But a soft cap with a luxury tax that has some teeth to it would work just fine for the NHL in Bettmen knows it. The NHL would have their cap and the players would have their free market you see everyone is happy!

 

[John Flyers Fan]

some of you people amaze me. do you realize he's putting himself in position to bargain?

How's that bargaining gone so far ???


Or perhaps he's speaking the truth in part because he wants that ... and also because his buddy David Stern and the NBA also have their CBA expiring at the end of this season ... and they would also like to have a much more owner-friendly CBA.

...nahhhhhh gary wouldn't do that, would he ???

 

[barnburner]

Good, what goes around comes around for Goodenow... he can take arrogant BS on the road, and take Gary Bettman with him for company.

I'll be glad to drive them both to the airport and buy their tickets to Iraq.

 

[Morbo]

You are right he doesn't want the NBA systeme because it wouldn't work for the NHL. But a soft cap with a luxury tax that has some teeth to it would work just fine for the NHL in Bettmen knows it.

That must be why Bettman said multiple times they weren't interested in any kind of luxury tax system at all, because it doesn't provide cost certainty.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

You are right he doesn't want the NBA systeme because it wouldn't work for the NHL. But a soft cap with a luxury tax that has some teeth to it would work just fine for the NHL in Bettmen knows it. The NHL would have their cap and the players would have their free market you see everyone is happy!

There are a ton of different ways the NHL could make it work ... with some creativity on the side of Bettman & the BoG we'd be watching hockey right now.

 

[Go Flames Go*]

There are a ton of different ways the NHL could make it work ... with some creativity on the side of Bettman & the BoG we'd be watching hockey right now.

They have been creative, but the players have been being stubbourn and greedy.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

They have been creative, but the players have been being stubbourn and greedy.

What creativity have they shown ??? .... so far it's hard cap with a floor and a ceiling, minimal revenue sharing, no arbitration, and completely screw all rookies.

The NHLPA to this point hasn't gone far enough, but they have been creative and put some good ideas on the board.

 

[SPARTAKUS*]

That must be why Bettman said multiple times they weren't interested in any kind of luxury tax system at all, because it doesn't provide cost certainty.

Tell me what good is get cost certainty if you destroy the league getting it?

 

[Morbo]

Tell me what good is get cost certainty if you destroy the league getting it?

Why don't you ask Gary?

 

[hb74147]

What creativity have they shown ??? .... so far it's hard cap with a floor and a ceiling, minimal revenue sharing, no arbitration, and completely screw all rookies.

Amen Flyer Fan! (strange, me agreeing with a Flyer fan)

I'm pretty owner sympathetic, but the utter lack of creativity shown so far is nearly criminal -- the two sides need to do a little more in negotiations than keep hammering away at their positions, spew rhetoric and wait till someone caves - (ie BG&GB(fire them both!), hats off the Linden for doing for the players what BG & his fat ego are unable to do).

A simple hard cap system seems ridiculous given the incredible range in revenues generated by the different teams - some type of revenue sharing (and full and honest disclosure of course) is what is going to have to happen - no one is going to agree to a system where the top spending teams just cut their payrolls by half to bottom team levels under a cap and laugh their way to the bank

A simple cap in the NFL works because each and every team generates enough serious revenue and TV money that they can all independantly afford a decent salary level and thus a decent level cap is possible.

(BTW - post #1 - hello HFBoard)

 

[Trottier]

The NHL has NEVER, EVER been fixated on a Hard Cap. The NHL has been fixated on ensuring that TOTAL player costs comprise a known % of leage revenue. The Current NBA system ALMOST accomplishes this (the luxury tax probably kicks in too high, but that is the ONLY thing that is keeping salaries too high). So, as long as the "soft" cap will keep player salaries below a set % of league revenue, the NHL will have NO PROBLEM taking that type of deal.

I so hope you are correct, for that would be a superb compromise, a solid solution. But why does the NHLPA come out of every meeting saying "no hardcap, we won't budge on it, ya-da, ya-da" if this isn't the case? Just continued posturing from the league in your opinion?

As for a fixation on a hardcap, the league may not have one but a few here clearly do. Obsessive compulsive.

 

[mr gib]

Trevor Linden is Bob Goodenows boss. If Linden likes a deal he has the power to accept with the vote of the excutive commities thus forcing good ole Bobby to sign the CBA.

Goodenow is not good for hockey, he dosen't understand ****.

now you like linden - flake -

 

[Crows*]

I hate lawyers.

goodnow worked for management way back.

 

[FlyersFan10*]

20 cents on the dollar is not going to work. The NHL could argue that the reason they want to create a large rate for salary tax is to create a larger pool of money that would benefit teams in the red. Im pretty sure teams like Detroit, Colorado, Toronto, Philly would all glady go over a soft cap and pay large amounts of salary taxes.

What makes you so sure that Philadelphia would go over the soft cap? Ed Snider is a business who has made a ton of money, more than you and I will ever see. Do you think he wants to pay out a ton of salary in payroll and then tax on top of it? Being a Philadelphia and paying attention to what is going on in Philadelphia, Snider has actually ordered Clarke to bring the payroll down to the 35 - 36 million range. So, for your statement about Philly going over and paying the luxury tax just shows how little you actually know. Welcome to my ignore list

 

[Egil]

I so hope you are correct, for that would be a superb compromise, a solid solution. But why does the NHLPA come out of every meeting saying "no hardcap, we won't budge on it, ya-da, ya-da" if this isn't the case? Just continued posturing from the league in your opinion?

As for a fixation on a hardcap, the league may not have one but a few here clearly do. Obsessive compulsive.

First, the league in the summer outlined 6 different "cost-certainty" proposals, some of which were WAY out there (but would have been AWESOME for the fans).

The NHL proposed a tiered salary system, whereby players sign as a % of a teams payroll, and then, based on how succesful the team is, the pie iss divided up (a standard, non-playoff team would split $30 Mil, the SC champs would split $55 Mil). You can also do this with a "let the players decide the split" technique as well. The league also proposed centralized contracts, which would mean your team only needs to draft/trade for players, and doesn't have to worry about salaries.

BOTH of these setups would be PURE gold for the fans, as teams would NEVER, EVER need to be broken up, and contracts become IRRELEVENT to trades. The NHLPA of course dismissed these systems, yet they are undoubtedly the BEST for the league as a whole.

So, the NHL wants LINKAGE. They want a system whereby they know the % of revenue that the players will recieve. They also want to ensure that ALL teams can compete, so you don't have teams with no chance. A HARD salary cap is ONE way of doing this. The current NBA system CAN do this, but needs tweaking. Based on the players stance, an NBA style system could be accepted by them, and by the owners.

Remember, the NBA system is designed to keep player revenues at 55% of league revenue. To do this, their soft cap is applied at 48% of league revenue, has 10% of player salaries in a fund to pay owners if salaries surpass 55% of league revenue, and a luxury tax if player salaries exceed 61% of league revenue (basically if the escrow fund can't repay the owners back to 55% of league revenue).

It is only recently that the luxury tax has been required, and if it were enacted at 55% of league revenue isntead of 61% (and triggered at that level as well), I believe the system would work. Putting a hard cap at 61% of revenue might also help.

But again, the league has been, IMHO, very clear on this. They want a system that will GUARANTEE that player salaries will not exceed a designated % of league revenue. The easiest, crudest and simplest solution is a Hard cap, but it is not the only effective technique to meet their needs. It is in fact the players union that has muddied the waters, as they have called anything the NHL does a "hard cap", even though not everything they have proposed could be considered a hard cap.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

First, the league in the summer outlined 6 different "cost-certainty" proposals, some of which were WAY out there (but would have been AWESOME for the fans).

Problem is that they were all done in less than a paragraph. The NHL didn't make any serious proposals using any of the ideas they put forth. Perhaps if they had gone into detail, we might be getting somewhere.

God knows they've had months to actually put them on paper.

 

[i am dave]

Snider has actually ordered Clarke to bring the payroll down to the 35 - 36 million range.

Source?

 

[likea]

Problem is that they were all done in less than a paragraph. The NHL didn't make any serious proposals using any of the ideas they put forth. Perhaps if they had gone into detail, we might be getting somewhere.

God knows they've had months to actually put them on paper.

your a mod, can I see proof of what you state or a link saying that it is true???