Official Cap Numbers Final - Per Leafs Lunch

[Fugu]

Here's the official release from the NHL and NHLPA, on NHL.com:

NHL, NHLPA announce team payroll range for 2007-08
NHL.com Jun 29, 2007, 1:12 PM EDT
TORONTO/NEW YORK – The National Hockey League Players’ Association and the National Hockey League announced today that the Team Payroll Range established for the 2007-08 League Year, pursuant to the Collective Bargaining Agreement, provides for a Lower Limit of $34.3 million, an Adjusted Midpoint of $42.3 million and an Upper Limit of $50.3 million.

 

[Meichel Kane]

If I see "we had a lockout for nothing" one more time, I'm going to scream. Go back, research the pre-lockout NHL economic landscape, and say that again to a fan of a small market team.

 

[dkhockey]

So what does this mean........CAN you buy a stanley cup next season?...... or in the future..?.....

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

So what does this mean........CAN you buy a stanley cup next season?...... or in the future..?.....

since you couldnt buy one in the past, i dont think anything has changed to make it possible to buy in the future either.

next cliche please?

 

[reckoning]

Does anybody remember all the experts on here who gloated about how the players were so stupid to turn down a flat $42M cap because "they'll never, ever, ever, ever get that much again"?

 

[S.S. Giggy]

$50 million? Too much, too fast, too early.

 

[dkhockey]

Does anybody remember all the experts on here who gloated about how the players were so stupid to turn down a flat $42M cap because "they'll never, ever, ever, ever get that much again"?

.
.
Raises hand........
.
.
.
Most be the same experts, who had planned the next summer olympics to be held in Baghdad....

 

[dkhockey]

$50 million? Too much, too fast, too early.

.
.That´s what she said last night.......
.
.
.
.
sorry.........i am high on gatorade.............damn you Sidney!

 

[andy*]

Like they mentioned on the show, a few teams will have troubles hitting that low number.

What teams are those.

 

[NYRfan11]

Can someone explain how the cap went up 6 million if the players are going to end up paying 3-4% back to the owners for the 06-07 season as Bob McKenzie pointed out on TSN. If with a $44 MM cap, the payout to the players exceeded 54% of revenues, how does the cap go up 6 million? I understand the 5% inflator but even without that the cap would still have gone up significantly.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

Rangers, Leafs, Dallas. Just like before the lockout. and NJ because they were at $50 last year

NYR, Detroit, Philadelphia, Dallas, Toronto, and New Jersey have consistently had some of the highest salaries in the league for years now.

 

[hockeytown9321]

Does anybody remember all the experts on here who gloated about how the players were so stupid to turn down a flat $42M cap because "they'll never, ever, ever, ever get that much again"?

Yup, also remember that ticket prices would go down. No more needs to be said about that.

How about the small market teams that would be able to re-sign their own stars? Buffalo is having some problems there.

All 30 teams would be financially healthy? Nashville looks good. Pittsburgh came an eyelash from moving. Lots of teams, including Buffalo who sells out every game, need a self imposed cap in order not to lose money.

Remember that Chelios was just a delusional old man, Ted Saskin was a paragon of virtue?

Everything seems to working out well.

 

[kdb209]

Can someone explain how the cap went up 6 million if the players are going to end up paying 3-4% back to the owners for the 06-07 season as Bob McKenzie pointed out on TSN. If with a $44 MM cap, the payout to the players exceeded 54% of revenues, how does the cap go up 6 million? I understand the 5% inflator but even without that the cap would still have gone up significantly.

The two really have little to do with each other.

The cap went up, because revenues went up (and the 54% Players Share increased to 55.x%).

The players gave back through escrow because player salary exceeded the Players Share. If there hadn't been a significant increase in revenues (and the bump in percentage), the players would have given a lot more back than 3-4%.

By electing not to waive the 5% inflator, the NHLPA is pretty much guaranteeing much larger escrow givebacks next season.

As long as the GMs keep spending and the average team payroll stays above the cap midpoint, the players will keep givingback through escrow.

 

[Fugu]

And the UFA age will continue to come down, guaranteeing that teams will spend the most money on players in their prime, not on past-prime, over the hill UFA's like they did before. Either way, teams will spend that money, but how it is distributed is the big difference now.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

All 30 teams would be financially healthy? Nashville looks good. Pittsburgh came an eyelash from moving. Lots of teams, including Buffalo who sells out every game, need a self imposed cap in order not to lose money.

The problems in Pittsburgh and Nashville started well before this CBA. Let's not pretend that things were fine in those two cities pre-CBA, and then all the damage was done in 2 years because of this new agreement. The Pens were teetering because of an incredibly bad lease and a completely apathetic city and state who refused to give the team a 2nd chance at a new arena for free (something the Pirates and Steelers got). The Predators were in trouble b/c Leipold & Co. kicked sand in the eyes of the corporate community early on, and companies withheld their $ for luxury boxes, premium seating, etc. as a result.

All of that had nothing to do with this CBA.

Buffalo and Tampa are having problems keeping their stars? For the 11,672nd time ... the purpose of the salary cap system is NOT for all teams to spend as much as possible - it's for all teams to spend to the midpoint. Without the cap system, Buffalo never has to worry about making a choice of whether to keep Drury or Briere - because in the old system, Buffalo doesn't get revenue sharing and thus doesn't have the money to worry about keeping either guy; they're both long gone.

No, under the current system teams are on nearly the same playing field - so teams with payrolls of $34 million have about the same chance of winning the Cup as teams with payrolls of $50 million, and teams raking money in hand over fist have to (gasp!) actually share some of that money with teams who have no hope of being in that position and would struggle to stay afloat (and ice a halfway competitive team) without revenue sharing. Yes, that means having to make choices - but everyone will have to make those choices. A team like Edmonton really can compete for the Cup again with a $35 million payroll and not have to worry about Detroit and Colorado spending $80 million (or more) and snapping up key guys like a collector perusing the latest offerings from the Franklin Mint.

Eventually, we'll see parity in the league like we've seen in the NFL - the franchises that are really good and know how to plan ahead will rise to the top, and the franchises that have no clue how to go about business will sink to the bottom, and teams will generally have legitimate hopes of going from out of the playoffs to in the playoffs in a year or two, not 4-7 years like we saw pre-CBA.

And when it happens ... that will be a good thing.

 

[GSC2k2*]

maybe you misunderstood. i was suggesting that under the new CBA the owners were having to disclose revenues that they previously had diverted to other area's such as arena revenue.

this can also be a cause for the revenue rising, no? they are legislated to report revenues that previously they had pure discretion on how to manipulate to their advantage.

Other than the fact that the Levitt numbers were in fact completely validated and that there is NO new revenue that was not counted before, DR, you are definitely on to something.

 

[Scoogs]

What teams are those.

It's purely speculation on my part, no numbers to back it up..

I'm guessing teams like Washington, Chicago, St. Louis.

They will obviously go above that number, just because there is no choice. But they might not like it. At least, the owners won't.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

It's purely speculation on my part, no numbers to back it up..

I'm guessing teams like Washington, Chicago, St. Louis.

They will obviously go above that number, just because there is no choice. But they might not like it. At least, the owners won't.

St. Louis has already said their expecting to spend at least $40 million; Chicago is already over about $39 million and Wirtz approved spending nearly $42 million last year - so scratch those two off the list.

Washington might be your best bet - but in terms of cap dollars, they already have $21.5 million in 11 guys (plus Yonkman's buyout) and have Eminger at a $1M qualifying offer (and arbitration eligible). Still, I think they'll get over $34.3 million by opening night without that much of a problem.

 

[puckhead103*]

players getting a refund

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID=212247&hubname=

 

[Scoogs]

Maybe it's out-dated, but following NHLPA.com's salary lists, Chicago is around $29M. I'm not even sure if those contracts are averaged out, either, so possibly less.

But you are the CBA/Salary master, IB... (I don't mean that sarcastically) So you let me know.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Maybe it's out-dated, but following NHLPA.com's salary lists, Chicago is around $29M. I'm not even sure if those contracts are averaged out, either, so possibly less.

But you are the CBA/Salary master, IB... (I don't mean that sarcastically) So you let me know.

Remember ... we're talking cap dollars - not salary. Teams have to hit $34.3 million in cap dollars.

Also remember that the NHLPA only lists salaries for the current League Year; it's never listed cap numbers. I'm assuming Toews will start in the NHL (probably a safe bet) so his $2.8 million cap hit is on there; also remember that Cam Barker is a little under $2.8 million himself - and if Kane signs and starts the season in the NHL, he could be up to $3.725 million. And, the Hawks are carrying $823,333 in dead cap space thanks to buyouts of Matthew Barnaby and Curtis Brown.

 

[pitseleh]

Remember ... we're talking cap dollars - not salary. Teams have to hit $34.3 million in cap dollars.

Also remember that the NHLPA only lists salaries for the current League Year; it's never listed cap numbers. I'm assuming Toews will start in the NHL (probably a safe bet) so his $2.8 million cap hit is on there; also remember that Cam Barker is a little under $2.8 million himself - and if Kane signs and starts the season in the NHL, he could be up to $3.725 million. And, the Hawks are carrying $823,333 in dead cap space thanks to buyouts of Matthew Barnaby and Curtis Brown.

Here's a question IB, what happens if a team makes the cap floor at the start of the season with bonus clauses that aren't met during the season? Are teams expected to add salary to reach the floor somehow or is there some other type of penalty?

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Here's a question IB, what happens if a team makes the cap floor at the start of the season with bonus clauses that aren't met during the season? Are teams expected to add salary to reach the floor somehow or is there some other type of penalty?

Great question - the Capitals pretty much coasted last year around the floor with Ovechkin's bonuses pushing them over.

Unfortunately, I don't have an answer - I suspect it's in the League By-Laws, which I don't have a copy of [yet - if anyone should happen to stumble across a spare copy of them ... we'll have to negotiate a swap of assets]. My guess is that a team who doesn't clear the floor at the end of the season has to pay a fine and loses out on any potential revenue sharing, but that's purely a guess. I don't know how the League handles it during the season.

 

[hockeytown9321]

The problems in Pittsburgh and Nashville started well before this CBA. Let's not pretend that things were fine in those two cities pre-CBA, and then all the damage was done in 2 years because of this new agreement.

Sure, but this CBA was supposed to fix all of those problems. It hasn't.

Without the cap system, Buffalo never has to worry about making a choice of whether to keep Drury or Briere - because in the old system, Buffalo doesn't get revenue sharing and thus doesn't have the money to worry about keeping either guy; they're both long gone.

And under this system, they don't have to worry about making a choice either. The salary cap has made the decision for them.

 

[Fugu]

Sure, but this CBA was supposed to fix all of those problems. It hasn't.



And under this system, they don't have to worry about making a choice either. The salary cap has made the decision for them.

And much sooner than under the old system. Remember the declining age to free agency!