TSN Reporting hard/soft cap of 42 Mil rejected by PA

[Lady Rhian]

that quote is legit, as it's included in yahoo's report, which came directly from an email sent from daly to the AP. daly goes on to say that whatever plans for a meeting tomorrow have been scrapped

Nice email- gets your hopes up and dashed, all in a couple of sentences.

 

[leaflover]

Sportsnet is reporting no offer was made.
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/article.jsp?content=20050126_122859_2272

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

While I'm disappointed the owners didn't show a little more creativity here, there were concessions in this.
-- A $42 million cap ensures players up to 60 percent of stated revenues, up from 54 percent in previous offer. NBA players get about 57 percent.
-- At a $42 million cap, the average player salary is $1.75 million, up from $1.6 million in the previous offer. The current average salary is about $1.8 million

whats the floor ? your calculations assume each team spends the max, right ?

i dunno, id be fine with a compromise of a lower floor (22m) and a higher ceiling (42m), with a luxury tax that allows for a payroll up to 48 or 50m.

dr

 

[octopi]

Lets hack this site I'm sure some dumb player has an easy password.

Try their family members (particulary children's) names or birthdates

 

[Russian Fan]

While I'm disappointed the owners didn't show a little more creativity here, there were concessions in this.
-- A $42 million cap ensures players up to 60 percent of stated revenues, up from 54 percent in previous offer. NBA players get about 57 percent.
-- At a $42 million cap, the average player salary is $1.75 million, up from $1.6 million in the previous offer. The current average salary is about $1.8 million

I never liked when people talked about the average salary. This is one of the most misguide information to get the fans on the owner's side.

Yes it's true the average salary is 1,8M$ but the median salary is around 900K$

That's mean you remove the 14 players at 6M$ + & you get close to 1M$.

 

[CarlRacki]

whats the floor ? your calculations assume each team spends the max, right ?

i dunno, id be fine with a compromise of a lower floor (22m) and a higher ceiling (42m), with a luxury tax that allows for a payroll up to 48 or 50m.

dr

Correct, which is why I wrote "up to" 60 percent of revenues. I probably should have been as clear regarding the average salaries.

I can't see why the PA would want a lower floor. In it's December CBA proposal, the league pledged to do enough revenue sharing so that every team could meet the $34.5 million floor. Seems to me that's a good thing for the players.

 

[CarlRacki]

I never liked when people talked about the average salary. This is one of the most misguide information to get the fans on the owner's side.

Yes it's true the average salary is 1,8M$ but the median salary is around 900K$

That's mean you remove the 14 players at 6M$ + & you get close to 1M$.

That's fine, but it's also impossible at this moment to determine median salaries. That can't be done until we see how the salaries will shake out under the new system. So, for now average salary is the best we've got.
Regardless, if the cap number goes up, so should median salaries.

FYI, there are 26 players at $6 million or more.

 

[Russian Fan]

That's fine, but it's also impossible at this moment to determine median salaries. That can't be done until we see how the salaries will shake out under the new system. So, for now average salary is the best we've got.
Regardless, if the cap number goes up, so should median salaries.

FYI, there are 26 players at $6 million or more.

Well I have the 2003-04 Full salary and here it is

Adam Munro was the least paid player in the NHL at 200,000$
Peter Forsberg & JAromir JAgr was the highest paid at 11,000,000$

779 players are in that list & the average is $1,745,179,97
player at the median is #390 is paid $1,050,000$

Players over 5M$ : 54 (37 over 6M$)
Players between 3M$ to 4,999,999$ : 80
Players between 2M$ to 2,999,999$ : 86
Players between 1,5M$ to 1,999,999$ : 65
Players between 1M$ to 1,499,999$ : 131
Players between 500K to 999,999$ : 242
Players between 200K to 499,999$ : 121

-----------------------------------------------------
My opinion is that I will never be bothered about the top 50 getting 5M$+ , they are the stars & we shouldn't be envious about that.

The problem I always had is the players between 2M$ to 4,999,999$ (166 players) which are marginal players or they had 1 good season & got the big payday.

when on 779 players, 494 players are making less than 1,5M$ (363 of them are not millionaire) that's why the average salary are just a P.R move by the owners to give the perception that MOST PLAYERS are getting close than 1,8M$ & putting the average salary @ 1,3M$ they all will be rich.

The next system that should be in place should be to restrain the salary of those 2nd line & since 2-3 years the ''super'' 3rd line players (John Madden, Kris Madden) getting close to 3M$ per year.

Just my thought.

 

[Pepper]

Lets hack this site I'm sure some dumb player has an easy password.

Login: Peter Worrell
password: Lilja

 

[Lady Rhian]

Login: Peter Worrell
password: Lilja

 

[tantalum]

whats the floor ? your calculations assume each team spends the max, right ?

i dunno, id be fine with a compromise of a lower floor (22m) and a higher ceiling (42m), with a luxury tax that allows for a payroll up to 48 or 50m.

dr

I think the owners in the end would as well but they want the players to counter with such an offer as it would essentially be the NHL proposed framework. But I don't think you'll see the owners propose that. They are going to keep the proposals as hard caps and get the players to bargain for the other concessions. Get the players to cross that "philisophical divide". If the owners come back with a a soft/hard cap mix it just weakens their bargaining position which I don't think they'll do being in the drivers seat. It's pretty clear to me that the NHL has moved considerably within the cost certainty framework. Their is negotiation room

 

[GKJ]

It's pretty clear to me that the NHL has moved considerably within the cost certainty framework. Their is negotiation room

The NHL has moved no where. They went from offering a $31M cap to a $42M cap. That's not moving, that's not making concessions, that's beating a square peg into a round hole.


The owners make a meaningful, creative offer when they consider a soft cap.

 

[Pepper]

The NHL has moved no where. They went from offering a $31M cap to a $42M cap. That's not moving, that's not making concessions, that's beating a square peg into a round hole.


The owners make a meaningful, creative offer when they consider a soft cap.

They have increased their offer by more than 33%, I'd say that's pretty considerable concession.

Anyway, whether league has moved or not is irrelevant considering that NHLPA hasn't made a single meaningful offer in the first place.

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

You're of the philosophy that because the NHL employs the players, the players should agree to anything the league tables? Why can't the League curb their own spending?

Collusion. Next question?

 

[tantalum]

They have increased their offer by more than 33%, I'd say that's pretty considerable concession.

Anyway, whether league has moved or not is irrelevant considering that NHLPA hasn't made a single meaningful offer in the first place.

NOt to mention they have also brought in a salary floor idea which would get rid of low payrolls. It is very significant movement within the framework they proposed. The players have shown some movement within their framework though engineered in such a way as to gain everything back within 3 years IMO. BUt the end result is neither side has made the step to the other framework. And why would it be the owners who need to do this? They have offered a framework for a hurting league that resembles other leagues (or would if the NHLPA negotiated it).

 

[Levitate]

like i said in another post, i think we have to consider the other factors in a new deal besides just the idea of a cap or not

free agency, arbitration, rookie contracts, etc. the league could offer a nice looking deal to the players on the surface but one that ultimately screws the players in the end, so they won't take it. then everyone screams they rejected a good proposal when they've only looked at the salary cap part of it. and vice versa with the players

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

The NHL has moved no where. They went from offering a $31M cap to a $42M cap. That's not moving, that's not making concessions, that's beating a square peg into a round hole.


The owners make a meaningful, creative offer when they consider a soft cap.

That's nothing? Well, give me a steam bowl of nothing then. $11 million in salary cap is nothing? The things that flow from the pro-PA side of this argument are unbelievable.



Okay, here's you soft cap. $25 million base. $35 million soft cap with a dollar for tax up to an including $40 million. Anything over that incures a 5:1 penalty and forfeiture of team draft picks in rounds 1 thru 4.

There's your soft cap, and its really creative. We have a deal?

 

[tantalum]

like i said in another post, i think we have to consider the other factors in a new deal besides just the idea of a cap or not

free agency, arbitration, rookie contracts, etc. the league could offer a nice looking deal to the players on the surface but one that ultimately screws the players in the end, so they won't take it. then everyone screams they rejected a good proposal when they've only looked at the salary cap part of it. and vice versa with the players

I agree but in the end the reason the PA is giving is that they want nothing to do with the system. They are not willing to negotiate within the system. If they do and in the end don't feel the concessions on those other things are good enough fine reject it and give reasons why. But right now it isn't these other things they are rejecting.

 

[Levitate]

actually we don't know that at all, we don't know what either side is rejecting for sure

we get the media posturing but have no real idea what's going on. that frustrates me too, that the fans are ultimately kept in the dark about this all.

 

[tantalum]

actually we don't know that at all, we don't know what either side is rejecting for sure

we get the media posturing but have no real idea what's going on. that frustrates me too, that the fans are ultimately kept in the dark about this all.

I'm taking it from what the PA has said directly and consistently, as well as from their actions in rejecting the first offer within a couple of hours. They want nothing to do with a cap system or anything that ties salaries to revenues. Could it be a smokecreen? Sure but I don't think that for this major issue it is.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

There's your soft cap, and its really creative. We have a deal?

no, not good enough

25m floor ..... 40 soft ceiling ... 48 hard cap .. luxury tax of 1:1 from 40 to 48.

but who cares what you and me think .. the owners are more interested in manouvering than in solutions.

dr

 

[GKJ]

no, not good enough

25m floor ..... 40 soft ceiling ... 48 hard cap .. luxury tax of 1:1 from 40 to 48.

but who cares what you and me think .. the owners are more interested in manouvering than in solutions.

dr

I agree.


If all the NHL has done in the past year is change a number from 31 to 42, that is more than a few fries short of a happy meal.

 

[txpd]

The owners have now proved they do not want a season played. This is not the creative proposal that daly was talking about this is more of the same. Wow they went up 3 million dollars from there last proposal a month ago

This thing is going to end up in court and the owners are going to have a tough time winning.

What a shame but at least baseball season is not to far away.

all the owners have proved is that when they said they needed a cost certainty...a hard salary cap, they meant what they said. if they throw that away in bargaining and move on to something wildly different or accept a cap over $60m, then they have wasted most of this hockey season for nothing. I suppose you all think those teams are lying anyway.

it still comes down to one thing. salary cap/no salary cap. both sides seem to be comfortable with the idea of not playing anymore rather than give in on that stand.
IMO the NHL is serious that it needs the cap and if you asked the players they would sign up today for a $42m cap and get back to playing for real money. They dont have that option with this PA, but they would if they could.

 

[txpd]

The NHL has moved no where. They went from offering a $31M cap to a $42M cap. That's not moving, that's not making concessions, that's beating a square peg into a round hole.


The owners make a meaningful, creative offer when they consider a soft cap.

The owners have said all along that they need a direct tie of revenue to payroll/hard salary cap. the nhlpa has said all along that they will not accept that idea and that its none negotiable.

you say in the above post that you expect the owners to move off there demand.
do you have the same expectation of the nhlpa? the players are not moving on the subject. they are not making concessions. all of their offers have been trying to beat a round peg into a square hole.

explain the difference?

 

[GKJ]

The owners have said all along that they need a direct tie of revenue to payroll/hard salary cap. the nhlpa has said all along that they will not accept that idea and that its none negotiable.

you say in the above post that you expect the owners to move off there demand.
do you have the same expectation of the nhlpa? the players are not moving on the subject. they are not making concessions. all of their offers have been trying to beat a round peg into a square hole.

explain the difference?

Well, let's see the players offered to give back 24% of their salary, change the entry level format and change the arbitration format. They're making serious concessions. What's wrong with the proposal floating around this board of a combined soft cap and large cap? Owners still get a hard cap, with linkage, players get their luxury tax. What's so hard about this? The fact that the owners want one thing and it is non-neogeotiable? That's just being stubborn and stupid and if this is what the owners really want, their way or no way, then they were playing this all year to not play this season and they shouldn't entertain us by making the same proposal over and over again.

This is why I believe there is a lot more to what we know and no one is being told anything to report as such)