Lorenzo1000
Registered User
mytor4 said:this is not a $38 million dollar cap. read in-between the lines .38 +franchise=48to50million dollar cap. as i said the union has offered nothing with this perposal.
mytor4 said:this is not a $38 million dollar cap. read in-between the lines .38 +franchise=48to50million dollar cap. as i said the union has offered nothing with this perposal.
York16 said:A poster at another forum I frequent heard this (he said he would fix any errors in his post if need be)...
- Salary cap of $38.5 million, + $2 million for player compensation & benefits
- Salary floor of $31 million
- "Franchise player" exemption from salary cap
- No salary rollback
- 60/40 revenue sharing on gate receipts
- Unrestricted free agency at age 27, or 6 years in the NHL
- Entry-level contracts limited to $1.2 million plus bonuses
- Qualifying offers @ 75%
- Baseball-style arbitration
Rob Paxon said:This is very workable for both sides... the numbers can go up or down a bit and the UFA age needs to be a bit higher, but what do you radically pro-owners guys expect?
The cap number isn't ridiculously high when you consider the revenue sharing.
Anyone trying to fudge the numbers so that the cap is $50 million is just being stubborn. Since when does every team have a player making over $10 million? If they did, it'd be basically dead salary... teams wouldn't be adding $10 million in player value to their roster, they'd be adding one player of substantially less value than they could get out of multiple players with the money if they were allowed to. If a team can afford the additional money for just one player, it isn't going to ruin the entire system and turn the rich teams into dynasties, nor will it dictate a rise in non-franchised slaries. It is just one player and does not represent a "loophole" by any means. On top of that, I'm sure most franchised players would end up getting $7 million or less. And on top of that, I'm sure any sort of final agreement would have many imits dealing with the exemption, not the least of which would be a cap on it.
I do like the idea someone said about giving some cap exemptions for players who have been with a team for a long period of time. In fact, it is the best non-traditional idea I've heard in conjunction with a cap.
The NHLPA isn't going to be offering anything better numbers-wise, but that isn't to say they wouldn't accept something lower in a counter-offer.
If this is indeed a real proposal, a deal is inevitable. If it isn't inevitable, it would spell doom and gloom as far as I'm concerned.
But I thought it was said on the first page of this thread that the proposal was most likely fiction, just like most other rumoured proposals that have been bantered about on this board. The PA cant really be accused of offering half-measure proposals. They havent offered anything in months.no13matssundin said:Is anyone else sick and tired of the PA's half-measure proposals that add up to absolutely nothing?
Icey said:So you think a team like Chicago who does not broadcast their home games (i.e. no TV revenue) should share in Toronto's or Dallas's TV revenue who do broadcast their home games and do a darn good job at it. You are rewarding the bad teams for doing nothing and penalizing the teams who are good at it.
couldn't agree with you more -Icey said:So you think a team like Chicago who does not broadcast their home games (i.e. no TV revenue) should share in Toronto's or Dallas's TV revenue who do broadcast their home games and do a darn good job at it. You are rewarding the bad teams for doing nothing and penalizing the teams who are good at it.
Rob Paxon said:This is very workable for both sides... the numbers can go up or down a bit and the UFA age needs to be a bit higher, but what do you radically pro-owners guys expect?
The cap number isn't ridiculously high when you consider the revenue sharing.
Anyone trying to fudge the numbers so that the cap is $50 million is just being stubborn. Since when does every team have a player making over $10 million? If they did, it'd be basically dead salary... teams wouldn't be adding $10 million in player value to their roster, they'd be adding one player of substantially less value than they could get out of multiple players with the money if they were allowed to. If a team can afford the additional money for just one player, it isn't going to ruin the entire system and turn the rich teams into dynasties, nor will it dictate a rise in non-franchised slaries. It is just one player and does not represent a "loophole" by any means. On top of that, I'm sure most franchised players would end up getting $7 million or less. And on top of that, I'm sure any sort of final agreement would have many imits dealing with the exemption, not the least of which would be a cap on it.
I do like the idea someone said about giving some cap exemptions for players who have been with a team for a long period of time. In fact, it is the best non-traditional idea I've heard in conjunction with a cap.
The NHLPA isn't going to be offering anything better numbers-wise, but that isn't to say they wouldn't accept something lower in a counter-offer.
If this is indeed a real proposal, a deal is inevitable. If it isn't inevitable, it would spell doom and gloom as far as I'm concerned.
Winger98 said:Careful Rob-- you're going to start sounding like a reasonable moderate and those aren't much welcomed in these here parts
Just like the NHL has offered nothing with their crap proposals then right?mytor4 said:this is not a $38 million dollar cap. read in-between the lines .38 +franchise=48to50million dollar cap. as i said the union has offered nothing with this perposal.
mytor4 said:this is not a $38 million dollar cap. read in-between the lines .38 +franchise=48to50million dollar cap. as i said the union has offered nothing with this perposal.
you're right - trevor linden has said the correction - ie - gm's waking up - had already started - before bettman decided he didn't want to play this yearJohn Flyers Fan said:Franchise player salaries for each team if this was 2003-04
Anaheim - Fedorov - $10 million
Atlanta - Kozlov - $3.5
Boston - Lapointe - $5.5
Buffalo - Satan - $4.75
Calgary - Iginla - $7.5
Carolina - Brind'amour - $5
Chicago - Daze - $3.2
Colorado - Forsberg - $11
Columbus - Cassels - $3.5
Dallas - Modano - $9
Detroit - Lidstrom - $10
Edmonton - Smyth - $3.45
Florida - Jokinen - $2
Los Angeles - Allison - $8
Minnesota - Gaborik - $2.9
Nashville - York - $2
New Jersey - Stevens - $6.92
New York - Yashin - $8.4
New York - Jagr - $11
Ottawa - Alfredsson - $5.05
Philadelphia - LeClair - $9
Phoenix - Savage - $3.25
San Jose - Damphousse - $4
St. Louis - Tkachuk - $10
Tampa - Khabibulin - $4.43
Toronto - Sundin - $9
Vancouver - Bertuzzi - $6.8
Washington - Kolzig - $6.25
Average is $5.85 million. And if anything salaries are going to drop.
Exactly what I thought. Thanks for getting the list of highest paid players for each team. Proves pro-player points.John Flyers Fan said:How many teams have $10-12 million players ???
Taranis_24 said:Am I the only one who sees this franchise exception tag as inflationary? When one teams franchise player claiming he should be paid commensorate to other teams franchise player. You know the agents and union will be sure to try to exploit it.
How does it prove pro-player points with respect to a likely bs rumour? It may debunk some peoples numbers, but it doesnt prove anything.19nazzy said:Exactly what I thought. Thanks for getting the list of highest paid players for each team. Proves pro-player points.
John Flyers Fan said:Franchise player salaries for each team if this was 2003-04
Anaheim - Fedorov - $10 million
Atlanta - Kozlov - $3.5
Boston - Lapointe - $5.5
Buffalo - Satan - $4.75
Calgary - Iginla - $7.5
Carolina - Brind'amour - $5
Chicago - Daze - $3.2
Colorado - Forsberg - $11
Columbus - Cassels - $3.5
Dallas - Modano - $9
Detroit - Lidstrom - $10
Edmonton - Smyth - $3.45
Florida - Jokinen - $2
Los Angeles - Allison - $8
Minnesota - Gaborik - $2.9
Nashville - York - $2
New Jersey - Stevens - $6.92
New York - Yashin - $8.4
New York - Jagr - $11
Ottawa - Alfredsson - $5.05
Philadelphia - LeClair - $9
Phoenix - Savage - $3.25
San Jose - Damphousse - $4
St. Louis - Tkachuk - $10
Tampa - Khabibulin - $4.43
Toronto - Sundin - $9
Vancouver - Bertuzzi - $6.8
Washington - Kolzig - $6.25
Average is $5.85 million. And if anything salaries are going to drop.
Rob Paxon said:And this is seemingly alright with so many of you... if the league doesn't like anything in the deal it is OK for them to reject it. How close is this deal to what the league wanted rather than what the NHLPA did? The union is giving here, and at some point the league is going to have to.
McDonald19 said:Well maybe they will negotiate off of the proposal.
UFA age dropped to 30...then players say 28 then owners say 29....there you go new UFA age is 29.
Owners say Cap floor at 20 million players want 30 million owners say ok 25 million.
Franchise player exception thing the owners are never going to agree to in my opinion though.
McDonald19 said:Well maybe they will negotiate off of the proposal.
UFA age dropped to 30...then players say 28 then owners say 29....there you go new UFA age is 29.
Owners say Cap floor at 20 million players want 30 million owners say ok 25 million.
Franchise player exception thing the owners are never going to agree to in my opinion though.