Globe and Mail -"Sides Agree to Salary Cap system" -all talk here !!!!

[DevilsFan]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050608.wnhltalks8/BNStory/Sports/

Hot off the press, it looks like previously to today, the NHL and NHLPA have agree to salary-cap system based on team-by-team revenue. Now it's left to the other issues.

A few comments:
1. I can't see them taken much longer than a couple weeks on the others issues like salary arbitration, free agency, qualifying contract offers, and entry-level contracts. The middle to end of June looks likely barring a wrench thrown in by either side.

2. From the article, it looks like certain team will be able to spend more than others due to a floating cap. That was a big bone thrown to the PA, and I disagree with it. The luxury tax better have significant teeth, or smaller teams will suffer. Also, whatever other plan they come up with to share revenue better be substancial, or the league will have problems down the road.

3. Nice to see the players like Linden take some control back from Goodenow. It is going to help their image a little bit.

Click to read more...

 

[Beauty eh?]

The ball is rolling....I can't see them not coming to an agreement now.

 

[Bring Back Bucky]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050608.wnhltalks8/BNStory/Sports/

Hot off the press, it looks like previously to today, the NHL and NHLPA have agree to salary-cap system based on team-by-team revenue. Now it's left to the other issues.

A few comments:
1. I can't see them taken much longer than a couple weeks on the others issues like salary arbitration, free agency, qualifying contract offers, and entry-level contracts. The middle to end of June looks likely barring a wrench thrown in by either side.

2. From the article, it looks like certain team will be able to spend more than others due to a floating cap. That was a big bone thrown to the PA, and I disagree with it. The luxury tax better have significant teeth, or smaller teams will suffer. Also, whatever other plan they come up with to share revenue better be substancial, or the league will have problems down the road.

3. Nice to see the players like Linden take some control back from Goodenow. It is going to help their image a little bit.

In reading the article, that made my stomach a tad uneasy, too. I'd like to see how it would pan out in practice..

 

[GKJ]

The ball is rolling....I can't see them not coming to an agreement now.

will you shut up already? you know the rules around here.

 

[blamebettman*]

the team by team floating cap is a great idea, because it won't lock everybody in at some 36-38 ceiling. Let the Wings, Leafs and Rangers spend into the 40's, the revenue will be there and you can keep teams together longer that way. You win a cup(or go to the finals, conference finals), revenue increases, your cap goes up, you can keep the cup team together longer.


forget teeth, you want to deter the rangers, the luxury tax better have sabre tooth fangs.

If this is the deal, Goodenow is going to be carried out of the boardroom on the players shoulders.

 

[Kaizer]

There is official Alexei Kovalev site.
http://www.kovalev27.ru/

There is info directly from interview with Kovalev :
- Season will start in October
- Lockout may be cancelled in few days
- Sides have almost agreed
- The only problem that NHLPA and NHL has to solve - UFA status .

 

[Bring Back Bucky]

will you shut up already? you know the rules around here.

gokj, you missed our therapy session again today.. Sorry, but I'm going to have to bill you if this happens again

 

[WC Handy*]

the team by team floating cap is a great idea, because it won't lock everybody in at some 36-38 ceiling. Let the Wings, Leafs and Rangers spend into the 40's, the revenue will be there and you can keep teams together longer that way. You win a cup(or go to the finals, conference finals), revenue increases, your cap goes up, you can keep the cup team together longer.


forget teeth, you want to deter the rangers, the luxury tax better have sabre tooth fangs.

No, it's not a great idea. If they agree to a system that allows the Wings or the Rangers to spend more than the rest of the league, I'll be cancelling my season tickets the day of the press conference.

 

[FLYLine27*]

No, it's not a great idea. If they agree to a system that allows the Wings or the Rangers to spend more than the rest of the league, I'll be cancelling my season tickets the day of the press conference.

You do realize if they do...it will be like an extra 1.5-2 million max right? (No way i can see it being more then that)

 

[Bruwinz37]

No, it's not a great idea. If they agree to a system that allows the Wings or the Rangers to spend more than the rest of the league, I'll be cancelling my season tickets the day of the press conference.

I need more details, but jeez, this sounds like a very weird system that could create more trouble than it fixes.

 

[blamebettman*]

it all depends on how much money the rangers/leafs/avs etc make. they'll likely make more than most of the league so the cap will be higher. But it won't be 60 million or something, or probably even 50 million! so you'd better rethink canceling your season tickets.

 

[Levitate]

er, how would it create more problems than it solves?

 

[joepeps]

the team by team floating cap is a great idea, because it won't lock everybody in at some 36-38 ceiling. Let the Wings, Leafs and Rangers spend into the 40's, the revenue will be there and you can keep teams together longer that way. You win a cup(or go to the finals, conference finals), revenue increases, your cap goes up, you can keep the cup team together longer.


forget teeth, you want to deter the rangers, the luxury tax better have sabre tooth fangs.

If this is the deal, Goodenow is going to be carried out of the boardroom on the players shoulders.

Goodenow did **** on this deal...

my guess is.. that it's the work of the PA Players.... ala.. Lindin, Gartner, and company........

 

[blamebettman*]

er, how would it create more problems than it solves?

potential problems in reporting revenue for one, especially since certain teams will want a higher cap. but there will be a luxury tax, probably not a strong one, and I think they've now defined revenue at these meetings so it's going to be hard for the rangers to say we made X amount and deserve a 56mil cap, not likely.

 

[Levitate]

yeah i don't see issues with reporting revenues if they've spent all this time defining what those revenues are, etc

but even so, honestly compare the old CBA to this proposal, and tell me that this new one creates more problems than the last one...just try

 

[blamebettman*]

Goodenow did **** on this deal...

my guess is.. that it's the work of the PA Players.... ala.. Lindin, Gartner, and company........

if you believe that myth floated by the PA haters

 

[joepeps]

if you believe that myth floated by the PA haters

lol i'm pro PA... what are you talking about... I just believe goodenow has been told to straighten up a little... and do what they say...

 

[blamebettman*]

it seems odd though.

goodenow is not so irrational to let a deal like this slip by and suggest the players hold out even longer, they shouldn't be holding his feet to the fire on this one, this is much better than the old 42 offer, which by the way is NOT looking good right now...

jacobs, ok I could see how he's pissed off (some earlier reports had him sitting angrily at the meetings and glancing at his watch). so the NHL hardliners are upset, but I don't think Goodenow was as hardline as most made him out to be.

 

[tantalum]

AS i mentioned in another thread it seems to me that the author of the story is saying that the payroll range will span a low of $22 mil and a potential high of $36 mil. I think he is saying that the formula for the calculation must be a complicated one because if you used direct percentages then the leafs would have a cap higher than $36 mil when that will not be the case. The allowing high revenue teams to spend more seems more to do with the tax system that lower revenue teams may not be abel to afford. SO if the PA folks are correct and that a cap doesn't act as a magnet then the richer teams will be able to spend $14 more million than the poor teams. No more than that.

 

[Shaynsaw]

it seems odd though.

goodenow is not so irrational to let a deal like this slip by and suggest the players hold out even longer, they shouldn't be holding his feet to the fire on this one, this is much better than the old 42 offer, which by the way is NOT looking good right now...

jacobs, ok I could see how he's pissed off (some earlier reports had him sitting angrily at the meetings and glancing at his watch). so the NHL hardliners are upset, but I don't think Goodenow was as hardline as most made him out to be.

Why would the hardlines be mad. I am a fan of a small market team and this deal looks pretty good.

34-36Mil Hard cap with a $1 for $1 between $29Mil and 36Mil.
This mean if the Oilers spend $29 Mil and the Rangers spend 36Mil there is only a $7Mil gap. Thats pretty good. Plus the Ranger would have to pay $7Mil in taxes which could help the small market team gets to the min cap.

 

[Mess]

You do realize if they do...it will be like an extra 1.5-2 million max right? (No way i can see it being more then that)

Well the article does say

" If a strict percentage were used, then a large-revenue team like the Toronto Maple Leafs would have a salary cap not only much higher than $36-million, but vastly higher than a team like the Phoenix Coyotes".

 

[Robert Paulson*]

I've barely been following this at all lately.. if we get a deal done by mid June.. would there still be an entry draft at its normal time?

 

[FLYLine27*]

I've barely been following this at all lately.. if we get a deal done by mid June.. would there still be an entry draft at its normal time?

Most likely.

 

[Mess]

lol i'm pro PA... what are you talking about... I just believe goodenow has been told to straighten up a little... and do what they say...

Or if this rumour is true at all .. (Which is hard to believe really) but ..

Then it looks like Good Cop LINDEN verses Bad COP GOODENOW tactic seems to be working quite well against the NHL Owners at this stage.

With each passing day it is getting closer and closer to the Dec 9th NHLPA proposal with a Hard Cap to prevent small market teams from losing money.

 

[Realm]

floating cap

I dont like the idea of big market teams being able to spend more then "the cap" I gotta get some more info on this. Doesnt sound right. I hope its not a big difference, because I am sure it will grow EVERY year if there is a floating cap with linkage. It might seem like a small amount now, but year after year it would grow. Sounds like the loophole the PA is looking for. I guess I will wait until I see the numbers before I freak out about this.