If cap goes down for 2006-07 season, who might be in trouble?

[Colorado Avalanche]

If cap limit goes down, i can see few teams having problems with cap. This is just speculation and lot will happen in 12 months, but just wanted to do this, to see, which teams might be in troubles. Here's few teams i might see having problems.

I was thinking maybe Pittsburgh. Lot young players who might have good year and wants more money and they also bought some high profile ufas which will take nice amount of cap space etc. Gonchar,Palffy, but we might not see Lemieux after this year, so it frees some cap space for them.

Flyers, After signing Rathje,Hatcher and Forsberg. It takes at least 10 million away their cap space and they need to sign Gagne etc.

Anaheim, Scott Niedermayer,Giguere and Fedorov will take easily over 10 million off their cap space already.

Atlanta, might be some kind of problems too, it depends lot, how much is Kovalchuk going to get?

Boston, They will have hard times, when Patrice Bergeron and Raycroft wants more money.

Joe Thornton Re-signed RFA (Boston) $6.666 million
Glen Murray Re-signed UFA (Boston) $4.15 million
Alexei Zhamnov UFA (Philadelphia) $4.1 million
Sergei Samsonov Re-signed RFA (Boston) $2.77 million

4 players take off their cap space 16 million+. It will be tough time for Boston.

Tampa Bay

Martin St. Louis Re-signed RFA (Tampa Bay) $6.5 million
Vincent Lecavalier Re-signed RFA (Tampa Bay) $6 million
Brad Richards $3.401 million

If Brad Richards wants raise for his salary , Tampa Bay will be some kind of troubles.

Colorado

Colorado Will have also hard times, they need to sign John-Michael Liles,Aebischer,Tanguay etc for longer term deals, and hopefully for cheap.

Click to read more...

 

[Sens4Cup]

It seems like Brad Richards is going to another team no matter what. Giving Lecavalier and St. Louis 13 million dollars a year will make Richards the likely candidate out of town. He's making 3.4 million this year, which for what he does is pretty much a steal. But seen as he won the Conn Smythe, and has been an awesome and consistent player, he'll want more like 4.5-5 million at least IMO. I would think a likely destination for him might be Montreal or Detroit. Montreal has cap room and Detroit will have a fair bit of space after this year with guys like Chelios, Shanahan, Yzerman, etc. gone. Ken Holland is also quite good at pulling off deals that get him a superstar player at just the right time. If they were able to acquire Richards, it would be a big step forward for the franchise, and would make Datsyuk very expendible.

 

[Classic Devil]

Everybody.

 

[Biggest Canuck Fan]

Vancouver. They are right at the brink, and if the cap goes down they would let someone go and replace him with a rookie... not good at all.

 

[boredmale]

UFAs next season will have trouble, with teams having limited budgets, they will be got at bargain prices

at least bargain prices compared to this years signings.

 

[infected13]

the ducks shouldnt be too bad, they as some of their contracts, including Sykora come to term at the end of this season. Also they are already sitting around 35m payroll according to TSN as i recall.

 

[Sotnos]

It seems like Brad Richards is going to another team no matter what. Giving Lecavalier and St. Louis 13 million dollars a year will make Richards the likely candidate out of town. He's making 3.4 million this year, which for what he does is pretty much a steal. But seen as he won the Conn Smythe, and has been an awesome and consistent player, he'll want more like 4.5-5 million at least IMO. I would think a likely destination for him might be Montreal or Detroit. Montreal has cap room and Detroit will have a fair bit of space after this year with guys like Chelios, Shanahan, Yzerman, etc. gone. Ken Holland is also quite good at pulling off deals that get him a superstar player at just the right time. If they were able to acquire Richards, it would be a big step forward for the franchise, and would make Datsyuk very expendible.

Why do people assume one of those 3 MUST be the odd man out? There are other players Tampa can get rid of to fit Brad in. Think about it.

Richards will be signed to a long-term contract next season, period. He is not the type of player you move unless you're forced to.

 

[discostu]

Why do people assume one of those 3 MUST be the odd man out? There are other players Tampa can get rid of to fit Brad in. Think about it.

Richards will be signed to a long-term contract next season, period. He is not the type of player you move unless you're forced to.

If the cap goes down, it becomes very hard to keep that core together. In fact, I think Tampa, when making that move, were banking on a decent-sized increase in revenues, which is why they went after longer term deals. If that doesn't happen, and in fact, revenues do go down, I think the cap situation gets ugly, with some creative management needed by Feaster to field a cup contending team.

The reason why people assume that Richards will be the one to go, is that the next biggest salaries are on defence, and, personally, you've got great bang for your buck on the blueline, so, I don't see it being possible to tinker there, without sacrificing a lot in terms of quality. There are other salaries that are movable, like Modin and Prospal, but, they don't make that much, and their replacements will command nearly as much. The easiest, but not neccessarily the best solution, is to trade one of the big three. That's why people proposing that. If the cap does go down, maybe Feaster has a few tricks up his sleeve (we've already seen some GMs find creative solutions to their problems), that keeps the trio together, but, my guess is that it will take the trading of one of those guys to make it happen.

 

[Sotnos]

maybe Feaster has a few tricks up his sleeve

Obviously he does, and obviously if the cap goes down, Tampa has a problem. They are hardly alone in that.

No offense, but it does get annoying hearing this stuff over and over again, always from fans of the same team.

 

[Tap on the Ankle]

The Sens may be in big trouble if the cap goes down, with Havlat, Spezza, Chara, and Redden needing new contracts next summer. The latter two eligible for UFA status as well. Heck, the Sens may even have some trouble re-signing all those guys if the cap stays the same or goes up a bit. The lesson here is don't draft well before a new CBA.

 

[oil slick]

Obviously he does, and obviously if the cap goes down, Tampa has a problem. They are hardly alone in that.

No offense, but it does get annoying hearing this stuff over and over again, always from fans of the same team.

Consider it a compliment coming from an Oilers fan anyways. It means that you have such an embarrassment of riches that other teams are looking for some way to bring you down.

As a fan of a team with no first line center, I think it's natural to look at other teams and day dream about scenarios in which you can pilfer someone elses good stuff, and the cap provides fodder for such ambitions.

I think it will be interesting how this all plays out though. Will it be better to construct a team with balance throughout the lineup? Or will it be better to pay a few star players a lot, and try to fill out the roster with decent cheap players. I guess you would prefer to keep all three big guns indefinately, which might work, but I think if you start skimping too much on the rest of the lineup, it could really hurt.

 

[SJeasy]

From what I can gather looking at projected ticket sales, ticket price reductions, the TV contract, etc., it looks like worst case is that the league will do no worse than the projected revenue (projected ticket sales is the hardest to track down). If they do that and the Brooks article is correct about a factored in 5% increase of revenues for setting the following year's cap, then the cap would actually go up by about 0.5 mil. This may not be enough for some teams like TB, but it indicates what some of the GMs may be looking at for setting their payroll and the signings that they have done this year.

 

[discostu]

From what I can gather looking at projected ticket sales, ticket price reductions, the TV contract, etc., it looks like worst case is that the league will do no worse than the projected revenue (projected ticket sales is the hardest to track down). If they do that and the Brooks article is correct about a factored in 5% increase of revenues for setting the following year's cap, then the cap would actually go up by about 0.5 mil. This may not be enough for some teams like TB, but it indicates what some of the GMs may be looking at for setting their payroll and the signings that they have done this year.

I haven't done any detailed analysis, but, based on the reductions in ticket prices in most arena's, I'm thinking that they will have a tough time reaching their projected revenue targets. In Ottawa, there has been some substantial ticket price cuts, and, we are a market that should have a fairly high retention rate.

 

[USF Shark]

Everybody.

Well stated, and it's the correct answer. The cap is already pretty darn low, if it went down even more there would be no way for teams to keep any high priced tallent unless they decided to field a team with 10 players making less than a million. There would be no paridy (?) (I need spell check), teams would just suck.

 

[Egil]

I haven't done any detailed analysis, but, based on the reductions in ticket prices in most arena's, I'm thinking that they will have a tough time reaching their projected revenue targets. In Ottawa, there has been some substantial ticket price cuts, and, we are a market that should have a fairly high retention rate.

But the ticket price cuts are under 20%, which is the projected revenue drop.

Sotnos: You sound like someone trying to deny reality. Sure, you don't need to move on of Richards, Lecavalier or St. Louis, but paying half your payroll to 3 forwards isn't a path to success. As Disco pointed out, your options for shedding payroll after one of those 3 are slim.

 

[SJeasy]

In the research that I did, I had to find projected ticket sales. Some were obvious like Toronto, Philadelphia, Colorado and Detroit. The large market teams with strong fanbases are looking like worst case 5-10% revenue drops, if that. SJ looks like a 25% drop. Washington is hurting bad. The overall scenario looked as if there were enough large market teams to hold the drop to 20%. The revenue issue is league wide. Some smaller markets will be doing well vs. the 20% like TB and Pittsburgh. From a mathematical perspective, a team such as Toronto making $100 mil and suffering a %5 drop can almost hold up two $50 mil teams suffering 40% drops so that overall the drop is 20%.

 

[PecaFan]

The cap's not going to go down. The ticket price reductions and reduced ticket sales etc have all been factored into the cap already.

And since then, we've had new revenue sources of the US TV deal, the new radio deal today, and most every market in the league has already seen a increase in enthusiasm towards the upcoming season, as the cap has been seen as great leveler.

 

[kdb209]

The cap's not going to go down. The ticket price reductions and reduced ticket sales etc have all been factored into the cap already.

And since then, we've had new revenue sources of the US TV deal, the new radio deal today, and most every market in the league has already seen a increase in enthusiasm towards the upcoming season, as the cap has been seen as great leveler.

I wouldn't be so optimistic.

The cap was set by estimated revenues - even accounting for price reductions, it is possible that ticket sales may fall short of those estimates, particularly in those markets without a large season ticket base that rely on individual game ticket sales - they are very hard to predict.

The New OLN TV deal ($65M) is only $5M more than the ESPN deal from last season, and the NBC deal has no guaranteed money (unlike the old ABC deal). The XM deal is only a whopping $10M/year and we don't know how it is structured - they are likely paying significantly less for the first two years when the broadcasts aren't exclusive.

Not every market has seen great enthusiasm.

I posted in another thread here, an article from the San Jose Business Journal on the Sharks.

http://www.hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=170947
http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2005/09/12/focus2.html

Even with an average 10% ticket price reduction (and a trip to the WCF), they still lost 10% of their season ticket base, have unsold luxury boxes, and a very soft advertising market for local TV revenues.

I think it is likely, especially if enforcement of the new rules does lead to a more exciting product on the ice, that the league will reach it's revenue projections, but it is by no means a slam dunk.

 

[Colorado Avalanche]

Vancouver. They are right at the brink, and if the cap goes down they would let someone go and replace him with a rookie... not good at all.

I can see Jovanovski going back Florida, because Sedinds might wanna have some cash after this year.

Excellent core, Bertuzzi,Naslund,Ohlund and Jovanovski, but it's very hard to keep together.

 

[Colorado Avalanche]

The Sens may be in big trouble if the cap goes down, with Havlat, Spezza, Chara, and Redden needing new contracts next summer. The latter two eligible for UFA status as well. Heck, the Sens may even have some trouble re-signing all those guys if the cap stays the same or goes up a bit. The lesson here is don't draft well before a new CBA.

Agree, they propably have to let someone go, because if some of those have "big/huge" year, they will want more money. I can see Chara having at least +5 million in UFA market and Redden +3,5 million. Hard times for Ottawa.

 

[Colorado Avalanche]

Hopefully teams can afford Kovalchuks,Datsyuks in cap world. They are game sugar, awesome to watch, that would be big hit for NHL, if they would go back Russia.

 

[PecaFan]

Even with an average 10% ticket price reduction (and a trip to the WCF), they still lost 10% of their season ticket base, have unsold luxury boxes, and a very soft advertising market for local TV revenues.

Yup, and as I said, those things have *already* been included in the estimates. It's not like this is a surprise, "gosh, we thought San Jose was going to be 100% filled every night". No, the current cap is based on very pessimistic numbers, a $400 million revenue reduction is *huge*.

The cap will only go down if the revenue hit is so extreme that it ends up being way beyond the vision of those pessimistic forecasts.

Me, I think the NHL hired some smart people, who could see all this.

 

[Captain Ron]

Yup, and as I said, those things have *already* been included in the estimates. It's not like this is a surprise, "gosh, we thought San Jose was going to be 100% filled every night". No, the current cap is based on very pessimistic numbers, a $400 million revenue reduction is *huge*.

The cap will only go down if the revenue hit is so extreme that it ends up being way beyond the vision of those pessimistic forecasts.

Me, I think the NHL hired some smart people, who could see all this.

PecaFan you are a knowledgeable guy and this is not a slam at you. But there is no way in hell that the league could possibly know what kind of financial consequences will result in the loss of an entire season. There are Fortune 500 companies that have accountants that are far superior to anybody the NHL could find that have difficulties in accurately predicting their companies future revenue.

The revenue predictions for the 2005-06 season are nothing more than a shot in the dark. The league could make $1.4 billion it could make $1.9 billion. Any of us would have about the same chances of guessing what the league will make this year as any of these "so-called" experts.

 

[discostu]

PecaFan you are a knowledgeable guy and this is not a slam at you. But there is no way in hell that the league could possibly know what kind of financial consequences will result in the loss of an entire season. There are Fortune 500 companies that have accountants that are far superior to anybody the NHL could find that have difficulties in accurately predicting their companies future revenue.

The revenue predictions for the 2005-06 season are nothing more than a shot in the dark. The league could make $1.4 billion it could make $1.9 billion. Any of us would have about the same chances of guessing what the league will make this year as any of these "so-called" experts.

Well, the league does have more info at their disposal, but, I agree with you. Predicting revenue is a hard game, and no one will really know what's going to happen. The enthusiasm about the season on this board is encouraging, but, there are also lots of fans that are sitting back. There are some encouraging ticket sales numbers, out of places like Pittsburgh, whose team is greatly improved, but, there are also teams like Colorado and Detroit, who have been big revenue generators, who are dealing with a lot of turnover. Thse teams may take a big hit.

Also, luxury boxes, and other corporate revenues are still a bit of anomoly. We don't know how well the NHL has rebounded in this area. They may sell all of their boxes, but, it may require bigger discounts for that to happen, and not all of that will be made public.

I think we need to be patient, and realize that all estimates at what the future will bring are just that, estimates.

 

[Anksun]

Just heard a little report about the fans going back in the stands at rds. They communicated with a bunch load of teams around the league to see how the buying tickets was going and about every team that bother to answer send very positive early results. They said the teams that doesnt bother returning the call was teams with the like of Carolina (which will drop imo).

Boivin (president of the habs) already states the early predictions were all looking a good mark under what are the new expectations with the past few weeks selling. That's the highest fans total in the stand and they already are stating they WILL beat the average people in the stands of the last 3 seasons.

I know Tampa Bay are selling season tickets pretty well also, and that's a decent looking indication of what might happen in the usa (granted they are the reigning champions, so that helps.)

The TV contracts are lower, but that was already expected. So i think we might not see the cap going down.