gc2005 said:
Explain this then:
How is a $42.5 million salary cap a $75 million increase compared to a $40 million salary cap? I'll make it multiple choice:
(a) If and only if every team spends up to the maximum allowable limit of $42.5 million
(b) Gary is lying
The idea wasn't that every team would spend $42.5M instead of $40M, it's that all teams would spend $2.5M more as the cap is raised. The $75M increase takes into account the fact that Pittsburgh would have to spend maybe $30M instead of $28M for the same players, because the top spenders are allowed to raise the market by $2.5M.
Bettman's theory that the cap acts as a magnet is fine. The "universe" of salaries is increased whenever the cap is increased.
The problem is that he talked about the theory in the complete wrong way, saying all teams would spend to the cap limit etc. All teams would spend more as the cap is increased, but that doesn't mean all teams would spend the cap.
If Detroit is allowed to spend $45M instead of $42M, it doesn't mean Pittsburgh will spend $45M it means that they will have to spend about $3M more for the same team, because the market is increased. So like $30M instead of $28M.
Problem is, some people took Bettman's terrible explanation of the theory and failed to understand what he's actually talking about. Some people on here still think that a $49M cap is too high because 30x$49M is too much. It's pretty annoying.