Salary Cap: Salary Cap Might Climb to $82.5M Next Off-Season

[Adam Michaels]

Click to read more...

 

[CHfan1]

I expect it’ll go up by $1 million at a time for the next few years at least (according to the modified CBA). It’ll be quite awhile before escrow is paid off by the players where it can go up by more than that.

 

[Big Empty]

This is the issue with acquiring Eichel. The cap is barely going up.

Suzuki is going to need a new deal. He should be in the 6-7.5M range. Romanov is going to need a new deal. Chiarot will be up for a new deal. Evans will get a raise. Lehky is going to need a new deal.

If you add a 10M contract with the cap staying flat and your young stars coming off their ELC, you're going to have a major cap issue.

As much as I like Eichel, I'd stay away.

 

[Hoochi Papa]

Add Gallagher and Byron/one of our many third pair D's/Anderson/Drouin in the package and BOOM, there's your Eichel money. Kotkaniemi and how many first round picks?

 

[MasterD]

This is the issue with acquiring Eichel. The cap is barely going up.

Suzuki is going to need a new deal. He should be in the 6-7.5M range. Romanov is going to need a new deal. Chiarot will be up for a new deal. Evans will get a raise. Lehky is going to need a new deal.

If you add a 10M contract with the cap staying flat and your young stars coming off their ELC, you're going to have a major cap issue.

As much as I like Eichel, I'd stay away.

We're paying Byron 3.5M and Gallagher 6.5. and Armia 3.4 or something?

Eichel wouldn't be the problem.

 

[Leon Lucius Black]

This is the issue with acquiring Eichel. The cap is barely going up.

Suzuki is going to need a new deal. He should be in the 6-7.5M range. Romanov is going to need a new deal. Chiarot will be up for a new deal. Evans will get a raise. Lehky is going to need a new deal.

If you add a 10M contract with the cap staying flat and your young stars coming off their ELC, you're going to have a major cap issue.

As much as I like Eichel, I'd stay away.

If we got Eichel there are lots of options to clear space next off season.

- Drouin and Byron will only have a year left on their deals which could make them more tradeable, even if you have to give up an asset
- A bottom six winger like Armia or Lehkonen could be dealt, or even both
- Hoffman or Toffoli are on very tradeable deals
- If Primeau has a strong year, Allen could be dealt

 

[salbutera]

If we got Eichel there are lots of options to clear space next off season.

- Drouin and Byron will only have a year left on their deals which could make them more tradeable, even if you have to give up an asset
- A bottom six winger like Armia or Lehkonen could be dealt, or even both
- Hoffman or Toffoli are on very tradeable deals
- If Primeau has a strong year, Allen could be dealt

Yup - don’t get this constant paranoia about cap space. Get the talent first, there’ll always be a way to deal with it.

The only team that got remotely hammered by the cap was Hawks of 2010 and even they were able to package Byfuglien & Ladd in separate deals for futures + 1st rounders

 

[jjmathews202]

If there is one thing that TBL has proven, it's that you should always sign the talent then worry about cap compliance. One is much harder to succeed in than the other..... Bring on Papa Eichel!!!

 

[BLONG7]

This will cover the Alzner mistake...........833k each of the next two years...

 

[Deebs]

If we got Eichel there are lots of options to clear space next off season.

- Drouin and Byron will only have a year left on their deals which could make them more tradeable, even if you have to give up an asset
- A bottom six winger like Armia or Lehkonen could be dealt, or even both
- Hoffman or Toffoli are on very tradeable deals
- If Primeau has a strong year, Allen could be dealt

All these proposals in this post is the dilemma with acquiring Eichel. Yeah we can get him but then our depth goes to shit and we become the Oilers. A couple high priced players that are great in the regular season but then the rest of the team can't help them out when it counts in the playoffs.

I understand the want of getting the super talented players but you gotta be smart about it as well.

We need to continue to build from within and when we get to the point where we can make a big move without sacrificing team depth, then pull the trigger.

 

[Kriss E]

All these proposals in this post is the dilemma with acquiring Eichel. Yeah we can get him but then our depth goes to shit and we become the Oilers. A couple high priced players that are great in the regular season but then the rest of the team can't help them out when it counts in the playoffs.

I understand the want of getting the super talented players but you gotta be smart about it as well.

We need to continue to build from within and when we get to the point where we can make a big move without sacrificing team depth, then pull the trigger.

The issue isn't clearing space, it's what we'd have to give to acquire him.

 

[Deebs]

The issue isn't clearing space, it's what we'd have to give to acquire him.

It's actually both. Give up some of our top prospects, who make nothing and then leave our cupboards empty, then trying to make room by sacrificing depth. It's a tough situation all around

 

[covfefe]

Lehkonen or our other bit player’s next deals aren’t really a consideration in the context of acquiring a guy like Eichel. If you have the chance to pick up a gamebreaker, you take it and figure out how the chips will fall.

the neck injury - that’s a real concern, but I have no unique insights nor is that the topic at hand.

 

[26Mats]

This is the issue with acquiring Eichel. The cap is barely going up.

Suzuki is going to need a new deal. He should be in the 6-7.5M range. Romanov is going to need a new deal. Chiarot will be up for a new deal. Evans will get a raise. Lehky is going to need a new deal.

If you add a 10M contract with the cap staying flat and your young stars coming off their ELC, you're going to have a major cap issue.

As much as I like Eichel, I'd stay away.

I'd add Eichel and move the following players if/when the cap becomes an issue: Drouin, Byron, Anderson, Armia, Lehkonen. That's 20.1M in cap that can be replaced by 5 in 1M players. These are not core pieces. Eichel would be (if healthy!).

 

[beowulf]

A whole million perfect for a Bargain Big free agent!!

 

[BigDaddyLurch]

A whole million perfect for a Bargain Big free agent!!

...nope, just pays for Alzner...

 

[Sterling Archer]

Perfect. Our star play Cap Hit will get a raise!

 

[beowulf]

...nope, just pays for Alzner...

not even lol

 

[CHfan1]

Semantics issue at play here. I call both the 20% hold back and any other holdback Escrow.

Something else to consider... $81.5M salary cap came from a $5.09B market. That article you are reading has the projected market at $4.8B for next year and I have that exact number in my formula as well. However, consider this part... Salary cap before Covid was projected to be $86M - $88M range for the 20/21 season. That would indicate a higher market than $5.09B right? . So I believe they are projecting very conservatives numbers at this point with that $4.8B market for the coming season. It doesn't all add up to me and I've dug deep into this before.

How does the cap grow from $81.5M to a projected $86M - $88M range before Covid? That was right before Covid (Early 2020). That was the projected salary cap for the 20/21 season at that point in time. I'm not making this up, it was an article posted about Bettman's market predictions with the players. Now they are saying the market will be $4.8B for 21/22 with fans in the seats, Seattle revenue, and new US TV deals? It seems very, very, very, conservative to me. Then I wonder, the amount of spending done this off season was ridiculous if teams actually thought the cap would be flat for that long. It don't add all up!

Maybe $4.8 billion is conservative but we’ll see. If HRR is higher the remaining escrow balance gets paid off quicker. There is still a lot of factors that could lower revenue next season. For example who knows if all Canadian arenas will be allowed at full capacity.

From the article:

According to sources, the NHL is projecting hockey-related revenue in the $4.8 billion range for the upcoming 2021-22 season. Given that figure includes the increased revenue generated from the two new U.S. national television rights deals with the Walt Disney Company (ESPN) and Warner Media (Turner Sports), plus the juice from a new Kraken club that will almost surely be in the top quartile in revenue, that the NHL’s projection is still south of the pre-pandemic pace of $4.9 billion in 2019-20 would suggest that league bean counters believe some buildings will not be back to full capacity for at least a chunk of this upcoming season.

 

[Habs Halifax]

I expect it’ll go up by $1 million at a time for the next few years at least (according to the modified CBA). It’ll be quite awhile before escrow is paid off by the players where it can go up by more than that.

That's only if you believe their conservative market growth is correct. The same narrative was presented to us in the past when they had the lockout and came back. The projected revenue ended up way lower than what happened and the cap grew substantially. This is Bettman's style and it's always been that way... anything released or projected is on the conservative side.

NHL was a $5.09B market before Covid and the projected revenue was expected to go up in early 2020 before Covid came. Now they are saying that the projected revenue is $4.8B for next year? I bet they are predicting that ticket revenue won't be like it was in 18/19 cause they are being conservative in their predictions.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Maybe $4.8 billion is conservative but we’ll see. If HRR is higher the remaining escrow balance gets paid off quicker. There is still a lot of factors that could lower revenue next season. For example who knows if all Canadian arenas will be allowed at full capacity.

From the article:

I believe that's why they are forced to be conservative with the numbers. Last thing the NHL wants is the NHLPA complaining about higher escrow than they agreed on already. Remember that shit show before last season started? Basically, what we see now is safe numbers to avoid NHLPA paying higher escrow (or holdback...call it what you wish). Anything better, is gravy

$4.8B market is low to me for next year's projections. Like you said, we will see.

 

[CHfan1]

I believe that's why they are forced to be conservative with the numbers. Last thing the NHL wants is the NHLPA complaining about higher escrow than they agreed on already. Remember that shit show before last season started? Basically, what we see now is safe numbers to avoid NHLPA paying higher escrow (or holdback...call it what you wish). Anything better, is gravy

$4.8B market is low to me for next year's projections. Like you said, we will see.

They can’t have higher escrow % than what was already agreed upon, that’s what the CBA is for. Those are the maximum %’s that can come off per year. Any escrow balance above that goes into an escrow account that has to be paid off in the future by the players.

See below (from the CBA):

To the extent that utilizing the Maximum Escrow Percentage for a given League Year results in an Escrow Balance or does not eliminate an Escrow Balance, any such Escrow Balance shall carry forward into (and be factored into the setting of the Escrow Percentage for) the following League Year (with the exception of the 2021/22 League Year).

2020/21 20%

2021/22 14% if Preliminary HRR for the 2020/21
League Year equals or exceeds $3.3 Billion; 18% if Preliminary HRR for the 2020/21 League Year equals or is below $1.8 Billion; pro-rata rate in between $1.8 Billion and $3.3 Billion (e.g. Escrow Percentage of 16% if HRR is $2.55 Billion)

2022/23 10%

2023/24 6%

2024/25 6%

2025/26 6%