News Article: Salary cap might not go up

[Burke the Legend]

In this case wouldn't is related to couldn't. In the end where there's a will, there's a way. Chicago had to dump Campbell, Buff and walked away from Niemi's $2.75M arbitration. Yet they managed to do OK after.

That wasn't a normal cap situation though. By July 1, the team that won the cup in June's salary jumped from like 50$ million (whatever the cap was) to over 70$ million in a few weeks. It was just an overload of talent on ELC or bargain contracts playing way under value. They had to shed that 20$ million after no matter what.

 

[Price is Wright]

Getting another team to take on Bickell's contract might be a problem for them. Saad will get a nice raise from the $764K he's making now and will likely take up $3-$3.5M of that $5.45M you have projected if they can find someone to take on Bickell and his full salary that is.

They are more likely to push him to take the deal Reilly/Krug took in Boston. Once Versteeg is a UFA, Saad can get a better deal.

I think even if they traded Sharp, the Hawks are gonna deal with the loss of Seabrook. Don't see him staying. I think like Suter he wants the chance to stand out on his own as the best defenceman on a team. If they did trade Sharp he would probably have his doubts on the Blackhawks contending again. If they don't, he'll want better pay.

 

[Garnet]

Wouldnt the new Canadian TV deal have to be added into the pool of funds and then raise the salary cap?

 

[Agnostic]

Wouldnt the new Canadian TV deal have to be added into the pool of funds and then raise the salary cap?

Yeah, there's $150M of new money coming into HRR next year, that should more than offset currency exchange issues affecting 7 out of 30 hockey clubs. (yes I know these 7 are very big league revenue generators) .

 

[Frozenice]

Yeah, there's $150M of new money coming into HRR next year, that should more than offset currency exchange issues affecting 7 out of 30 hockey clubs. (yes I know these 7 are very big league revenue generators) .

Surprise, surprise. I guess that crap PK and his agent were spewing about the cap going into never, never land aren't going to come true after all.

 

[sheed36]

They are more likely to push him to take the deal Reilly/Krug took in Boston. Once Versteeg is a UFA, Saad can get a better deal.

I think even if they traded Sharp, the Hawks are gonna deal with the loss of Seabrook. Don't see him staying. I think like Suter he wants the chance to stand out on his own as the best defenceman on a team. If they did trade Sharp he would probably have his doubts on the Blackhawks contending again. If they don't, he'll want better pay.

Would Saad be in the same situation has what Krug/Smith was in not being offer sheet eligible? The Bruins had both of these guys over a barrel and both had to pretty much accept whatever the Bruins were offering if they wanted to play in the NHL this year. If Saad is offer sheet eligible the Hawks might be dealing with someone offer sheeting him which is something the Bruins didn't have to worry about with Krug and Smith.

 

[Hoople]

Surprise, surprise. I guess that crap PK and his agent were spewing about the cap going into never, never land aren't going to come true after all.

So glad that we locked him up at the bargain basement cost of only $9M and is now earning every penny of it with his play this season.

$11M or $12M per year wouldn't have been that bad though.

 

[Frozenice]

So glad that we locked him up at the bargain basement cost of only $9M and is now earning every penny of it with his play this season.

$11M or $12M per year wouldn't have been that bad though.

I get blowback for my over the top pronouncements that I make from time to time, it's good to poke back if it looks like I'm right.

 

[Tabarouette]

people used to make fun of me when I used the argument "yeah but what if the cap doesn't go up." in stupid contract threads

I hope it stays the same, GMs 100% deserve to get screwed by their assumption that the cap would go up

 

[Brainiac]

Haven't you heard? Whenever a team gets into cap difficulties they start trading away their best players.

Ooohh, I see. Makes sense.

Anyways, I don't think we have to worry. Habs don't have any crippling contracts. Whatever happens, we'll be fine. It's not like we're paying a Clarkson 5M for the next 6 years.

 

[c3z4r]

Wasn't this debunked as just pure speculation with no facts supporting it from the NY Post?

 

[Burke the Legend]

hey, the NY Post is the greatest newspaper in the world!

 

[Scriptor]

Works as an assumption, provided you also assume that NY IS THE WORLD….

 

[Spearmint Rhino]

people used to make fun of me when I used the argument "yeah but what if the cap doesn't go up." in stupid contract threads

I hope it stays the same, GMs 100% deserve to get screwed by their assumption that the cap would go up

Pretty much the same here. I don't think people realize the impact the Canadian dollar value really has on the cap, yeah we are 7/30 but I bet we are at least 50% of the gate revenue if not more + many projections included the growth rate on top of the TV deal which was wrong cause you're adding a multiplier to a fixed contract (TV deal varies by year but capped at $5.2B CDN so will not experience any actual growth).

Outdoors games will/have lost their lustre

Oil price is tanking which will impact the economy, massively in Alberta with lower royalties to the govt

Anyone who's tracked stocks would know nothing lasts forever, the Cap increase experienced from inception to date is/was not sustainable and was also masked by a weak US dollar that players salaries are paid in - those 1st to the trough like PK, Toews and Kane will do great but won't be nearly as good for their teammates

 

[Kriss E]

Wasn't this debunked as just pure speculation with no facts supporting it from the NY Post?

Bobby Mac certainly didn't debunk it this morning. He talked of it as a real possibility.
I heard it from him, had he not mention Larry Brooks I would have had no idea it came from NYC.