HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=3)
-   -   Other: Does anybody else feel that a lot of people haven't coped with the rising cap? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1227497)

Krishna 07-09-2012 01:39 PM

Does anybody else feel that a lot of people haven't coped with the rising cap?
 
I see it all the time on here with people saying that x player isn't worth y amount for z years.

For example, I saw a lot of people saying Ryan suter wasn't worth the 7.54m per year he got and it was a huge overpayment.. Let's break it down.



The 2011-12 salary cap is 70.2m

Suter's cap hit is 7.54m

That's 10.7% of the cap for a #1 defenseman who is arguably in the top 5 for defenseman is a pretty good deal.


in summary, does anyone else feel like a lot of people on here haven't adjusted their salary values for players as quickly as the cap rose?

joestevens29 07-09-2012 01:43 PM

I see what your getting at, but it's not like Crosby the best player in the game is getting more on his next deal than his previous deal. The top guys seem to be around the same amount as always. There just seems to be more mid-tier guys get the money now too.

GreenLantern 07-09-2012 01:46 PM

Absolutely. I was thinking about this today and you're right, 10% of the cap for a truly elite-level player makes sense but some people are still stuck in a 50 million dollar cap-world.

Moller 07-09-2012 01:47 PM

I think a lot of fans on here use stats like that to de-value players that aren't on their team when they wish they were.

I bet if you scaled the cap until 2020 or so you'd find the rate of progression would put it around 80-90 million too making these contracts which are 10 or 12% of the cap shrink to 7 or 8%. Would be interesting to see.

Grant 07-09-2012 01:51 PM

Yes, my rule of thumb for forwards now is 0.1m cap hit per point. I know it's not perfect due to other intangibles such as defense, size, speed, contract length, etc. But it works out alright still.

MGorgon 07-09-2012 01:57 PM

Coming out of the lockout Iginla signed a 3y/7 mil contract, 18% of the 39 million cap. If he signed at that % today it would be 12.6 million. Jagr and Lidstrom were making 20% of the cap on their contracts that were signed pre-lockout too.

People forget the cap has almost doubled. It's easy to think players are over/underpaid because the old contracts are still around, so the 7 million Iginla got in 2005 isn't the same as Stamkos getting 7.5, Stamkos took a massive paycut in comparison.

nhlfan9191 07-09-2012 01:59 PM

Just because the cap goes up doesn't mean players get their salary doubled.

CorpseFX 07-09-2012 02:02 PM

the 70 million cap is a farce since most teams have self-imposed caps. not every team is spending to that amount, nor will they.

judging what Suter's % of cap space depends on what team he is on and their economic structure based on multiple facets.

same thing in football. it might be 120+ million for a cap ceiling (i have no idea what its at right now) but many teams have imposed caps (Packers, etc). and larger markets are more willing to spend closer to the ceiling.

i get what youre saying and its slightly true, but its even deeper than that.

TOGuy14 07-09-2012 02:10 PM

I think people haven't adjusted but the way salaries in the NHL have gone has also changed.

Superstars are making roughly the same amount in terms of real dollars, but it is actually the second tier players now who are being significantly overpaid if anything. The salaries are really starting to average out.

In the old days you had your 7-8mil top line guys, your 3-4 mil second line guys, and the league minimums everywhere else. These days Matt Carkner can pull in 1.5mil...

SeriousHabs 07-09-2012 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TOGuy14 (Post 52341663)
I think people haven't adjusted but the way salaries in the NHL have gone has also changed.

Superstars are making roughly the same amount in terms of real dollars, but it is actually the second tier players now who are being significantly overpaid if anything. The salaries are really starting to average out.
In the old days you had your 7-8mil top line guys, your 3-4 mil second line guys, and the league minimums everywhere else. These days Matt Carkner can pull in 1.5mil...

That is because the floor increased more proportionally than the ceiling. Teams that need to reach the floor typically can't attract stars, so they give money to decent role players. It worked out pretty well for the Panthers.

Vexxed14 07-09-2012 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeriousHabs (Post 52341793)
That is because the floor increased more proportionally than the ceiling. Teams that need to reach the floor typically can't attract stars, so they give money to decent role players. It worked out pretty well for the Panthers.

This.

And the floor could come up a lot more in the next CBA if the NFL and NBA set any sort of precedence here.

Some guy pointed out points to dollar ratio. Its not really fair because players don't get paid on production. They get paid on draw or how much money they can make the organization. This can often be quantified in points for certain players, but more so in point potential as that's what we pay to see. Guys like Carkner play a different game so how you quantify his draw to the team is different.

We pay for the whole package on the ice and I feel that the split amongst players is almost fair with the lower end players getting annual raises in comparison to the high-end players due to the cap and the ratio of elite to average players.

um 07-09-2012 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nhlfan9191 (Post 52341089)
Just because the cap goes up doesn't mean players get their salary doubled.

who is getting there salary doubled?

Machinehead 07-09-2012 02:55 PM

Well HFBoards thinks pretty much everyone that signed this offseason got overpaid.

It crossed my mind yesterday that maybe if that many contracts were "overpayments" then maybe it's HFBoards that's wrong, and not the GMs.

airforceones25 07-09-2012 02:56 PM

I completely agree 100% with what you state.. But what happens if the cap goes down in the new CBA which is very much a real possibility. These contracts will ultimately look silly like everyone states. However your point is extremely valid until that occurs.

HooliganX2 07-09-2012 02:59 PM

Personally I think the cap is to high with over half the teams still losing money every years. I look at it from an average team budget not the salary. As there are a decent amount of teams with internal budgets.

Feed Me A Stray Cat 07-09-2012 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by airforceones25 (Post 52343897)
I completely agree 100% with what you state.. But what happens if the cap goes down in the new CBA which is very much a real possibility. These contracts will ultimately look silly like everyone states. However your point is extremely valid until that occurs.

If the cap goes down contracts will probably be rolled back.

habs03 07-09-2012 03:07 PM

I agree with the OP, that's why I like to look at the % of the cap a player takes. Also I don't like comparing some contracts, some of these 10+ year contracts are total bs. While Suter cap hit is only 7 something, by the time retires, if you recalculate the years he he plays and gets paid, it will be a lot higher then that.

In regards to the cap being so high, and players getting overpaid( generally speaking), I don't agree, because the cap in based on how much money the owners are making, so I don't see the problem, and I great that not alll the teams are making a lot of money, but I believe there is revenue sharing to help with that.

Just my .02


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:17 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.