: News Article:
New CBA offer from NHL
View Single Post
10-22-2012, 12:39 PM
Ducks tank is on!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Originally Posted by
Can someone explain something for me? I'm totally at a loss as to how players will actually make less money on their contracts once they go to 50-50. I understand that the cap will go down but if there's not a rollback in salaries why are players giving money back? It's not like every team has spent to the cap, most haven't. Wouldn't most team be under the new cap anyway? Maybe I'm just completely lost and aren't paying close enough attention so can someone please explain it to me?
The players will likely lose money. It's because the system of the cap. Currently the
is is not set at 57%, but the midpoint is set at 57%.
I'm too lazy to go through to confirm, but I feel that too many teams are spending too close to the cap when they shouldn't. Based on how the system was designed, the median payroll should be at the midpoint, with roughly equal numbers of teams spending above and below the cap. Also as many teams should be at the cap max as the cap min. I think in reality there are too many teams spending too much and not enough teams spending lower. That's where the organizations also hold responsibility in why they are losing money now. They are voluntarily spending above their means. This would be corrected by escrow. I haven't been paying attention to what escrow has been doing, but if escrow is pulling larger and larger amounts from players' contracts then this would be why it's doing that. Basically if players get too much money, then escrow will reduce current contracts (it gets given to the teams rather than being redistributed to the players).
If a 50-50 split drops the new cap to below the midpoint, then players will probably make less money.
Originally Posted by
I dont think any team that lost money should make money from revenue sharing. Break even at the most.
That's a fine condition to add too. But what I meant was that currently there is some sort of system. Basically if a team takes revenue sharing one year, it impacts their eligibility the next year. I think there's also some performance improvement (ie standings points) requirement to remain eligible. Eligibility does not just refer to simple eligible/not eligible but also how much they can get paid.
Last edited by snarktacular: 10-22-2012 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by snarktacular