View Single Post
Old
12-12-2012, 12:26 PM
  #16
DL44
Registered User
 
DL44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Left Coast
Posts: 7,324
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
I'm not sure about how great of a change that is. Project that out a few years. At 5% growth (and ignoring the damage done by the lockout/missed games) it would look something like this:

2012: 61m MP, 73.2m/48.8m, 24.4m separation
2013: 67.2m MP, 80.6m/53.7m, 26.8m separation
2014: 69.7m MP, 83.7m/55.8m, 27.9m separation
2019: 107.6m MP, 129.1m/86.0m, 43.0m separation

How does having 25-40m difference between the highest spenders and the lowest spenders help parity in the league? What would that do to the on-ice product of the cap floor teams? And how would that impact the revenue of those teams?

I don't think it's an easy question. They don't want teams in the red if they don't need to be, but neither do they want teams to suck which would mess with the perceived parity that we currently have.
At the end of the day, you have to just look at the % difference... and that stays constant which should keep the general quality differences between the teams constant despite the growing $ amount difference.

by percentage.. in yr 1 post lockout, a 31 mil mp had a range of 39mil to 23 mil. That was a huge difference based on %.

But nothing compared to 50-60 mil differences we were seeing pre-cap.

DL44 is online now   Reply With Quote