View Single Post
12-21-2012, 02:02 PM
Registered User
Alesle's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oslo, Norway
Country: Norway
Posts: 532
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by cheswick View Post
Never quite understand when reporters quote this. They use the salary figures players would have earned under the previous CBA, which is the whole point of the lockout, so the amount of salary lost they quote would never have been earned under any circumstances.

The true salary lost would be the amount the players could have earned accepting a particular offer the NHL gave them for a certain number of games.
I'll play. Compared to the October 17 offer the players have now lost about $600M. The $211M 'Make whole' offer on November 9 then more or less covered the amount the players lost from the October 17 offer until November 9, meaning the players would've been just as well off accepting either of those offers.

Since the December 6 $300M 'Make whole' offer the players have lost about $130M. However, by accepting the December 6 offer the players would have been about $150M worse off than by accepting either the October 17 or November 9 offers.

Small note: all numbers above are assuming the number of games played and league revenues are scaled down at a linear relationship with the number of days since October 17.

Alesle is offline