HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

Saskin says give us a 100 million hard cap and we have a deal.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-10-2004, 12:55 PM
  #1
eye
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: around the 49th para
Posts: 1,607
vCash: 500
Saskin says give us a 100 million hard cap and we have a deal.

What happened to the PA's principles? Saskin just told Jeff Marrick that if the NHL offer a 100 million hard cap that we have a deal. Isn't that hypocritical?

eye is offline  
Old
12-10-2004, 12:58 PM
  #2
swflyers8*
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Upper Darby, PA
Posts: 2,908
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to swflyers8*
Have a link or anything of where you got this from?

swflyers8* is offline  
Old
12-10-2004, 01:02 PM
  #3
mooseOAK*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 42,435
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eye
What happened to the PA's principles? Saskin just told Jeff Marrick that if the NHL offer a 100 million hard cap that we have a deal. Isn't that hypocritical?
That doesn't seem like a comment that was made in total seriousness.

mooseOAK* is offline  
Old
12-10-2004, 01:09 PM
  #4
eye
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: around the 49th para
Posts: 1,607
vCash: 500
He was quite serious. Leafs TV Ted Saskin was asked by Jeff Marrick if he would accept a hard cap of 100 million and he said "yes if the NHL offer a hard cap of 100 million we have deal". You can watch the replay later on if you don't believe me.

eye is offline  
Old
12-10-2004, 01:18 PM
  #5
Go Flames Go*
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 943
vCash: 500
Saskin is a idiot. I question his education in economics, and his research he is quickly to point out how the NBA system or the NFL does not work and the players hate them, while the NFLPA is salavating at the chance to resign the current CBA. THen he goes on to talk about how the Baseball style works, where teams are taxed over $100 million payrolls which is ridiculous. The NHLPA are not doing what is right for the players and what is right for the game, they just want to keep cashing in on big contracts, but there wont be many of them to go around with the current CBA since there is going to be potential for 6 or more teams to fold.

Go Flames Go* is offline  
Old
12-10-2004, 01:19 PM
  #6
shakes
Pep City
 
shakes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,298
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eye
He was quite serious. Leafs TV Ted Saskin was asked by Jeff Marrick if he would accept a hard cap of 100 million and he said "yes if the NHL offer a hard cap of 100 million we have deal". You can watch the replay later on if you don't believe me.
I'm sure they would probably accept a cap at 80-100 million

shakes is offline  
Old
12-10-2004, 01:19 PM
  #7
X0ssbar
 
X0ssbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: ...on a star!
Country: United States
Posts: 13,011
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eye
He was quite serious. Leafs TV Ted Saskin was asked by Jeff Marrick if he would accept a hard cap of 100 million and he said "yes if the NHL offer a hard cap of 100 million we have deal". You can watch the replay later on if you don't believe me.
Alright, I prolly get flamed for this, but if we are talking long term here, like the NHL says, I think this is a statement the NHL can work with.

Stay with me here - in 20 years NHL salaries with inflation etc will reach that point for a lot of teams so I think the NHL should consider instituting a high cap. HOWEVER - the cap number should come down around 70-80 million AND there needs to be STRONG measures in place to control spending now and for the next 10 years - IE, a very, VERY strong luxury tax kicking in at 100% at 40 mill and 200% at 60 mil, etc ,etc.

In other words, this is a way to somehow get a cap in this next agreement - even if its a high unrealistic ceiling b/c the market will catch up and then institute a strict luxury tax in the interm.

Thanks god its Friday and flame away..!

X0ssbar is offline  
Old
12-10-2004, 02:35 PM
  #8
no13matssundin
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,726
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Top Shelf
Alright, I prolly get flamed for this, but if we are talking long term here, like the NHL says, I think this is a statement the NHL can work with.

Stay with me here - in 20 years NHL salaries with inflation etc will reach that point for a lot of teams so I think the NHL should consider instituting a high cap. HOWEVER - the cap number should come down around 70-80 million AND there needs to be STRONG measures in place to control spending now and for the next 10 years - IE, a very, VERY strong luxury tax kicking in at 100% at 40 mill and 200% at 60 mil, etc ,etc.

In other words, this is a way to somehow get a cap in this next agreement - even if its a high unrealistic ceiling b/c the market will catch up and then institute a strict luxury tax in the interm.

Thanks god its Friday and flame away..!

Ok, no flame from me... but I think youre missing the point of this whole lockout:

You institute a cap of 100 Mil per team and there wont BE an NHL in 20 years.

Get it?

no13matssundin is offline  
Old
12-10-2004, 02:37 PM
  #9
Lionel Hutz
Registered User
 
Lionel Hutz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Locking the Lounge??
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,217
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by no13matssundin
Ok, no flame from me... but I think youre missing the point of this whole lockout:

You institute a cap of 100 Mil per team and there wont BE an NHL in 20 years.

Get it?
Not to mention the fact its not very likely they will negotiate a 20 yr CBA.

Lionel Hutz is offline  
Old
12-10-2004, 02:38 PM
  #10
mooseOAK*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 42,435
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eye
He was quite serious. Leafs TV Ted Saskin was asked by Jeff Marrick if he would accept a hard cap of 100 million and he said "yes if the NHL offer a hard cap of 100 million we have deal". You can watch the replay later on if you don't believe me.
It is something that he knows will never happen, therefore he can't be serious in even suggesting that it might.

mooseOAK* is offline  
Old
12-10-2004, 03:02 PM
  #11
LadyByngJeanRatelle
Registered User
 
LadyByngJeanRatelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,096
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mooseOAK
It is something that he knows will never happen, therefore he can't be serious in even suggesting that it might.
Kinda like, if you give me a new car, I will accept it.

LadyByngJeanRatelle is offline  
Old
12-10-2004, 05:04 PM
  #12
kerrly
Registered User
 
kerrly's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Regina
Country: Canada
Posts: 809
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to kerrly
Actually he's just suggesting that a cap will work at $100 million because there will still be big contracts to go around.

kerrly is offline  
Old
12-10-2004, 06:20 PM
  #13
Charge_Seven
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,631
vCash: 500
I believe the players would likely be willing to strongly consider a $75,000,000 hard cap...

The players have maintained the entire lockout that they do not want, nor will they accept any hard cap, however every hard cap offered to them thus far has been what? $32,000,000?

I'd much rather have something to the tune of:

Minimum Salary: $27,000,000 (not sure what the punishment could be...maybe the loss of the teams first rounder in the draft...that would definitely keep teams at or above the minimum...lol It could be sacrificed to the highest paying team...lol)

Soft cap of $40,000,000, luxury tax of $.75 per dollar over
Next level, $50,000,000 luxury tax at $1.00 per dollar over
Next level, $55,000,000 luxury tax $1.50 per dollar over
Next level, $60,000,000 luxury tax at $2.00 per dollar over

In essence you'd have a true hard cap at $60,000,000 as no owner would go over that (often...I could see it in maybe the third year of a dynasty team, after earning a ton in the playoffs, giving back to the fans by keeping the team together, but how often do we have those these days?). That would severely punish any team that spent money to a great extent.

Charge_Seven is offline  
Old
12-10-2004, 06:28 PM
  #14
Iceman23
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 65
vCash: 500
Saskin=Moron nuff said.

Iceman23 is offline  
Old
12-10-2004, 06:41 PM
  #15
waffledave
waffledave, from hf
 
waffledave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,670
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Go Flames Go
Saskin is a idiot. I question his education in economics, and his research he is quickly to point out how the NBA system or the NFL does not work and the players hate them, while the NFLPA is salavating at the chance to resign the current CBA. THen he goes on to talk about how the Baseball style works, where teams are taxed over $100 million payrolls which is ridiculous. The NHLPA are not doing what is right for the players and what is right for the game, they just want to keep cashing in on big contracts, but there wont be many of them to go around with the current CBA since there is going to be potential for 6 or more teams to fold.
I agree.

Yeah, baseball's system works. But after changing the soft cap numbers to reflect the market value of hockey you end up with the same system kicking in at $40 million.

This guy's mouth is going to end up ruining the players' position.

waffledave is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:12 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2016 All Rights Reserved.