But if the players accepted a Cap reduction to 58 million, I don't see how they'd benefit, as I stated earlier, they're already at 54 million with O'Reilly left to sign, signing him would put them right up against the cap.
It benefits us in that it is detrimental to divisional rivals. We may not improve this upcoming season, but many teams will get worse.
But if the players accepted a Cap reduction to 58 million, I don't see how they'd benefit, as I stated earlier, they're already at 54 million with O'Reilly left to sign, signing him would put them right up against the cap.
It would definitely benefit us more so than the majority of other teams.
But if the players accepted a Cap reduction to 58 million, I don't see how they'd benefit, as I stated earlier, they're already at 54 million with O'Reilly left to sign, signing him would put them right up against the cap.
Landeskog's bonsus could be rolled over, saving the Avs about 2.5 million in space. The Avs could also afford to lose a defenceman, as they wouldn't need 8 on the roster at all times, might save the Avs another 2 million.
Edit: Just a follow up to show the potential to benefit from a $58m Cap.
Assumtion: O'Reilly signs the same deal as Duchene. One of our defenceman is traded(I used O'Brien as the example because his $2 was about average for the defenders we could potentially move).
Also all bonuses would be carried forward.
CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS
SALARY CAP: $58,000,000; CAP PAYROLL: $52,908,333
CAP SPACE (22-man roster): $5,091,667
FORWARDS
Jamie McGinn ($1.750m) / Paul Stastny ($6.600m) / David Jones ($4.000m)
Gabriel Landeskog ($0.925m) / Ryan O'Reilly ($3.500m) / Steve Downie ($2.650m)
Milan Hejduk ($2.000m) / Matt Duchene ($3.500m) / P-A Parenteau ($4.000m)
Cody McLeod ($1.150m) / John Mitchell ($1.100m) / Chuck Kobasew ($1.250m)
Mark Olver ($0.600m)
DEFENSEMEN
Ryan Wilson ($2.250m) / Erik Johnson ($3.750m)
Jan Hejda ($3.250m) / Stefan Elloitt ($0.900m)
Greg Zanon ($2.250m) / Ryan O'Byrne ($1.800m)
Matt Hunwick ($1.600m) /
The real problem (we've all seen this in EA season sims) is that once teams sign enough players and get close enough to the cap there is little ability to perform trades. So imagine having half the league over the cap (by a little or a lot) and half the league within 5 million of the cap, those teams under won't want spare parts to pay for and those at the top won't be able to dump players easily.
There's more to it than just 58mil, even if I would like to see the cap decreased just to benefit the Avs, it could hurt the league.
Well the thing to remember about the $58m is that it's the NHL's first serious offer, which is up $8m from the original $50m offer. I believe the players originally proposed $69m, so if the players went down $8 you would have a counter offer of $61m. Meet somewhere in the middle and give teams a little more of a buffer than your looking at $60m.
$60m is pretty reasonable and no team should complain about having to shink their cap down to that level. After the last lockout you had teams going from $60m-$70m down to $39m. Perhaps add in an buyout period with no salary cap repercussions to teams which choose that route.
It's a negotiation. I strongly suspect the final agreement won't have such a rigid cap half the teams in the league would have to dump NHL players into the minors. Especially when those teams risking it are the biggest and wealthiest teams.
That said, even if there is some grandfathering of contracts a team like the Avalanche stand to benefit from it, even if there isn't an immediate urgent issue for teams because a lot of them will be feeling the cap squeeze in subsequent years too if we get a lower cap.
But if the players accepted a Cap reduction to 58 million, I don't see how they'd benefit, as I stated earlier, they're already at 54 million with O'Reilly left to sign, signing him would put them right up against the cap.
Well it's a counter proposal and I doubt the league expects the NHLPA to agree to it right away. There will probably still be more negotiating to do but the extremely positive thing here is that the league has moved off it's almost insane stance and appear willing to negotiate off the players' proposal. We may just see hockey on time after all.
I think those cap numbers will go up a bit before it's all said and done.
That said, the Avs may very well be in a very nice position with some teams needing to make some trades to get under the cap. A lot of people laughed at how the Avs proceeded with caution in light of this new CBA, who's laughing now?
Unless there is something sneaky in the lates league proposal, I'm cautiously optimistic in terms of how close they are. They actually made their way up to essentially an averaged 50-50 split in revenue, and no rollback. Those were the main issues.
I would imagine the PA still wants a more defined, and transparent definition of revenue, and I'm sure the league wants to close the loophole on long term deals. They actually seem fairly close IMO unless I'm missing something.
I'm predicting the same or similar 50-50 type split. Better definition of revenue, but not that transparent, and not exactly what the PA wants. 7 year max on averaged cap hit deals, anything over that has to be the same $ every year. 5% rollback on salaries, and $64M cap.
Well it looks like the sneaky aspect is the escrow, which essentially brings the percentage down to around 46% after all is said and done with the cap. This is according to the players, which the league acknowledged was in the ball park.
Also looks like it was the opposite from what I thought, and the PA is the one that wants to keep the current revenue definition, in order to "not complicate the process." Not sure if that is their true intention, but it sounds good.
Still working towards a 50-50 split, involving both revenue and escrow IMO. It will just take a few more proposals.
Yeah the current process works fine from the players side imo. Rich owners and their inability to share is my issue (and teams being located in a place where they lose $ to a lesser extent) but the problem I see is how the owners are handling the $ not the players.
If they don't like losing it then don't force poor teams to spend and don't spend themselves.
I also find in a lot of discussions that the fans expect parity. This is BS because we have plenty of parity but there's no need to create some type of system where all 30 teams are competitive because it's just unrealistic to expect the poorer teams (and there will always be poorer teams even if some of the current ones relocate) to be able to compete. You just end up decreasing the pay roll to an extent where some fairly talented players end up staying in Europe (not just the Radulov's but also the Afinogenov's or the PJ Axelsson's or all the recent $1-2 M NHLers that can't find a roster spot here).
Owners need to sort their stuff out and make a system where they aren't losing $ by having a high floor but at the same time can have a high enough cap so that the league can retain talent not have a problem in attracting talent whilst having 5-15 teams that can challenge for the cup each season (that number to me is parity).
anyone else a bit surprised that minny fans think they will be fine without backstrom, if he gets let go with his salary , and due to possible cap complications with the new proposed salary cap. I'm not that high on harding myself and hackett looked like he needed more seasoning last season.
I know that doesn't belong to the topic right now (is there a topic?) but - I have to say that you people at the AVs forum are by far the friendliest at Hfboards .. until know ;-)
anyone else a bit surprised that minny fans think they will be fine without backstrom, if he gets let go with his salary , and due to possible cap complications with the new proposed salary cap. I'm not that high on harding myself and hackett looked like he needed more seasoning last season.
Yeah they'll be fine without him. I mean in terms of being as good if not better than last yr. He's regressed a bit as well imo and Harding's overrated a bit but I like Hackett and dunno if he needs that much more seasoning. It's not like they had stellar goaltending last yr and they were still in 1st place in the west before the injury bug hit.
Not really sure how the league expects their 58 Million proposal to work. 16 teams are already at or above the 58 million cap, and other than NYI and Phoenix it's not like the other 14 teams can take on a lot of salary. So basically you would be seeing very highly paid players being bought out and having to sign for 1-2 million. I just don't see that happening.
Not really sure how the league expects their 58 Million proposal to work. 16 teams are already at or above the 58 million cap, and other than NYI and Phoenix it's not like the other 14 teams can take on a lot of salary. So basically you would be seeing very highly paid players being bought out and having to sign for 1-2 million. I just don't see that happening.
It sure would have been nice if they had done that in the first place when the first cap was put in place. Could have kept Forsberg.
Yea it's ridiculous. I feel like the Avs got completely f' d after the last CBA, and every one else had exceptions made for them like these huge loophole deals, and this idea of transitioning contracts now.
The Avs had a few big contracts, but those we're their own players they re-signed. It's not the same as teams then and now like Philly, NYR, and the like that just throw money at UFA's and jack up the system. Now they get to have their cake and eat it to by the league bailing them out. What a joke.
Awesome video, but I definitely do not respect the players as well.
I am very curious what was that Slovakia clip from? They were crazy after that goal.
I think I've come to the conclusion that I'm anti-PA, and anti-Owner but pro-Wanting a Hockey Season. I think both sides are being incredibly greedy and are taking the fans for granted. I take that video not as a PA-promotional video, but a video that shows how amazing the game of hockey is and how amazing the fans of the game are. Plus, them proclaiming their salaries and comparing it to the average salaries of their fans doesn't make me hate Bettman because he makes more than an average NHLer, it makes me think that they think the fans are idiots. We aren't dumb, we realize that the players and owners involved in the NHL are all ridiculously overpaid, no one is innocent. They need to sit down, figure things out and do so quickly, or they need to find an arbitrator to get a deal done.
If they decide to lockout the season, even a fraction of it, I hope the fans react by simply not going to their games for the amount of time that they lockout for. It may seem immature, and it is, but the NHL and the NHLPA need to realize that they have fans because of the service they provide, we aren't just here to shovel money in their direction.
A little part of my hopes that the KHL/SEL steals away a ton of talent from the NHL.
I've had enough of rich people fighting over money.
The fact that there's a possibility that there might not be a season is utterly baffling to me. I don't care what they have to work out, their job is to ensure the running of the NHL If they season doesn't start on time then the people in charge of that negotiation have failed, miserably.
) but - I have to say that you people at the AVs forum are by far the friendliest at Hfboards .. until know ;-)
