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

Why not a cap on player salary?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-12-2004, 09:06 AM
  #1
Classic Devil
Global Moderator
Spirit of 1988
 
Classic Devil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 33,500
vCash: 500
Awards:
Why not a cap on player salary?

I'm wondering if we can't abandon this notion of a hard cap, but instead put a cap on how high any individual player salary can be - somewhere in the 7-8 million range. So the best players in the league will always receive that, while the owners can use arbitration to hold down other player salaries and keep players in the price range they should be in.

Classic Devil is offline  
Old
12-12-2004, 11:03 AM
  #2
thinkwild
Veni Vidi Toga
 
thinkwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,286
vCash: 500
Free agency is a fact of life. Players over 31 have the right to select any offer they wish. It is a fact that has to be acknowledged and accomodated when designing a system.

RFA's however, are not free agents. They are pretty regulated, and the tweaked CBA the players propose pretty much creates a defacto RFA cap of about $7mil.

Perhaps there is a way to set the maximum comparable available to RFAs through some revenue linkage formula, But everyone will know what it really is when they make their UFA offers anyway.

thinkwild is offline  
Old
12-12-2004, 11:29 AM
  #3
Peter
Registered User
 
Peter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Alberta
Posts: 3,668
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flame_Star_Devil
I'm wondering if we can't abandon this notion of a hard cap, but instead put a cap on how high any individual player salary can be - somewhere in the 7-8 million range. So the best players in the league will always receive that, while the owners can use arbitration to hold down other player salaries and keep players in the price range they should be in.
If you have an individual cap on all salaries: 7-8 million like you suggest you have to give the players unrestricted free agency after their first entry level contract.

Peter is offline  
Old
12-12-2004, 07:23 PM
  #4
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 18,225
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkwild
Free agency is a fact of life. Players over 31 have the right to select any offer they wish. It is a fact that has to be acknowledged and accomodated when designing a system.

RFA's however, are not free agents. They are pretty regulated, and the tweaked CBA the players propose pretty much creates a defacto RFA cap of about $7mil.
How? It reduces the exisiting players salaries to around that number but it certainly doesn't cap them there. $5-6m would be a much better number for RFAs to be hard capped at.

me2 is offline  
Old
12-12-2004, 08:44 PM
  #5
Steve L*
Registered User
 
Steve L*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Southampton, England
Country: England
Posts: 11,548
vCash: 500
My idea was to have a $5m player cap in the current players proposal, then we get the salary back to a good level and still have some kind of check on it in the future.

Teams also have a better chance of keeping their big name UFAs as the other clubs cant offer them any more money.

Steve L* is offline  
Old
12-12-2004, 09:35 PM
  #6
thinkwild
Veni Vidi Toga
 
thinkwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,286
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve L
My idea was to have a $5m player cap in the current players proposal, then we get the salary back to a good level and still have some kind of check on it in the future.
What would be a reasonable salary to pay the owners for doing the accounting in such a system?

thinkwild is offline  
Old
12-12-2004, 11:33 PM
  #7
trentmccleary
Registered User
 
trentmccleary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Alfie-Ville
Posts: 18,805
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkwild
What would be a reasonable salary to pay the owners for doing the accounting in such a system?
You mean the accounting, marketing, managing, etc.

How much is taking all of the economic risk worth?
I mean, the players are just employees who can easily bankrupt the company and walk away like crooked CEO's. The owners are the poor saps who'll go down with the ship.

What is your position anyways?
That this; problem is all the owners fault! They want to fix it. But instead of wanting them to fix it... you'd rather complain about them some more and allow the league fall apart in the mean time?

trentmccleary is offline  
Old
12-12-2004, 11:41 PM
  #8
thinkwild
Veni Vidi Toga
 
thinkwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,286
vCash: 500
What risk are they taking when the players add up the receipts take their cut and give the owners their salary? There's no entrepreneurship there,

I dont see this fight for a cap as just something nice and fuzzy thats for the good of the game. Its code for strikebreaking and years of no hockey for no valid hockey reason. The players arent going to accept a cap. If you are insistent on getting one despite the fact there is a perfectly reasonable solution staring you in the face, then I think you are an idiot. That is my position.

I want the owners to have a marketplace that works. So that all teams have an ability to build a great team in its prime. Not so that all teams have the right to get the most expensive free agents on their team.

thinkwild is offline  
Old
12-13-2004, 12:05 AM
  #9
trentmccleary
Registered User
 
trentmccleary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Alfie-Ville
Posts: 18,805
vCash: 500
- What kind of idiot would pay $200 M for a team and then allow his employees to decide that he should earn 50 cents this year?

-The solution being what? This silly rollback.

GM's haven't been handing out long-term deals because of this CBA. So how many contracts does this actually affect?
So arbitration might work a little slower in the near future... great
The league will fold in 20 years instead of 10. Now that's progress.

- This isn't the Gordie Howe days when players were truly getting the shaft. Players are fighting over whether they'll be able to afford 20 Ferrari's this year or only 19.
If that's the fight you want to be a part of... then stand up on the table and shout it to the heavens, Norma Rae! "19 Ferrari's a year is garbage. I'm mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore!" :mad:

trentmccleary 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 03:26 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.