The salaries may go down with the cap but that will leave us with a bunch of unhappy workers who are ready to strike. Everything that's happened is entirely on the shoulders of the owners, for completely lacking self-control. There should be a third-party involved in every contract, someone who can step in when the Rangers and Scott Gomez are talking and say "Hey, waitaminute, 60 points shouldn't equal 7.3 million bucks." The teams are competing with each other over free agents so they necessarily have to outspend one another if there's a hope of landing the big name. What's the solution though? If the cap goes up and up and up there's nothing to suggest to the idiot owners "You might want to calm down with that money, sir."
Wonky idea: separate players into 'tiers' or 'echelons' or some such. Lower echelon players can't make more than 2 mil, middle from 2-4, upper from 4-5, elite from 5-8....tiers will be determined by statistics and maybe GM rankings or something so when a player craps out for a couple years he won't get a big check because of his name or if a no-name strikes gold and earns his way up he can make more money. That way the owners can't offer 60 point Gomez 7 million to begin with because he's really only worth 4 or 5 max. Basically what I'm saying is contracts should be performance based in a more regimented fashion.
Cap up to 50.3 mill...is this a good or bad thing for NHL?
-
Shadd666
- Super Mario
- Posts: 2996
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 5:47 pm
- Custom Rank: Smiley Crazy Goodwill Ambassador!
- Location: Toulouse (France)
T-cleese: It would be impossible to make something fair and cohesive for salaries based on the stats. Teammates, linemates, coaches, style of play, injuries, and a bit of luck: all have a more or less big influence on the stats. Just a quick example: don't you think Iginla would have far more goals and points in a more offensive system? Same thing applies with the goalies, as their stats depend of their talent AND the defense they have in front. So it couldn't be fair to classify the players by stats.
The other option you mentionned is to classify them by GM rankings. Hmm... In fact, that's more or less how it works actually. And if you organise a vote amongst the GMs so they rank free agents, they will overrate the players they don't care about to force other GMs to pay them more and so have less money to spend on the market, etc. So it couldn't work either.
However, you're right when you say that "everything that's happened is entirely on the shoulders of the owners, for completely lacking self-control." The owners, along with Bettman, are co-responsible for the stupid expansion of the cap that can only kill the league a few years down the road. The cap shouldn't be based on league revenues but on every teams revenue, to ensure that every team can compete at a decent level under the cap rules. Maybe the cap should be fixed for the whole length of a CBA, instead of changing every single year.
The other option you mentionned is to classify them by GM rankings. Hmm... In fact, that's more or less how it works actually. And if you organise a vote amongst the GMs so they rank free agents, they will overrate the players they don't care about to force other GMs to pay them more and so have less money to spend on the market, etc. So it couldn't work either.
However, you're right when you say that "everything that's happened is entirely on the shoulders of the owners, for completely lacking self-control." The owners, along with Bettman, are co-responsible for the stupid expansion of the cap that can only kill the league a few years down the road. The cap shouldn't be based on league revenues but on every teams revenue, to ensure that every team can compete at a decent level under the cap rules. Maybe the cap should be fixed for the whole length of a CBA, instead of changing every single year.
-
batdad
- The Great One
- Posts: 12616
- Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 7:46 pm
- Custom Rank: Mr Technology
- Favourite Team: Syracuse Bulldogs.
- Location: Look behind you, you peon
Actually an interesting point came to me yesterday through my radio about the CAP.
Revenues have increased two years in a row. Dramatically so. There is one other thing that has increased dramatically in the last two years. The value of the Canadian $. This is really the one thing no one took into account when establishing the revenue sharing and links to cap and escrow.
For example two years ago the Canadian $ was struggling in the 70 cent range in comparison to the US dollar. Now it is almost 95 cents. That is 25 cents on every $. So CBC's TV contract which was worth 50 mill Canadian (example not actual figures) was at one point only $35 mill USA.
Now at lets say $65 mill Canadian since it went up I know for sure in the latest contract. The $US are 64.6 mill. $30 mill increase right there. But the numbers are higher than that. It is a larger $ increase, based solely on HNiC rights.
The revenues from the teams...add em in...huge increase in US $ based solely on the Canadian $ increasing 20%. Huge huge bucks. Therefore...this is the reason revenues increased.
When/If the Canadian $ drops off again, or remains stable against the US $ revenues will not increase, and/or go down. Seeing the cap remain stable or drop off.
Shocking....Canada makes the hockey world go round even in finances. What sucks about it is the teams that will see the most benefit from Canadian market $ increasing....are all American. Shite.
Revenues have increased two years in a row. Dramatically so. There is one other thing that has increased dramatically in the last two years. The value of the Canadian $. This is really the one thing no one took into account when establishing the revenue sharing and links to cap and escrow.
For example two years ago the Canadian $ was struggling in the 70 cent range in comparison to the US dollar. Now it is almost 95 cents. That is 25 cents on every $. So CBC's TV contract which was worth 50 mill Canadian (example not actual figures) was at one point only $35 mill USA.
Now at lets say $65 mill Canadian since it went up I know for sure in the latest contract. The $US are 64.6 mill. $30 mill increase right there. But the numbers are higher than that. It is a larger $ increase, based solely on HNiC rights.
The revenues from the teams...add em in...huge increase in US $ based solely on the Canadian $ increasing 20%. Huge huge bucks. Therefore...this is the reason revenues increased.
When/If the Canadian $ drops off again, or remains stable against the US $ revenues will not increase, and/or go down. Seeing the cap remain stable or drop off.
Shocking....Canada makes the hockey world go round even in finances. What sucks about it is the teams that will see the most benefit from Canadian market $ increasing....are all American. Shite.