SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Toronto Maple Leafs

Where does the NHL go now?

Which path do you choose?
Le graphique a été masqué

Options de sondage


24 mars 2020 à 17 h 59
#1
hey look a squirrel
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2018
Messages: 6,036
Mentions "j'aime": 3,744
I was thinking this in my head regarding the cap, and that is there only 3 paths forward for the next season.

Path 1 :
Reduced cap with 1 or more compliance buyouts
buyouts
-I have seen a lot of putting people pushing this forward and while attractive in some ways it is also unattractive in others.

Path 2 :
Same cap
-This is what I think will likely happen, to me this would be most problematic for teams to manage.

Path 3 :
Increased cap
-most unlikely thing to happen, it's just not realistic.


My question to people is, what do you want and what do you think will happen?
24 mars 2020 à 18 h 8
#2
Démarrer sujet
hey look a squirrel
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2018
Messages: 6,036
Mentions "j'aime": 3,744
24 mars 2020 à 18 h 21
#3
Kings v5 GM
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: févr. 2018
Messages: 4,767
Mentions "j'aime": 1,625
The cap should be going up and every team should get one compliance buyout. The rising escrow rates means that owners are getting some of their money back through revenue sharing. As far as I know the reason there is escrow is to adjust for the cap inflation. The Athletic had an artical about escrow rates going up again (this was a while ago so I could be completely wrong or things have changed) and the nhl should also have the cap inflate with it.

As much as it bugs me that GMs are still making stupid decisions I still think a compliance buyout is the way to go. By looking at the projections on CF of people who could be bought out it looks like its mostly guys in their early to mid 30s on horrible contracts. A league wide compliance buyout type of thing would help reset the market and it would be a real kick in the pants to all the GMs. In theory they would buy the Mark Edward Vlasic's of the world out, the owners would pay the check and they would be pretty pissed off. There wouldnt be many contracts like those again.

What the NHL should really be doing is going to a luxury tax system and getting rid of the pity points so there is less artificial parity. It would be so much fun and rewarding for the fans/management of teams that actually do a good job
OldNYIfan, Trickster et oneX a aimé ceci.
24 mars 2020 à 18 h 25
#4
Once a Kings Fan Too
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2018
Messages: 39,662
Mentions "j'aime": 24,579
The "compliance" or "free" buyout significantly benefits a few teams (notably Tampa Bay and four Pacific Division teams), doesn't help half a dozen teams at all, and has only a modest effect on the rest, so I don't see how it gets enough votes to pass.

Keeping the cap the same does negatively affect some teams who can argue that they were led to expect an increase, but by and large, those are teams that created or acquired bad contracts some time ago, so they are on shaky ground claiming some right to equitable relief.
Trickster, oneX et GenXHockey a aimé ceci.
24 mars 2020 à 18 h 35
#5
Démarrer sujet
hey look a squirrel
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2018
Messages: 6,036
Mentions "j'aime": 3,744
Quoting: Jack_
The cap should be going up and every team should get one compliance buyout. The rising escrow rates means that owners are getting some of their money back through revenue sharing. As far as I know the reason there is escrow is to adjust for the cap inflation. The Athletic had an artical about escrow rates going up again (this was a while ago so I could be completely wrong or things have changed) and the nhl should also have the cap inflate with it.

As much as it bugs me that GMs are still making stupid decisions I still think a compliance buyout is the way to go. By looking at the projections on CF of people who could be bought out it looks like its mostly guys in their early to mid 30s on horrible contracts. A league wide compliance buyout type of thing would help reset the market and it would be a real kick in the pants to all the GMs. In theory they would buy the Mark Edward Vlasic's of the world out, the owners would pay the check and they would be pretty pissed off. There wouldnt be many contracts like those again.

What the NHL should really be doing is going to a luxury tax system and getting rid of the pity points so there is less artificial parity. It would be so much fun and rewarding for the fans/management of teams that actually do a good job


Good points.


I really think the hard salary cap is here to stay.
Remember, more teams benefiting from this then not.
The only way this changes is if the top owners like MLSE and others decide they are not okay with it.

An increased cap with buyouts is even more likely than Path 3 I proposed IMO, the reason I think this is because the world economy is gonna get hit super hard especially in North America.
The situation in the USA right now, I think in reality it is worse than Italy and will get worse.

September is when this started in China, and due to this communist government they were able to hit recovery 7 to 8 months.

USA, they are one of the worst prepared for what is happening. And the country being so vast with state to state having a different situation is gonna further complicate things.
If one state recovers it will too easily prone to relapse unless the neighbours do too.

Same with Canada, we border NY state and Washington state.



Sorry for the rant but I'm just trying to emphasize that an increased cap with buyouts is super wishful thinking.
Jack_, oneX et OldNYIfan a aimé ceci.
24 mars 2020 à 18 h 37
#6
Démarrer sujet
hey look a squirrel
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2018
Messages: 6,036
Mentions "j'aime": 3,744
Quoting: OldNYIfan
The "compliance" or "free" buyout significantly benefits a few teams (notably Tampa Bay and four Pacific Division teams), doesn't help half a dozen teams at all, and has only a modest effect on the rest, so I don't see how it gets enough votes to pass.

Keeping the cap the same does negatively affect some teams who can argue that they were led to expect an increase, but by and large, those are teams that created or acquired bad contracts some time ago, so they are on shaky ground claiming some right to equitable relief.


What if the buyouts can happen to players traded to other teams? Than it will be factor for teams without bad contracts too.
oneX a aimé ceci.
24 mars 2020 à 18 h 55
#7
Once a Kings Fan Too
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2018
Messages: 39,662
Mentions "j'aime": 24,579
Quoting: Trickster
What if the buyouts can happen to players traded to other teams? Than it will be factor for teams without bad contracts too.


That only applies to teams that would be trying to dump TWO bad contracts, and there aren't many of them. Other than Tampa Bay, I can only think of two or three teams that might fall into that category (maybe Detroit, Pittsburgh, the Rangers -- if management wants Lundqvist to go and he won't, voluntarily).
oneX et Trickster a aimé ceci.
24 mars 2020 à 19 h 40
#8
LongtimeLeafsufferer
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2015
Messages: 59,065
Mentions "j'aime": 22,462
IMO. the cap HAS to go down. The cap is a calculated from revenues. The NHL more than any league depends on paying fans in the arena. Gee, folks are getting laid off, pension plans much lower because of get stock market. There is no way the upcoming recession/depression even if relatively short term won't affect league revenues and therefore players salaries

The owners and the NHLPA will come with a formula. I gotta believe that salaries will go down across board, with the top earners taking biggest % reduction. Remember most of the voting members of the NHLPA are the mid to lower priced players. So the majority players don't want the 7m plus players keeping their extravagant contracts when the the current unsigned players taking the biggest % haircut. Yes there might be compliance buyout.

Is this 2019/20 going to be completed. Doubtful. Will the 2020/21 season even start on time ? Questionable. This virus and the economic ramifications is gonna be a disastrous short term....maybe long term. Certainly discretionary spending is gonna be greatly reduced, and that means folks buying tickets to games, buying teams sweaters etc, travelling to other cities to attend sport events.
oneX et Trickster a aimé ceci.
24 mars 2020 à 20 h 28
#9
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2019
Messages: 6,730
Mentions "j'aime": 4,825
I personally think that cap will stay the same and one compliance buyout would be allowed. Wouldn’t be surprised if the cap rises to say like 83m to accommodate escrow rising. In that case a buyout would likely still be allowed. Just think about if they kept cap the same, they’d have to allow for one compliance buyout. Teams like TOR and TBL are so tight on cap it would be almost impossible to get compliant without a buyout allowed. Will be interesting to see what happens, if one buyout is allowed. You’ll see teams swapping big contracts to buyout and resign. Ex: WPG sends Wheeler to SJ for Burns type deal, Jets buyout Burns, SJ resigns him. SJ buys out wheeler, jets resign him.
oneX et Trickster a aimé ceci.
24 mars 2020 à 20 h 46
#10
MisstheWhalers
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: janv. 2019
Messages: 23,545
Mentions "j'aime": 12,303
I don't know what will happen but what I think should happen is #2, cap stays the same and NO compliance buyout, these GM'S need to lie in the bed they've made and deal with the contracts they agreed to good or bad.
oneX et Trickster a aimé ceci.
24 mars 2020 à 21 h 49
#11
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2017
Messages: 4,735
Mentions "j'aime": 1,985
I see the NHLPA agreeing to at least 1 compliance buyout, and perhaps 2 for next season.

Is there enough caproom in the leaguento have a flat cap and go business as normal. Yes. But this room is held by a handful of teams, and would guve them far to much bargaining power when discussing any potential deal. Messes far to much with the competitive balance (or parity?) that now exists.

Further, not allowing a compliance flst outnwaters down a product. A hugh number of entry level deals make teams for the sole purpose of being under cap.... and that would not be by much. This has 2 effects imo.... 1 - it reduces the likelihood of a bounce back financially. I want tonsee the best of the best, not a team(s) icing a product that is substandard because of labour costs. And 2, since this would shorten rosters, it does in fact increase the risk of injury.

A failure to implement a compliance buyout(s) jeopardizes the payroll structure of the League as a whole. A payroll structure can be viewed as a microcosm per team, but this also exists league wide. Bad enough theberosion of the middle class NHLer continues, but this all but snuffs it out. Worse, it arguably moves some of thise best players into pay brackets lower than what they are/would have been worth. Screws everything up. It would take more than one season to correct that. When the cap was first introduced, for payroll structures to adjust was a 3-4 year process. NHLPA has to be aware of that.

Lastly, without a buyout(s) option, theblatter point will be magnified as GMs/owners tighten their wallets noting an uncertain economic future. Yeah.... Pietrangelo won't see anywhere near $9 million if things are statis quo. Which messes with the payroll structure etc.....

Why I see the buyout option coming.
oneX et Trickster a aimé ceci.
25 mars 2020 à 1 h 41
#12
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2019
Messages: 2,744
Mentions "j'aime": 2,601
I'm with @palhal on this. The NHL is a gate driven league moreso than the NFL, NBA and MLB. Infact, these other leagues have sweetheart deals with t.v. networks nationally and regionally. The NHL t.v. deal in the US still has to be negiotated.

Based on these two things, I'm leaning towards the cap decreasing slightly. Now...with a cap decrease, compliance buyouts are almost a must but I like what @MisstheWhalers said about GMs having to live with their mess.

Because of the economy and what COVID-19 will end up doing to it, I won't be shocked to see it affect the cap for the next two years as well...which kinda sucks for the NHL as a whole and Seattle specifically as it brings in a new market and tries to get a better t.v. deal than last time.
Trickster et OldNYIfan a aimé ceci.
25 mars 2020 à 3 h 20
#13
Just Keep Swimming
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2018
Messages: 9,193
Mentions "j'aime": 5,554
Quoting: palhal
IMO. the cap HAS to go down. The cap is a calculated from revenues. The NHL more than any league depends on paying fans in the arena. Gee, folks are getting laid off, pension plans much lower because of get stock market. There is no way the upcoming recession/depression even if relatively short term won't affect league revenues and therefore players salaries

The owners and the NHLPA will come with a formula. I gotta believe that salaries will go down across board, with the top earners taking biggest % reduction. Remember most of the voting members of the NHLPA are the mid to lower priced players. So the majority players don't want the 7m plus players keeping their extravagant contracts when the the current unsigned players taking the biggest % haircut. Yes there might be compliance buyout.

Is this 2019/20 going to be completed. Doubtful. Will the 2020/21 season even start on time ? Questionable. This virus and the economic ramifications is gonna be a disastrous short term....maybe long term. Certainly discretionary spending is gonna be greatly reduced, and that means folks buying tickets to games, buying teams sweaters etc, travelling to other cities to attend sport events.


Quoting: oneX
I'm with @palhal on this. The NHL is a gate driven league moreso than the NFL, NBA and MLB. Infact, these other leagues have sweetheart deals with t.v. networks nationally and regionally. The NHL t.v. deal in the US still has to be negiotated.

Based on these two things, I'm leaning towards the cap decreasing slightly. Now...with a cap decrease, compliance buyouts are almost a must but I like what @MisstheWhalers said about GMs having to live with their mess.

Because of the economy and what COVID-19 will end up doing to it, I won't be shocked to see it affect the cap for the next two years as well...which kinda sucks for the NHL as a whole and Seattle specifically as it brings in a new market and tries to get a better t.v. deal than last time.


What everyone seems to forget is that the cap is calculated by estimating the revenue that the proceeding season will generate. For example, this season was expected to generate the revenue to make an 81.5M cap. The fact that it is speculation is why escrow exists. All this to say that Covid shouldn't affect next years cap unless the NHLPA and NHLBOG convene to change something to help lessen the burden of the massive escrow hit the players will take this year.
Trickster, OldNYIfan et oneX a aimé ceci.
25 mars 2020 à 13 h 25
#14
Démarrer sujet
hey look a squirrel
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2018
Messages: 6,036
Mentions "j'aime": 3,744
I think the 2019-20 season is done and there should be no playoffs.

And I agree with @palhal that the start next season on time is questionable at best right now.



If the cap decreases, how much lower do you think it will go? @onex
And how you feel about buyouts only allowed to players by signed by the same team???
OldNYIfan et oneX a aimé ceci.
25 mars 2020 à 13 h 26
#15
Once a Kings Fan Too
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2018
Messages: 39,662
Mentions "j'aime": 24,579
Quoting: Trickster
Good points.


I really think the hard salary cap is here to stay.
Remember, more teams benefiting from this then not.
The only way this changes is if the top owners like MLSE and others decide they are not okay with it.

An increased cap with buyouts is even more likely than Path 3 I proposed IMO, the reason I think this is because the world economy is gonna get hit super hard especially in North America.
The situation in the USA right now, I think in reality it is worse than Italy and will get worse.

September is when this started in China, and due to this communist government they were able to hit recovery 7 to 8 months.

USA, they are one of the worst prepared for what is happening. And the country being so vast with state to state having a different situation is gonna further complicate things.
If one state recovers it will too easily prone to relapse unless the neighbours do too.

Same with Canada, we border NY state and Washington state.



Sorry for the rant but I'm just trying to emphasize that an increased cap with buyouts is super wishful thinking.


For some reason, didn't get around to reading this until now.

Not a rant -- a thoughtful expression and intelligent opinion.
Trickster et oneX a aimé ceci.
25 mars 2020 à 13 h 33
#16
Démarrer sujet
hey look a squirrel
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2018
Messages: 6,036
Mentions "j'aime": 3,744
Quoting: Random2152
What everyone seems to forget is that the cap is calculated by estimating the revenue that the proceeding season will generate. For example, this season was expected to generate the revenue to make an 81.5M cap. The fact that it is speculation is why escrow exists. All this to say that Covid shouldn't affect next years cap unless the NHLPA and NHLBOG convene to change something to help lessen the burden of the massive escrow hit the players will take this year.


I did not think about this before, but with the escrow hit coming... who says NHLPA wont fight any buyout notions???
25 mars 2020 à 13 h 34
#17
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2019
Messages: 2,744
Mentions "j'aime": 2,601
Quoting: Random2152
What everyone seems to forget is that the cap is calculated by estimating the revenue that the proceeding season will generate. For example, this season was expected to generate the revenue to make an 81.5M cap. The fact that it is speculation is why escrow exists. All this to say that Covid shouldn't affect next years cap unless the NHLPA and NHLBOG convene to change something to help lessen the burden of the massive escrow hit the players will take this year.


Okay so your bolded point...COVID-19 shouldn't affect next year's cap...but it's inevitably will because at what point will fans be okay attending games without the fear of this virus even officials say everything is safe, carry on your daily life.

Maybe arenas won't be completely empty, but completely sold out like Scotiabank seems to be night in and night out? I don't know.
Trickster a aimé ceci.
25 mars 2020 à 13 h 35
#18
Once a Kings Fan Too
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2018
Messages: 39,662
Mentions "j'aime": 24,579
Quoting: Trickster
I think the 2019-20 season is done and there should be no playoffs.

And I agree with @palhal that the start next season on time is questionable at best right now.



If the cap decreases, how much lower do you think it will go? @onex
And how you feel about buyouts only allowed to players by signed by the same team???


Agree that this season should be done. Go back to Game 68 to determine the draft rankings. Raises the interesting question about incentive clauses, and the third-round pick involved in the Lucic-Neal deal.

As a practical matter, I don't think that the NHL can lower the cap. That would be an admission that the League has moved backwards - perhaps true, but politically destructive.
oneX, Trickster et MisstheWhalers a aimé ceci.
25 mars 2020 à 13 h 37
#19
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2019
Messages: 2,744
Mentions "j'aime": 2,601
Quoting: Trickster
I think the 2019-20 season is done and there should be no playoffs.

And I agree with @palhal that the start next season on time is questionable at best right now.



If the cap decreases, how much lower do you think it will go? @onex
And how you feel about buyouts only allowed to players by signed by the same team???


If the decreases, it'll be by a million, maybe two. Whether we like the idea of buyouts doesn't matter, if the cap decreases how will the league allow teams to get under it? Short answer is buyouts.
Trickster a aimé ceci.
25 mars 2020 à 13 h 40
#20
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2019
Messages: 2,744
Mentions "j'aime": 2,601
Quoting: OldNYIfan
Agree that this season should be done. Go back to Game 68 to determine the draft rankings. Raises the interesting question about incentive clauses, and the third-round pick involved in the Lucic-Neal deal.

As a practical matter, I don't think that the NHL can lower the cap. That would be an admission that the League has moved backwards - perhaps true, but politically destructive.


Might not have a choice with gate driven league like the NHL is. If attendance drops for the next season (I hope there's a next season) right across the league which isn't too far fetched, a cap decrease is how to deal with lower revenues.
Trickster, OldNYIfan et palhal a aimé ceci.
25 mars 2020 à 13 h 41
#21
Démarrer sujet
hey look a squirrel
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2018
Messages: 6,036
Mentions "j'aime": 3,744
Quoting: OldNYIfan
Agree that this season should be done. Go back to Game 68 to determine the draft rankings. Raises the interesting question about incentive clauses, and the third-round pick involved in the Lucic-Neal deal.

As a practical matter, I don't think that the NHL can lower the cap. That would be an admission that the League has moved backwards - perhaps true, but politically destructive.


So you think no matter how hard the USA economy gets hit, keep the cap the same???
While politically destructive, I'm not sure the NHL will have choice given how gate driven the league is like @onex said.

NHL will likely not be the first league to step forward.
My money is on the NBA, their commissioner is progressive af.
oneX a aimé ceci.
26 mars 2020 à 1 h 4
#22
tomato
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: oct. 2018
Messages: 526
Mentions "j'aime": 305
I see the cap going down simply because revenue will almost certainly go down. Along with that comes 1 buyout per team. This is worst case scenario for the leafs in my opinion. The leafs have no one i would want to buy out. If we are able to trade for other teams players to buy there bad contracts out that helps with getting picks/prospects but leaves us high and dry for adding to the defense next season. Most teams will be happy with a single compliance buyout. A handful have 2-3 bad contracts whom we should target for assets. I see the sharks wanting to buyout Jones/Vlasic, the Wild wanting to buyout Parise/Zuccarello, Islander - Boychuk/Ladd etc. Targetting those and other teams for assets in return for buying out a terrible contract is our only realistic scenario where we benefit.
 
Répondre
To create a post please Login or S'inscrire
Question:
Options:
Chargement de l'animation
Soumettre les modifications du sondage