Salary cap going up next year

[Rimmer]

SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. (CP) - Life just changed for the Toronto Maple Leafs and all the other big-market clubs in the NHL.

They've got more money to spend next season. Commissioner Gary Bettman, as expected, told owners at the board of governors meeting Thursday that current revenue projections will see the salary cap rise to somewhere between a low of $40 million US and a high of $45 million.

The cap was $39 million this season.

"It does provide a different landscape," Leafs general manager John Ferguson Jr., said after the two-day meetings wrapped up Thursday. "We negotiated some deals last summer and stayed out of some, frankly, because of that uncertainty.

"It doesn't sound like it's going up a whole lot if it ends up on the lower end but if it ends up on the higher end we'd have a little more room to spend providing our budget would permit us to go to that number.

"And I think it's safe to say we'd be approaching it."


....

But for a team like the Leafs, life is good again.

"Hopefully it will restore a little more of the competitive advantage we had on the financing side which will be nice," said MLSE president and CEO Richard Peddie.



--full article--

R.

[Skilly]

I hate to say I told you so .... but I told you so. That 5.333 cap hit doesn't seem so bad now does it?

[roke]

skilly said:

I hate to say I told you so .... but I told you so. That 5.333 cap hit doesn't seem so bad now does it?

5.333? Oh, Theodore?

[MC Habber]

As I understand things, if the cap goes up, player salaries go up too. Unless certain players recieve raises (new contracts) with sufficiently higher value to keep player revenues at the appropriate percentage, Theo, Kovalev, and everyone else with contracts past this year will see more money.

[Deleted]

skilly said:

I hate to say I told you so .... but I told you so. That 5.333 cap hit doesn't seem so bad now does it?

This really defeats the purpose of the cap. Why would you increase it? This will only alienate small market teams once again.

[cigarviper]

If the cap goes down the only way to accomodate it is to have every player's salary decrease. How else would it work? You can't just cut a player or two to meet the new cap. This is all an assumption on my part so correct me if I'm wrong.

[jkr]

skilly said:

I hate to say I told you so .... but I told you so.

Don't feel so bad about it. A lot of posters go to great lengths for a good "I told you so".

[jkr]

rimmer said:

SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. (CP) - Life just changed for the Toronto Maple Leafs and all the other big-market clubs in the NHL.

They've got more money to spend next season. Commissioner Gary Bettman, as expected, told owners at the board of governors meeting Thursday that current revenue projections will see the salary cap rise to somewhere between a low of $40 million US and a high of $45 million.

The cap was $39 million this season.

"It does provide a different landscape," Leafs general manager John Ferguson Jr., said after the two-day meetings wrapped up Thursday. "We negotiated some deals last summer and stayed out of some, frankly, because of that uncertainty.

"It doesn't sound like it's going up a whole lot if it ends up on the lower end but if it ends up on the higher end we'd have a little more room to spend providing our budget would permit us to go to that number.

"And I think it's safe to say we'd be approaching it."


....

But for a team like the Leafs, life is good again.

"Hopefully it will restore a little more of the competitive advantage we had on the financing side which will be nice," said MLSE president and CEO Richard Peddie.



--full article--

R.

But doesn't everybody have more to spend? Why are the leafs so excited?

[Rimmer]

Leafs are excited because not everybody can afford to spend more than they are spending right now. and one of those teams could very well be our Montreal Canadiens.

from the article:

"Not all clubs will use the new limit next season. Some teams have budgets and won't spend to the new maximum.

"That's absolutely correct," said Montreal Canadiens owner George Gillett. "We're operating in an economic reality. We're trying to recover from huge losses over the years. And I don't think that you recover by automatically going to the high end of the game."

Much of the same from Ottawa Senators president Roy Mlakar.

"We've always worked under a budget," Mlakar said. "When you look at Ottawa, we've always produced a budget for ownership and tried to be responsible, understanding that we're a small-market team. We're trying to build our revenues, we're doing a pretty good job of that. We're probably in the middle of the pack. And now we're top 10 in attendance and that's good news."

But spending up to $45 million next season is likely not in the cards, even if it means keeping free-agent star defencemen Zdeno Chara and Wade Redden.

"We're going to have to make a long run in the playoffs to be a financially successful franchise," said Mlakar. "So we've got some hard decisions for sure."

Columbus Blue Jackets GM Doug MacLean said the new cap figure won't influence things too much in his case either.

"It's not going to affect us because we're not going to get there anyway. But it's always interesting to see what the competition is going to be though and what the gap (in payrolls) is going to be."

But for a team like the Leafs, life is good again."

R.

[cigarviper]

rimmer said:

"That's absolutely correct," said Montreal Canadiens owner George Gillett. "We're operating in an economic reality. We're trying to recover from huge losses over the years. And I don't think that you recover by automatically going to the high end of the game."

That's not an overly optimistic statement to make for fans of the Habs. Didn't he promise to restore the club to it's former glory years? Money lost in previous years has been written off against his other investments. Now we're gonna hear about Gainey's hands being tied preventing him from doing what he feels he needs to do to make this team a champion again? I don't like this....I don't like this one bit.

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

jkr said:

skilly said:

I hate to say I told you so .... but I told you so.

Don't feel so bad about it. A lot of posters go to great lengths for a good "I told you so".

Yeah, take a tip from a veteran: be of good cheer when celebrating your prescience. And don't forget to quote your words, along with the evidentiary timestamp. Continued successful forecasting.

[Skilly]

mrbozo said:

jkr said:

Don't feel so bad about it. A lot of posters go to great lengths for a good "I told you so".

Yeah, take a tip from a veteran: be of good cheer when celebrating your prescience. And don't forget to quote your words, along with the evidentiary timestamp. Continued successful forecasting.

Agreed. But those threads are so hard to find and then remembering which thread you said it ..... well *whew*.... and that CBA thread is soooo long!!!

Ya guilted me into it ... but it took me a long time to find it

skilly said:

I disagree.

For starters I never said lets give him 6 million and Bob Gainey isnt going to give him 6 million either. I said we'd be nuts not to get him for 5 million for 3 or 4 years.

It would be hard this year and maybe next. But if the cap goes up (and I believe it will, everyone is hockey mad) even if it is in 2 years, the last 2 years of Theo's contract do not hold us at randsom. It would be less of a hit. If we wait until next year and the cap does indeed go up, then Theo will be asking for 6 million or more.

This of course was when we were arguing about Theo's salary and length of contract.

[BadCompany]

From the Globe and Mail:

www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20051216/NHLBOARD16/TPSports/Hockey

The increase in the cap does not mean the league has unexpectedly struck it rich after the lockout. When the lockout started in September, 2004, the league said it lost a total of $200-million on revenues for the 2003-04 season of $2.1-billion. But under accounting methods agreed to with the NHL Players' Association in the new labour agreement, the 2003-04 revenues were actually $2.2-billion.

Hmmm... So lets see... During the lockout the owners told us that they had revenues of $2.1 billion, and that they were losing $200 million a year... Now they tell us that they had revenues of $2.2 billion, and that they only lost $100 million, or about $3 million per team? Another couple of years of "re-accounting" and they'll be profitable.

The conspiracy theorist in me says this is only a ploy to prop up their patsy Ted Saskin, but then I've always been the cynical sort...

Also from the same article:

The Montreal Canadiens may have the largest arena in the NHL, which seats more than 21,000 fans, but owner George Gillett said it does not mean they will go to the new cap limit from this season's payroll, which is about $36.3-million.

"That's absolutely correct," Gillett said at the end of the annual governors meetings yesterday. "We're operating in an economic reality. We're trying to recover from huge losses over the years. And I don't think that you recover by automatically going to the high end of the game."

[jkr]

rimmer said:

Leafs are excited because not everybody can afford to spend more than they are spending right now. and one of those teams could very well be our Montreal Canadiens.

from the article:

"Not all clubs will use the new limit next season. Some teams have budgets and won't spend to the new maximum.

"That's absolutely correct," said Montreal Canadiens owner George Gillett. "We're operating in an economic reality. We're trying to recover from huge losses over the years. And I don't think that you recover by automatically going to the high end of the game."

Much of the same from Ottawa Senators president Roy Mlakar.

"We've always worked under a budget," Mlakar said. "When you look at Ottawa, we've always produced a budget for ownership and tried to be responsible, understanding that we're a small-market team. We're trying to build our revenues, we're doing a pretty good job of that. We're probably in the middle of the pack. And now we're top 10 in attendance and that's good news."

But spending up to $45 million next season is likely not in the cards, even if it means keeping free-agent star defencemen Zdeno Chara and Wade Redden.

"We're going to have to make a long run in the playoffs to be a financially successful franchise," said Mlakar. "So we've got some hard decisions for sure."

Columbus Blue Jackets GM Doug MacLean said the new cap figure won't influence things too much in his case either.

"It's not going to affect us because we're not going to get there anyway. But it's always interesting to see what the competition is going to be though and what the gap (in payrolls) is going to be."

But for a team like the Leafs, life is good again."

R.

Sound like things haven't changed a lot. Rich teams now have more money to spend.