Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Can you expand on this? I actually find stuff like this fascinating. 

 

It's nothing complicated.  Ticket prices go up and less people can afford them.  So of course that lends itself to the corporate types.

Posted

It's nothing complicated.  Ticket prices go up and less people can afford them.  So of course that lends itself to the corporate types.

 

It's not just that. Increases in student tuition, the number of people going to uni (and thus who have to pay it) as well as rent taking a larger slice of the take-home pie and mortgages requiring a larger deposit. Sure Millenials still spend/waste money on entertainment and social occasions, but probably not in $200 dollar chunks.

Posted

From Ken Campbell

 

For what it's worth, I've been told by people both on NHL and players' side there's no way the NHL is going to 2018 Olympics. Done deal.

Sweet, we'll have a lockout in the primes of Eichel, McDavid, Laine, and Matthews. 

Posted

Sweet, we'll have a lockout in the primes of Eichel, McDavid, Laine, and Matthews.

 

You truly believe letting the players go will prevent the next lockout?

 

Been drinking too much green paint, Charlie. :p

Posted

If indeed we live in just one of an infinite number of universes with an infinite number of possibilities, there would still be an NHL lockout in every single one of them. Nailed on.

Posted

You truly believe letting the players go will prevent the next lockout?

 

Been drinking too much green paint, Charlie. :P

Yup. The question isn't whether there will be a lockout, it's how long it will last.

Well what else is there to contend about? Revenue sharing, again?

 

 

Technically the paint is blue :D

Posted

Well what else is there to contend about? Revenue sharing, again?

 

 

Specifically, the escrow system currently in use. The salary cap is kind of a false number, since the players take a 15% hit off the top, most of which they'll never see again. I think they got 2% back last year.

Posted

Specifically, the escrow system currently in use. The salary cap is kind of a false number, since the players take a 15% hit off the top, most of which they'll never see again. I think they got 2% back last year.

Sorry, can you explain this like I'm 5?

Posted

Sorry, can you explain this like I'm 5?

The CBA dictates that the players are entitled to a certain percentage of "Hockey Related Revenue." The salary cap is based on estimates (it's more complicated than that, but will do for now). The league escrows 15% of all player salaries, and based on revenue results either pockets it or refunds a certain amount of it to make sure the players receive the specified percentage of revenue the CBA says they get.

Posted

The CBA dictates that the players are entitled to a certain percentage of "Hockey Related Revenue." The salary cap is based on estimates (it's more complicated than that, but will do for now). The league escrows 15% of all player salaries, and based on revenue results either pockets it or refunds a certain amount of it to make sure the players receive the specified percentage of revenue the CBA says they get.

 

That and the never ending battle over the definition of hockey related revenue.

Posted

Which is why, of course, the players are absolutely crazygonuts about, for instance the Vegas expansion fee not being "Hockey Related Revenue". CBA clearly states it isn't, so they lose that argument, but still.

Posted

Sorry, can you explain this like I'm 5?

 

This is my understanding:

 

Let's say the cap is 70m, and the floor is 50m. They find these two numbers based upon guessing that revenues will average 120m/team, thus 60m go to each team for players. Now we don't know what each team is going to spend on players, some teams spend 50m, some teams spend 70m, so if the average team spends more than 60m or revenues are less than 120m/team, then the owners still want their 50%. How they get their 50% is to keep part of each contract, called escrow, so instead of your favorite player making 2m/year, he makes ( if 15% is the number) 1.7m/year. At they end of the year, they total up the revenues, divide by 2, subtract the total contracts, that gives each side 50%, and any leftover goes to the players. If the average team spends 60m on contracts, and Hockey Related Revenue averages 120m/team, then each player gets their 15% back.

Posted (edited)

There is a sentence in here that makes me think scouts sometimes see what they want to. "NHL teams can teach a kid to play defense, but they can't teach Tippett brings to the table in his innate abilities." There are so many examples of wingers in particular NEVER learning how to play defense that I thought of 4 without much hesitation. Just a small gripe from me. Oh and they think Tippett could make the NHL jump right away.

http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/article/panther-sign-tippett-to-entry-level-deal-and-expect-him-to-contribute-right-away 

Edited by LGR4GM
This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a VERY SPECIFIC REASON to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...