The-Habby2919 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 According to this the cap will be at 52 million this year, lots of room for Bob to do some serious tinkering to the roster! http://www.nypost.com/seven/06032007/sports/rangers/fire_and_ice_rangers_larry_brooks.htm?page=0"]NY post[/topic] :hlogo: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psycing Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Ryan Smyth here we come! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark_faerie87 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 We marvel at the naivete of those people who still do not understand that the four primary objectives of the lockout were: a) to get Bob Goodenow fired as head of the union; B ) to get Bob Goodenow fired as head of the union; c) to wipe out the $1.4B in contractual obligations for 2004-05; and, d) to get Bob Goodenow fired as head of the union and replaced by a lackey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLP Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 So it's all Goodenow? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark_faerie87 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Anyone know what the new max contract will be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShortHanded Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 So it's all Goodenow? Puns are HILARIOUS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark_faerie87 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Puns are HILARIOUS Oh man, I didn't even catch that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShortHanded Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Oh man, I didn't even catch that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Just because the cap is going up doesn't mean Gainey will max out the cap. He was cl;ose last year and it didn't get him anything but an early tee time. I think they'll be around 44 million or so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark_faerie87 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Just because the cap is going up doesn't mean Gainey will max out the cap. He was cl;ose last year and it didn't get him anything but an early tee time. I think they'll be around 44 million or so. Maybe because he felt it wasn't worth selling the farm for a rental at this point in time... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talon Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Good thing there was a lock-out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habitforming Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Anyone know what the new max contract will be? The max allowed is 20% of the cap upper limit. So $52M would allow for a $10.4M contract. Crazy huh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark_faerie87 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 The max allowed is 20% of the cap upper limit. So $52M would allow for a $10.4M contract. Crazy huh? Dayum! Crosby, Malkin and Ovechkin must be licking their chops. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Not surprised at all. This means nothing so far as anything but our ability to retain our free agents. Attracting them is, if anything, more difficult. We have more money to get a Drury, Briere, Timmonen or Smyth, yes, but so does everyone else. Washington has to pony up a lot of money (likely 2 relatively big signings or 1 mega signing) just to get to the cap floor (minimum). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habitforming Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Dayum! Crosby, Malkin and Ovechkin must be licking their chops. I would offer Crosby a 15 year contract for $125M asap. Not surprised at all. This means nothing so far as anything but our ability to retain our free agents. Attracting them is, if anything, more difficult. We have more money to get a Drury, Briere, Timmonen or Smyth, yes, but so does everyone else. Washington has to pony up a lot of money (likely 2 relatively big signings or 1 mega signing) just to get to the cap floor (minimum). The rule for highest contract is 20% of the caps high end but, what was the rule for setting the cap floor? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark_faerie87 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 I would offer Crosby a 15 year contract for $125M asap. So would I, but at the rate the cap (and thus salaries) are rising, his agent would have to be pretty stupid to lock into that sort of deal. By the way, looks like the Isles are getting an incredible deal for Dippy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habitforming Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 (edited) So would I, but at the rate the cap (and thus salaries) are rising, his agent would have to be pretty stupid to lock into that sort of deal. By the way, looks like the Isles are getting an incredible deal for Dippy. Agreed, but he could take a home team discount If by chance the cap ever went down again the habs would be screwed. At some point you play for the game and fun of it...money doesn't keep you playing does it? How much money do you need really, $125M USD is lunacy. He can retire at 34 with all of it if he wants. Edited June 4, 2007 by Habitforming Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark_faerie87 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Agreed, but he could take a home team discount If by chance the cap ever went down again the habs would be screwed. At some point you play for the game and fun of it...money doesn't keep you playing does it? How much money do you need really, $125M USD is lunacy. He can retire at 34 with all of it if he wants. Haha, true enough. And yeah, I totally agree with you, but the salaries of some of these guys makes me wonder otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 I don't know what % the cap floor is, but it is a % of revenues, just like the ceiling is (commonly called a cap). Coming out of the lockout it was $21m. This should definitely have it in excess of $30m, and maybe up to $33/$34m, which is more than what a lot of teams were paying out pre-lockout (though revenue sharing should help them, and a strong Canadian $ for Edmonton/Ottawa/Calgary). This is mostly Canadian/Buffalo money fueling this increase, make no mistake. There was a report recently that said the Canadian teams accounted for 1/3 of the total revenue of the NHL (which make up the cap). Buffalo sold a ton of new jerseys this past year as well as selling out every game. They were as much of a machine as Canadian teams were in terms of revenues. Imagine what revenues would be like if Boston, Chicago, and Los Angeles actually performed well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Wow, I'm shocked. I figured it'd go up a couple million, but that's a ton! Drury and Hannan! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Wow, I'm shocked. I figured it'd go up a couple million, but that's a ton! Drury and Hannan! Again, this means that Drury could possibly get a Richards sized contract (or even more) since everyone has more money to spend (or has to spend in the case of Washington). Hannan will certainly get a bigger contract as well than what most expected. The extra cap room is irrelevant... it doesn't mean we can field a more talented team than previously thought. It just means the players will get more money than previously thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Again, this means that Drury could possibly get a Richards sized contract (or even more) since everyone has more money to spend (or has to spend in the case of Washington). Hannan will certainly get a bigger contract as well than what most expected. Briere might get a Richards sized contract, but I don't think Drury will. Hannan will probably be in the 4-5 million range. The extra cap room is irrelevant... it doesn't mean we can field a more talented team than previously thought. It just means the players will get more money than previously thought. Players will, indeed, get more, but we'll still have more money to spend. Before, even if we moved Samsonov, we were only gonna have about 8 million to spend. No way we get 2 great guys for that. Now we're gonna have 16 million to spend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Briere might get a Richards sized contract, but I don't think Drury will. Hannan will probably be in the 4-5 million range. Players will, indeed, get more, but we'll still have more money to spend. Before, even if we moved Samsonov, we were only gonna have about 8 million to spend. No way we get 2 great guys for that. Now we're gonna have 16 million to spend. This may help us in a couple of ways: 1) We find a taker for Samsonov since teams need to increase their payroll to get to the floor. 2) We become a high payroll team as more teams refuse to spend to the salary ceiling, meaning they bow out of negotiations with higher priced free agents quickly. I doubt Edmonton (at least until they get a new arena), Columbus, Atlanta and Tampa Bay to name a few are willing to spend to the salary ceiling if it's that high. They may try and maintain a $40-$45m payroll but they've hit their budgeted cap. Buffalo is iffy in this scenario as well although they generated a lot of revenue last year. But individual players will just get more money than before on the open market. It may allow us to outbid Atlanta, but consider how much cap room Edmonton and Philadelphia have. Philly now has around $30m in cap space and is consistently one of the top UFA destinations... they could easily put down $8m+ on Drury if they wanted him and would outbid us. Washington could put that much down on him if they wanted as well. Hannan may not get more than $5m, but it depends on how the market plays out. Timmonen, Rafalski, and Souray are the main competition for him right now. If 1 or 2 of them are off the market by July 1, Hannan will likely get a bigger contract as a result of supply (limited number of D) and demand (tons for top 4 d-men, tons of $$$ available). And don't forget the fact that Wang now has more money to spend on ridiculous contracts of massive length on Long Island. Fortunately Mike Barnett's gone, but that may not stop Gretzky from finding big money for former Canadian Olympians like Hannan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 I heard those reports too but many people say it's going to be between 47M$ and 49M$. Don't get me wrong, 52M$ would be freakin' sweet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 I heard those reports too but many people say it's going to be between 47M$ and 49M$. Don't get me wrong, 52M$ would be freakin' sweet. It's all up to the NHLPA where it is. The revenues are ther for it to go to $52m. And for all the negatives about Brooks, he's got his pulse on the NHLPA better than any reporter out there. Plus it makes no sense for the PA to not ask for the maximum cap number available to them. Saskin was an idiot as well as a sleaze, and now that he's gone (and the players themselves realize that the escrow is not lost salary at all) they should exploit their limited rights under the CBA to the full extent possible. Those aren't "reports" of where the cap will be that you're referring to. Those were predictions based off a different formula... Once the revenues topped $2.3 billion, the % that goes towards the salary range actually goes up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.