Apparently Brian Burke is behind this and if it is accepted it will definetely help the Leafs situation...


http://www.thestar.com/article/280605

The NHLPA will never go for this....

Well I figured it would suck for the players, but who knew they would go for the salary cap..

The way the current system is gms have very a difficult time making trades. As a fan its exciting when you get those major trades you can discuss and argue about..We never get those anymore. Obviously as a Leafs fan this is something that is intriguing as a team with lots of money can afford to make more moves..

We will see what happens...

You're kidding right?

Why? Freeing up money for big spending teams like the Leafs and Rangers would ensure that more big insane contracts would be signed.

When is the last time there was a major "hockey" trade made??Meaning stars switched teams and it wasnt a salary dump from one of the teams involved..

Movement is a lot more difficult within the salary cap, and GMs are having tough time making trades..

Obviously GMs watch the AHL / FCHL and realize what geniuses we are in our rules.

(serge)

Salary is one of the biggest reasons for making a trade. What other reasons are there?

It doesnt free up any money. The cap is still the cap. It just allows teams to trade cap space, which is detrimental to player contracts.

I also heard today that they are reviewing the numbers and its very likely the cap will be higher next year...

Dont get your hopes up next years UFA list is pretty pathetic. Most of the impact RFA have been locked up early aswell. Maybe the Leafs can give 6mill 5 year deal to Kolzig though.

seriously all you guys are getting old with your bashing...You dont have to bash the Leafs on every topic on every post I make..

Especially when I am contributing to the thread in a legitimate way...

Thanks

Looks to me like there may be some decent talent available.

http://www.nhlnumbers.com/freeagents.php?t...a&type=none

Hossa is really the only one who stands out as a major impact player to me. Demitra is solid but getting up there.

Sorry I am still bitter for missing the first half of the 1st period of the Van/Anh game last night because some retard doesnt know how to work a zamboni!

that was pretty hilarious...I am pretty sure he got fired today....

Hossa, JP Dumont, Langkow, Comrie, etc..

While there isn't a ton of big names there still a ton of quality to be mined in there as well in the 1-2 mill range.

After a quick look, I like...

Marian Hossa
Brian Campbell
Cory Stillman
Kristian Huselius
Daymond Langkow
Ron Hainsey
Joe Sakic
Mike Ribeiro
John-Michael Liles
Nicklas Lidstrom
Michael Ryder
J.P. Dumont
David Legwand
Mike Comrie
Miroslav Satan
Sean Avery
Martin Straka
Brendan Shanahan
Wade Redden
Dan Boyle
Vaclav Prospal
Mats Sundin
Brendan Morrison
Markus Naslund

There is also big names that wont receive the contracts they are currently signed for..

ie Theodore,Demitra,Blake(might retire),Lidstrom,Sakic(maybe he will)

While these guys are all old Sakic and Lidstrom are still at the top of their game adn for the right price they can have value...

The real goldmine of great young talent is in the RFAs

But some teams don't spend to the top of the cap because they are cheap. As an example If Toronto trades Kubina and his salary to the Predators, then spend that 5 million on other free agents, 5 million more dollars just went into player salaries. Nashville would not have spent that money unless Toronto sent it to them. They would have just gone through the season with unused cap space.

what they are proposing is, in your example..Toronto would still pay all or part of Kubina's salary, but it wont count against the cap...So in essence Kubina can play for Nashville and be paid by Toronto...
It happens in other sports , especially baseball..That way more trades are able to go through...

why? serge's argument (more flexibility equals more money spent on player contracts) seems pretty solid to me. this is not necessarily to say that I want to see this rule go into place.

Lets say toronto ate 2 mil of kubina's salary. That 2 mil still counts against the Leafs cap. The other three mil counts against Nashville's cap. THerefore, the net change in salary cap availability is nil. It's just changed teams a little. So small market teams will get saddled with overpaid/underperforming players who will not cost them as much money. Big market teams will be paying phantom salaries under the cap rules to players they dont have. The NHLPA would rather not see deals being made to underwrite salaries or clear cap space. One of the basic premises of the NHL salary cap is that cap space is NOT to be used as a commodity. That's why everyone got so pissed with the Malakhov move by Lou Lamoriello..

Given that it is just a player union, isn't the NHLPA solely concerned with seeing larger player salaries? Maxing the cap in every single market (or getting as close as possible) seems consistent with their goals. I guess I would just expect the owners of smaller market franchises to be more up in arms over this than the players.

I agree that it isn't really something I want to see go into place. I don't know why we bothered with the lockout if we're going to do things that encourage the same big market spending as before. Serge mentioned baseball which I think is basically the perfect example of a sport totally ruined by the disparity between small and big markets. I live near KC and I've only been to maybe 5 royals games in the last 10 years... there's a reason for that.

I understand what you are saying, but in your example, Nashville is still employing a 5 million dollar player that they would not otherwise have. The Leafs free up another 3 million in cap space, which we all know they will spend. 3 million dollars is being spent that would not have been if this rule wasn't in place. I would have thought that alone would make the NHLPA come on board.

Demitra is 32 making 4.5 Mil this year, I'm sure the Leafs will pick him up in the off season in a $48 Mil, 6 yr contract.

That is unless Ferguson is gone which is a certainty.

I like to play the devils advocate in your baseball example...The Boston Red Sox and the New York Yankees make more money because of their fans...Those fans should be rewarded by having an edge over a city like Kansas City...Yes disparity sucks when you are a small market team..The sport is not ruined..

If I am a Yankee fan and I am dishing out all that money every year, I should be rewarded with a competitive team that has a chance to win the World Series every year..

just my opinion..

Yeah, but wouldn't the average Yankee fan pay similar to what the average say Royal fan would pay? I mean, I know tickets are more expensive in NY, but the average fan will attend fewer games, so it balances out.

Just because there are more people, I don't think they should get a competitive advantage.

Like, each individual fan, on average, probably pays a similar amount of money to the team.

I would think the ticket prices are way higher in New York..Also the fans pay through other ways as the Yankees make tons more money in merchandise and television revenue...

I am a fan of two extremes and I know how it is..

The Leafs are a rich team that cant spend under the salary cap..

The Jays cant spend and keep up with the Yankees and Red Sox..

Right. Of course overall merchandise and television revenues are higher for the Yankees, but it has nothing to do with fans paying them more money. Sure, the collective, but the individual, average fan, probably spends the same amount of money as he would in KC or whatever.

I just don't think it's fair to punish certain teams for their geographic deficiencies.

I much prefer the salary cap model of the NHL, to the MLB system, even if the NHL's model could use a bit of tinkering.

Except the leafs now have 2 million in dead cap. So lets say they trade McCabe, and eat 2 mil, trade Kubina, eat 2 mil, trade tucker, eat a mil, etc. You now have five million in dead cap. So, sure they open up 8 million in player availability but that 8 mil costs them 13 mil in cap space.

I would have thought the NHLPA would be all for increasing the salaries of players?

Unless I/we are missing a key point. If big market teams are able to dump large contracts at will that will push up total contracts as a % of revenue (which was already at 55%?) which means more large contracts to bums, in effect, means every other player looses out?

How is "dead" cap space worse than unspent cap space?

It's not worse. It's exactly the same. Therefore all you're REALLY doing is giving GM's more impetus to move players. Good for the teams, bad for the players. Players dont like moving, ergo no trade clauses....

I agree with you Gruven, but isnt it better for the fans? Trades are almost impossible to make now a days...

So Tor has 0 cap space and Buffalo has 8 Mil in Cap space.
The Leafs trade Kubina to Buf for a draft pick and agree to pay 2 Mil of his 5 Mil salary.
Now the Leafs have 3 Mil in Cap space and Buf has 5 Mil.
The problem is that although the Leafs have 3 Mil in cap space they can't exactly spend 3 Mil on a new player because it is the middle of the season and everyone is signed to contracts.
I agree with Gruven here that this does not help players as no players are going to make more $$. It just means there will be more trades.

Unless of course this can go on for multiple years. I am not sure if it is possible though in other Leagues. So that the Leafs would pay 2 Mil of his salary for say the next 2 years after this season and therefor they would have 3 Mil per year to spend in the free agent market in the summer.

I am not sure of the rules though.

By the way in no way does this mean that as a Buffalo fan I would want Kubina. This is strictly an example.

The interesting part of this is CAP vs BUDGET...The Cap might be $50 million for every team..However the Leafs budget might be $75 million and the Predators might be $33 million(or whatever the floor is)....By the Leafs being able to move more players through this method, they will have more money to spend and might drive up the price for a potential free agent....

Also I think the movement we can look at as some positive for players...Lets again take the Kubina example...Lets say that its a mutual decision that he has had enough with the team,the city,his family wants to move, whatever reason....Under the current system, its almost impossible for Pavel Kubina to be moved to another team, based on his contract, so he is "stuck" in Toronto for 5 years...Now you can argue that he is a professional and he should play for the team he signed for, but things change..Think of it as a marriage...The current NHL salary structure makes divorce very difficult...

There are other options to get out of bad contracts..
ie just buy the player out, or bury him in the minors..

But why do the players care if the leafs have dead cap space when more money is being spent overall? The Leafs will have less cap space, but the team they are trading with will have more. It isn't completely dead cap space, it is dead to the Leafs. The overall amount of cap space in the league will be the same, but now the overall money spent throughout the league will be closer to hitting the cap ceiling.

Also, why would the Leafs trade players and eat some their salaries against their cap space? While we mostly agree those Leafs are overpaid but with paying ~2mill towards their salaries that's the right price. It doesn't really achieve anything!

With the cap space the same, there will be no effect on salaries. The only effect will be the ease with which players can be moved. And the NHLPA is a huge advocate of players being able to stay with teams. So are the players. THEY don't want to change teams, with rare exceptions. So anything that promotes MORE movement without salary levels increasing will be frowned upon...

What if Toronto pulled a Serge and acquired $20 mill in cap space from a team such as Phoenix, Washington, etc... for a 1/2nd draft pick. That would be an extra $20 mill in salaries...

I dont think trading cap space is even being talked about...

"What if"... ie a way to trade cap w/o moving players.

The ticket prices are exponentially higher in new york. I'm pretty sure you can get great seats at the K for about $50 with nosebleeds under $10. I totally understand your argument about the big market fans deserving to have a bigger payroll, but I think the MLB could REALLY use some tweaking as far as the luxury tax goes. I could easily see KC losing the franchise in less than a decade.

Great idea to put an NHL team here, by the way.

I think the MLB scenario is extreme...While I believe the Yankees and Red Sox should be able to spend more than the rest of the teams, they spend an INSANE amount of money...I think something like $200 compared to $25 - $30 million with some teams...I would like to see something in between....

Serge, I really don't understand why you are so against a salary cap. It's not like Toronto had success before the cap.

you are right, it didnt work well for us before....It just goes against free market economic system.....Take a look at the games at the ACC,Montreal and Madison Square Garden..

Than you look at the games in Nashville and Long Island...Why should those teams that cant sell half their seats be able to compete with the Leafs and Montreal...If you are a succesful team off the ice you should have more resources to improve the on ice product...Instead of a salary cap, you get rid of the franchises that arent making money...

Nashville Predators were a Stanley Cup contender and they still couldnt sell out their games..

Allowing the big market teams to spend more would result in even more empty seats for the smaller market teams.

Also, don't confuse attendence with tickets sold.

My whole point is maybe there shouldnt be small market teams....30 teams is too many...

Plus its not small market vs big market like it is in the NFL....The NFL,NBA and MLB are different when it comes to fan base...They have fans everywhere...Even though Dallas might be one of the largest cities in the US a smaller city like Buffalo might have a larger fan base in hockey.

I really think if I was commisioner I would make the NHL more profitable especially in the US

Wasn't there a Canadian team that wasn't making money before the lock out? Do you really want to get ride of another Canadian team?

You are only thinking about what benifits the Leafs. You're just bitter because Toronto makes so much money but can't win a cup and you are trying to find a way to mold the league to give an edge for Toronto.