NHL should remove the salary cap

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
The only team that has non guaranteed contracts is the NFL, and the players want to dump it,
Oh, and I can see why, as well. But I was just mentioning that as an example of how there are different aspects that can be tweaked.
 
Absolutely the players should have never accepted it but they folded like they do every single time
 
That's not how it works, so yes.

All teams now have the same absolute limit on how much they can spend on players salaries so it's not an arms race anymore.

In the season before the cap, the highest paid players in the league were making $11 million. Almost 20 years later, the highest paid player in the NHL this season is making $13 million.

The NHL total revenue in 2004 was $2.24 billion. Last season according to Bettman revenue would exceed $5.2 billion.

The league is bringing $2.96 billion more than the season before the cap but its largest expense, players salaries, have barely increased.

There is a 50/50 revenue split, so its extremely obvious you're talking out of your ass here.

The average salary the last pre-cap season was 1.8M

The average salary this season is 3.5M

So if you think doubling is "barely increasing" then you do you. There's more players than just the single one at the top.
 
There is a 50/50 revenue split, so its extremely obvious you're talking out of your ass here.

The average salary the last pre-cap season was 1.8M

The average salary this season is 3.5M

So if you think doubling is "barely increasing" then you do you. There's more players than just the single one at the top.
Well for starters, there isn't a 50/50 revenue split. That's the myth Bettman sells that people parrot.

Ignoring that inaccuracy let's use better data.

In 2004 the average team payroll was $44.4 million. The last data I could find was 2019 where the average team payroll was $66.6 million.

So average team payroll increased by 22.2 million in those 15 years. Meanwhile, revenue increased by $2.85 billion.

If you think I'm talking out my ass, I don't think you fully appreciate the size difference between million and billion.

Me saying that the cap has benefitted owners isn't exactly a hot take. I'm not sure why you're so bent out of shape about it.
 
Well for starters, there isn't a 50/50 revenue split. That's the myth Bettman sells that people parrot.

Ignoring that inaccuracy let's use better data.

In 2004 the average team payroll was $44.4 million. The last data I could find was 2019 where the average team payroll was $66.6 million.

So average team payroll increased by 22.2 million in those 15 years. Meanwhile, revenue increased by $2.85 billion.

If you think I'm talking out my ass, I don't think you fully appreciate the size difference between million and billion.

Me saying that the cap has benefitted owners isn't exactly a hot take. I'm not sure why you're so bent out of shape about it.

Source: dude, just trust me

I'm an engineer, I understand numbers. I also understand sources, so heres some actual sources:

1.8M average salary in 03-04


3.5M average salary now


Care to explain how the average salary doubling fits into your narrative?

Also, if you're looking for updated NHL payrolls here's a current one.


Looks like all 32 teams are above your unsubstantiated out of date number. Please, tell us more about how the 50/50 revenue split is just a myth that Gary tells NHL fans when he tucks them in at night. I'm sure you'll have some airtight sources for that.
 
Well for starters, there isn't a 50/50 revenue split. That's the myth Bettman sells that people parrot.

Ignoring that inaccuracy let's use better data.

In 2004 the average team payroll was $44.4 million. The last data I could find was 2019 where the average team payroll was $66.6 million.

So average team payroll increased by 22.2 million in those 15 years. Meanwhile, revenue increased by $2.85 billion.

If you think I'm talking out my ass, I don't think you fully appreciate the size difference between million and billion.

Me saying that the cap has benefitted owners isn't exactly a hot take. I'm not sure why you're so bent out of shape about it.
After that 2004 year,
Forgot to mention there was a 25% salary rollback, and a league wide cap of $39.3 million maximum, don’t remember the minimum.

The next time they played hockey.
 
I've got a better idea. How about the NHL season and playoffs are turned into an exhibition and at the end of every season Toronto, Montreal, and New York roe-sham-bo for the Cup.
 
Source: dude, just trust me

I'm an engineer, I understand numbers. I also understand sources, so heres some actual sources:

1.8M average salary in 03-04


3.5M average salary now


Care to explain how the average salary doubling fits into your narrative?

Also, if you're looking for updated NHL payrolls here's a current one.


Looks like all 32 teams are above your unsubstantiated out of date number. Please, tell us more about how the 50/50 revenue split is just a myth that Gary tells NHL fans when he tucks them in at night. I'm sure you'll have some airtight sources for that.
Yes that's why everyone goes to engineers for their finances.

My numbers are average payroll. Which is a better figure than average salary. Wikipedia is the simplest source. Not my favorite but you can link back to the actual sources. It's just neatly consolidated there.


You keep fixating on the average salary doubling, because the words sound better than the math.

The whole reason for the salary cap was because players salaries were getting out of control. Are you really arguing that they wouldn't be significantly larger than they are now without a cap?

As for the myth of the 50/50 revenue split. First, it's not revenue, it's hockey related revenue (HRR). And there's some pretty dubious things carved out of it. Second, the salary cap isn't even calculated off of HRR. It's HRR minus direct costs. Since you're the financial wizard I won't bother explaining to you what that is. So the players are getting 50% of HRR - direct costs.



Again, not sure why you're so hot under the collar over the fairly obvious statement that when you artificially restrict your largest expense and revenue increases at a greater rate, you're going to make more money.


But you do you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ted Hoffman
Absolutely the players should have never accepted it but they folded like they do every single time
They were literally minutes from folding in 1995 and preparing to send a group over to NHL headquarters to say as much when the owners overran Bettman and caved in and sent notice to the NHLPA. Otherwise, we'd have had a cap 10 years earlier.
 
Yes that's why everyone goes to engineers for their finances.

My numbers are average payroll. Which is a better figure than average salary. Wikipedia is the simplest source. Not my favorite but you can link back to the actual sources. It's just neatly consolidated there.


You keep fixating on the average salary doubling, because the words sound better than the math.

The whole reason for the salary cap was because players salaries were getting out of control. Are you really arguing that they wouldn't be significantly larger than they are now without a cap?

As for the myth of the 50/50 revenue split. First, it's not revenue, it's hockey related revenue (HRR). And there's some pretty dubious things carved out of it. Second, the salary cap isn't even calculated off of HRR. It's HRR minus direct costs. Since you're the financial wizard I won't bother explaining to you what that is. So the players are getting 50% of HRR - direct costs.



Again, not sure why you're so hot under the collar over the fairly obvious statement that when you artificially restrict your largest expense and revenue increases at a greater rate, you're going to make more money.


But you do you.

The engineer comment was because you suggested I couldn't understand the difference between a million and a billion. If you want to be pithy after I shut down your baseless accusation just reflects on you.

You keep suggesting payroll is a better determination, yet you use admittedly outdated numbers from Wikipedia rather than the updated numbers I posted that show payrolls are way up.

You also don't offer any reason that you think 30 teams paying roughly 23 players 1.8M each is roughly the same as 32 teams paying roughly 23 players 3.5M each.

The salary cap has been keeping smaller market teams healthy for almost 20 years, and when revenues were way down during covid if the owners and PA couldn't have come to an agreement using the 50/50 split ans escrow then the league would be in big trouble right now.

You keep going on about revenue going up and salaries not, but they are tied together. Your unsupported comment that the owners aren't being faithful with defining HRR is irrelevant without some sort of proof.
 
The engineer comment was because you suggested I couldn't understand the difference between a million and a billion. If you want to be pithy after I shut down your baseless accusation just reflects on you.

You keep suggesting payroll is a better determination, yet you use admittedly outdated numbers from Wikipedia rather than the updated numbers I posted that show payrolls are way up.

You also don't offer any reason that you think 30 teams paying roughly 23 players 1.8M each is roughly the same as 32 teams paying roughly 23 players 3.5M each.

The salary cap has been keeping smaller market teams healthy for almost 20 years, and when revenues were way down during covid if the owners and PA couldn't have come to an agreement using the 50/50 split ans escrow then the league would be in big trouble right now.

You keep going on about revenue going up and salaries not, but they are tied together. Your unsupported comment that the owners aren't being faithful with defining HRR is irrelevant without some sort of proof.
I never said salaries have not gone up. holy cow. I don't know if you're just in the mood for arguing or what. Your thinking you "shut me down" seems to reflect that.

What I was getting at was that salaries have not gone up nearly as much as they would have without a cap.

And even without some of the questionable things carved out of HRR (which are mentioned in the linked article) it doesn't change that HRR minus Direct costs is not a 50/50 revenue split with players.

Are you seriously suggesting that salaries would not be significantly higher without a cap? That artificially restricting the owners biggest expense has not been beneficial?

Because I'm not sure if you remember but that's what was being stated when you started this pissing contest. That the cap has been beneficial to owners. Which it undeniably has.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ted Hoffman
I never said salaries have not gone up. holy cow. I don't know if you're just in the mood for arguing or what. Your thinking you "shut me down" seems to reflect that.

What I was getting at was that salaries have not gone up nearly as much as they would have without a cap.

And even without some of the questionable things carved out of HRR (which are mentioned in the linked article) it doesn't change that HRR minus Direct costs is not a 50/50 revenue split with players.

Are you seriously suggesting that salaries would not be significantly higher without a cap? That artificially restricting the owners biggest expense has not been beneficial?

Because I'm not sure if you remember but that's what was being stated when you started this pissing contest. That the cap has been beneficial to owners. Which it undeniably has.

If franchises folded due to unrestricted spending or the league was crippled by covid then salaries would be lower, yes. That was never my argument though. I was arguing your false statement that salaries have "barely increased" since the cap when the average salary has doubled.

Also, weird how when I respond to you I'm "argumentative" or "hot under the collar", yet you also seem to be responding to all of my posts. Are you just unaware of how a discussion message board works?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Lazlo Hollyfeld

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad