Friedman: Salary cap could rise as high as $95-97 million next season

NotAVacuumSalesman

The Guide And Record Book™
Jun 19, 2017
4,249
7,722
No it didn’t, it was limited to 1 million increases.
According to wiki it stayed flat for three seasons.

75AA9836-5813-4BCE-AA9C-B5C260DB6F55.jpeg
 

Fourier

Registered User
Dec 29, 2006
26,704
22,292
Waterloo Ontario
Players would be smart to leave it at 5% growth so they don’t wind up with high escrow payments. Worst case every player gets cut a check at season end to make up and shortfall on the players share.
If the total revenues are in the $6.2-6.5B range this year, and they may be more, escrow should not be an issue even at $97M. Assuming even a 4% rise the players share should be in the range of $95-100M per team even on the low end of that range.

I thought 5% was the max it could rise
The League and the NHLPA can agree to more. The increase this year was 5.4%.
 
  • Like
Reactions: QuizGuy66

Michel Beauchamp

Canadiens' fan since 1958
Mar 17, 2008
23,278
3,386
Laval, Qc
It makes sense. I think the projections were always way too conservative on the cap growth given revenues. I’m not sure how you tell your workforce to stay satisfied with meager growth or complain about how much players are making when the owners are taking in incredible revenues and team valuations are skyrocketing towards $2 billion for an average team.
50% of which must go to the players...
 

Soundwave

Registered User
Mar 1, 2007
74,188
30,391
If the total revenues are in the $6.2-6.5B range this year, and they may be more, escrow should not be an issue even at $97M. Assuming even a 4% rise the players share should be in the range of $95-100M per team even on the low end of that range.


The League and the NHLPA can agree to more. The increase this year was 5.4%.

I mean revenue was 6.43 billion for 22-23 and that was before widespread jersey ads, Utah, new deal with Fanatics, continued inflation, etc.

I say there's a high chance revenue is well over 6.5 billion now.
 

StreetHawk

Registered User
Sep 30, 2017
29,059
11,256
If the total revenues are in the $6.2-6.5B range this year, and they may be more, escrow should not be an issue even at $97M. Assuming even a 4% rise the players share should be in the range of $95-100M per team even on the low end of that range.


The League and the NHLPA can agree to more. The increase this year was 5.4%.
Escrow always seems to be a big deal for the PA. It was held at 6% last season and from what I could find, the PA got back about half of that for a net of 3% lost to escrow.

They seem to prefer lowering escrow to as close to 0% as possible vs risk it going up on a higher cap ceiling.

I do think they would approve a higher cap, but would aim to keep that reasonable. Like $93-94 mill vs the $95-97 mill these reporters. Most of the PA have contracts, so an extra couple of million of cap room doesn't help most of the players.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad