Sign in to follow this  
Petey40

Salary cap could remain around the current 81.5 million for the next 3 seasons.

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/nhl-nhlpa-talks-cba-include-escrow-cap-salary-deferral-players/

 

With the announcement that the salary cap could remain around the current 81.5 million for the next 3 seasons a lot of teams will be hurting if this ends up happening, how do you guys feel canucks will work around this? 

Edited by Petey40

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as the cap doesn't drop significantly, I think every team should be alright.

 

A compliance buyout would certainly be nice.

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gives the Canucks more incentive to use our rookies rather than sign FA's into stupid contracts like in the past.

  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will force some UFA during that time to take smaller contracts and we might see a few guys take 2 or 3 year contracts in hopes of cashing in big once the cap goes up again.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you say one compliance buyout?

 

We can finally get rid of that 6M albatross Eriksson contract!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Petey40 said:

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/nhl-nhlpa-talks-cba-include-escrow-cap-salary-deferral-players/

 

With the announcement that the salary cap will remain around the current 81.5 million for the next 3 seasons a lot of teams will be hurting, how do you guys feel canucks will work around this? It’s also possible teams could get 1 compliance buyout.

First of all. This isnt an announcement that the cap WILL remain level. It’s reporting on discussion that still need to be voted on. 
 

Second, if this goes through there is zero chance there will be a compliance buyout. If they’re keeping Escrow artificially low there’s no way they’ll allow compliance buyouts (which raise escrow) that would be further compounding the problems that they’re trying to solve.   To illustrate that point. Compliance buyouts aren’t even mentioned in the article. So I don’t know where you’re getting the idea that they’re a possibility 

Edited by qwijibo
  • Thanks 1
  • Hydration 1
  • Vintage 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, qwijibo said:

First of all. This isnt an announcement that the cap WILL remain level. It’s reporting on discussion that still need to be voted on. 
 

Second, if this goes through there is zero chance there will be a compliance buyout. If they’re keeping Escrow artificially low there’s no way they’ll allow compliance buyouts (which raise escrow) that would be further compounding the problems that they’re trying to solve.   To illustrate that point. Compliance buyouts aren’t even mentioned in the article. So I don’t know where you’re getting the idea that they’re a possibility 

Agree. I don't think there will be a compliance buyout if they go with flat cap and reading the article, it makes me believe that compliance is buyout is less likely given the complexity surrounding escrow. The article doesn't mention compliance buyout anywhere either.

 

If the cap stays flat, my guess is that EP and QH will want bridge contracts, giving them a chance to earn a giant contract 3 years later when things go back to normal. I'd say 3 years at 5-6 mil each. Marky is probably going to get 3-year 5 mil or 4-year 4 mil contract, as opposed to 5-6 mil.

 

My initial intuition is that this won't be too bad for us.

 

On the other hand, Toronto is most likely screwed. They might have to trade away one of the big 3, or at the very least, Nylander. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

Will force some UFA during that time to take smaller contracts and we might see a few guys take 2 or 3 year contracts in hopes of cashing in big once the cap goes up again.

Hopefully this means we’ll have an easier time re-signing Toffoli.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
43 minutes ago, qwijibo said:

First of all. This isnt an announcement that the cap WILL remain level. It’s reporting on discussion that still need to be voted on. 
 

Second, if this goes through there is zero chance there will be a compliance buyout. If they’re keeping Escrow artificially low there’s no way they’ll allow compliance buyouts (which raise escrow) that would be further compounding the problems that they’re trying to solve.   To illustrate that point. Compliance buyouts aren’t even mentioned in the article. So I don’t know where you’re getting the idea that they’re a possibility 

My bad I read multiple things about a possible compliance buyout but what you said makes sense. I just added that not in relation to the article but just because it was being discussed around the league by people like Brian Burke. But they seemed to just being talking nonsense.

 

I edited my post to more accurately reflect the article and discussion.

Edited by Petey40
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, we're stuck with Eriksson. 

Maybe he can be LTIR'd due to narcolepsy, extreme apathy, or an equipment allergy.

  • Hydration 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Master Mind said:

As long as the cap doesn't drop significantly, I think every team should be alright.

 

A compliance buyout would certainly be nice.

why ?

that makes the escrow amount deducted from the players pay go up

so they will all earn less if buyouts have to be factored in

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, luckylager said:

Yeah, we're stuck with Eriksson. 

Maybe he can be LTIR'd due to narcolepsy, extreme apathy, or an equipment allergy.

Or all the above?

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More info from Friedman in his 31 thoughts:


6. Some of what’s in the new framework was contained in this article from Thursday, but here’s a fuller picture: four years added onto two remaining seasons; 20 per cent escrow limit for players in 2020-21; somewhere between 14-18 per cent in 2021-22, with a hope of getting into single digits after; salary cap of $81.5 million for the next two seasons, and $82.5 million in 2022-23; a 10 per cent player “deferral” next season (which includes July 1 signing bonuses due next week), where players will get that money back in the future when escrow is lower; and a mechanism to make sure teams get paid in full from the 50-50 split over the length of the deal. 

One thing I’ve struggled understanding is what this deferment means to a team’s cap situation. Some sources indicated they thought this would give teams extra room, but another countered by saying he understood it “counted in the year earned.” So, still waiting for clarity on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Gawdzukes said:

Anything could happen, I would adjust as it actually happens.

If arenas are not open to the public I cannot see how the CAP could be maintained at $81.5? All it will take is a C-19 breakout during the playoffs, if they happen, and all bets will be off. Players desperate for income might risk playing but how would rosters be managed if NHL regulars decide to sit out? I certainly would not blame them for doing so. There is talk about escrow being the balancing tool but that is a patchwork at best and will not stand.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/28/2020 at 7:06 AM, Boudrias said:

If arenas are not open to the public I cannot see how the CAP could be maintained at $81.5? All it will take is a C-19 breakout during the playoffs, if they happen, and all bets will be off. Players desperate for income might risk playing but how would rosters be managed if NHL regulars decide to sit out? I certainly would not blame them for doing so. There is talk about escrow being the balancing tool but that is a patchwork at best and will not stand.   

The cap really isn't important it's the escrow because if escrow is 20%, they are assuming real cap is 65mil. Which means they roughly except to lose half billion dollars in. A season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.   Paste as plain text instead

  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...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.