Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

A player cap, and a team cap?


Recommended Posts

Hi, would like your thoughts on this too.

 

With the huge money players commanding nasty salaries that handcuff teams and not being able to put the best team on the ice because of it and of course injuries to them but what if there was a player cap as well? In other words, spreading out the wealth a bit more for every team 

 

Yeah no...  i know it won't happen but..  meh...  (shrugs)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You live in an already expensive Canadian city with an NHL team.  Guess how Aquaman keeps his hockey business worth more than most other teams, he bends you over on ticket prices.  Add to that the fact that Canadian teams along with teams like NYR and CHI subsidizes teams like FLA and ARZ, and there's your expensive ticket prices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, goalie13 said:

The cap is based on a percentage of league revenues.  The only reason the cap has gone up is because the revenue has gone up.  So just capping individual salaries wouldn't change the price of a ticket.

but they could figure out how to some way or other, but no why would they?  the price of a ticket was just a throw in...  more of a player cap that would level the playing field...  ok edit time and i'll leave the one point.. thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said:

You live in an already expensive Canadian city with an NHL team.  Guess how Aquaman keeps his hockey business worth more than most other teams, he bends you over on ticket prices.  Add to that the fact that Canadian teams along with teams like NYR and CHI subsidizes teams like FLA and ARZ, and there's your expensive ticket prices.

Leafs blow...  i love that!!!  lmao!  Thanks for that, needed a good chuckle today...  just sayin.. and oh yeah i modified it a bit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, iceman64 said:

but they could figure out how to some way or other, but no why would they?  the price of a ticket was just a throw in...  more of a player cap that would level the playing field...  ok edit time and i'll leave the one point.. thanks

 

7 minutes ago, goalie13 said:

The cap is based on a percentage of league revenues.  The only reason the cap has gone up is because the revenue has gone up.  So just capping individual salaries wouldn't change the price of a ticket.

Ticket prices are set at what a specific market will bear.  Vancouver (and Canadians in general) residents will pay through the nose so the Canucks will charge through the nose.  It's simple economics.  The owners are in business to make as much money as they can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, iceman64 said:

what if there was a player cap as well? 

 

There's already an individual player cap but it is a percentage of the team payroll not a fixed number per se. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, iceman64 said:

but they could figure out how to some way or other, but no why would they?  the price of a ticket was just a throw in...  more of a player cap that would level the playing field...  ok edit time and i'll leave the one point.. thanks

Level the field for whom? 

 

Are you looking to reward teams that are already fortunate enough to acquire top talent by limiting what they have to pay them, giving them the opportunity to bring in more talent?  Or, are you looking to provide a little mercy to some teams that overspend on one or two players and are all of a sudden struggling because the rest of the roster is not good enough?

 

If you bring in a stricter player cap ( @Where's Wellwood, @Fanuck, yes current CBA has it as 20% of the salary cap) without lowering the team salary cap, you just make it easier for powerhouse teams.

 

If you lower the team salary cap, then the owners make out even better than they already do, and the players as a whole miss out.

 

If a player like McDavid is good enough for max salary, that's the way it goes.  It's up to him whether he wants to take a discount to help the team do better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Fanuck said:

To my knowledge it's 20%.  Or at least it used to be. 

It is 20% of the salary cap in the year which the contract is signed.

 

As per the CBA:

50.6 Maximum Player Salary and Bonuses; Fixed Dollar Amount of Player Salary. (a) No SPC may provide for a total aggregate Player Salary and Bonuses that is in excess of twenty (20) percent of the Upper Limit for any League Year (the "Maximum Player Salary and Bonuses"). For a Player signing a multi-year SPC pursuant to which he receives the Maximum Player Salary and Bonuses in any League Year during the term of such SPC, the Maximum Player Salary and Bonuses for every League Year covered by the multi-year SPC shall be based upon the Upper Limit at the time the SPC was signed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With 20% of the teams total cap.  Next year the cap is going to $81.  So the Canucks could offer Tavares $16 is they so desired.

No other team will come match that.  Of course it probably would be a horrible idea.

 

But yeah.  It's a high figure.  Even McJesus got $12.5, when he could have got $15.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Fanuck said:

There's already an individual player cap but it is a percentage of the team payroll not a fixed number per se. 

 

19 hours ago, Where's Wellwood said:

Came here to say this. Though I don't know the specific percentage

This. I think I recall it being somewhere around $12M or $13M a few years back. Probably around $15M now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...