It's Gone! 2004-2006 NHL Offseason and Lockout Thread

[Draft Dodger]

Avs are in better shape than I thought...

[Karim]

The Flames have already said they will not be going over $30 million in payroll which means Jarome Iginla can make a max of $6 million.

[Blade]

I think that will make for some interesting scenarios...if Jarome can only make $6 mil on the Flames, and wants to make $7.5 elsewhere, but the teams who can still pay him that are paying other players that, he may not have anywhere else to go.

So while there is still somewhat of a disparity between some teams, it may not be as bad if there is not a market available for the top ends players, since there will be limited spots on teams now to pay players the max available salary.

[bronconick]

From TSN.ca
- No player can earn more than 20 per cent of the team cap, which for 2005-06 means no player can earn more than $7.4 million.



My understanding of it was that the max salary for all players on all teams was 7.4 million. Not that if your team's salary is $25 million, you can't get more then 5 million.

[sachmo71]

Did everyone check their team websites? (bold is not my emphasis)

July 13, 2005

Dear Stars Fans,

We have just received the news that the National Hockey League has reached an agreement in principle with the Players Association on a new Collective Bargaining Agreement, pending ratification. This is truly good news for our fans.

We are pleased that the agreement was reached. There is much to do before this agreement is made official, and we are hopeful that the ratification process is successful. Be sure to log on to DallasStars.com for all of the news as it breaks.

All of us here with the Stars are ready to reach out to our fans and reconnect with them. That all starts with lower ticket prices, which will be formally announced tomorrow. As we move forward you'll notice many other exciting changes that will be focused on our ultimate goal of winning you back and growing what we believe is the greatest game around.

We're ready to get going on the season and we want you to be a part of the great experiences.

GO STARS!

Sincerely,

James R. Lites
President, Dallas Stars

[Blade]

Originally Posted by bronconick

From TSN.ca
- No player can earn more than 20 per cent of the team cap, which for 2005-06 means no player can earn more than $7.4 million.



My understanding of it was that the max salary for all players on all teams was 7.4 million. Not that if your team's salary is $25 million, you can't get more then 5 million.

From what I read, it is 20% of the team's payroll...

[henry296]

Originally Posted by Blade

From what I read, it is 20% of the team's payroll...

I've read it that way as well, but it also makes sense to be 20% of the potential payroll. In that way it would be similar to a max contract in the NBA. The scenarios that we have laid out seem to cause a lot of confusion. At what point do you determine what % of the salary a player is taking. I can see a scenario... We would love to trade player X but must keep him so we don't violate the salary cap because then Iginla salary would be 21% of the team.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by sachmo71

Did everyone check their team websites? (bold is not my emphasis)

Nothing from the Hawks but it's a long trip to get up there for a game. Wonder if the Blues have any discounts- that's only a 4 hour drive.

SI

[Draft Dodger]

Originally Posted by sachmo71

Did everyone check their team websites? (bold is not my emphasis)

I'm going to guess without looking that the Bruins aren't lowering their prices...

[Blade]

Yah, sounds like the Oilers will not be dropping prices at all either.

[Simms]

My boss has Leafs season tickets and was telling us this morning about the letter he got from them.

It was dated June 22, but he didn't get it until last week. The gist of it was, you must send us $500/seat as a small deposit to confirm your interest in renewing before August 2nd. If no response, they will assume you're no longer interested. But no word about how much the tickets will actually cost.

In other words, ticket prices will be determined by the level of response from season ticket holders.

Not that I think anybody really expected prices to drop here, of all places, but still...that's pretty sneaky.

[Draft Dodger]

Panger mentioned a couple of the proposed rule changes today, and some seem a little, well, bizarre.

for example, tapering the jerseys to cut down on obstruction and not allowing a team that ices the puck to change lines (thus leaving tired players in their own zone to increase scoring chances). some good ideas out there too, but these seem a bit odd.

btw, can someone explain to me what touch up offsides is? I don't have a clue.

[Honolulu_Blue]

ESPN has put its own summary of each team and possible cuts.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/columns/story?id=2106450

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by Draft Dodger

Panger mentioned a couple of the proposed rule changes today, and some seem a little, well, bizarre.

for example, tapering the jerseys to cut down on obstruction and not allowing a team that ices the puck to change lines (thus leaving tired players in their own zone to increase scoring chances). some good ideas out there too, but these seem a bit odd.

btw, can someone explain to me what touch up offsides is? I don't have a clue.

offsides doesn't result in a stoppage of play and a faceoff, the offending player can getout of the zone then go back in. best way i can describe it

[RPI-Fan]

Originally Posted by Draft Dodger

Panger mentioned a couple of the proposed rule changes today, and some seem a little, well, bizarre.

for example, tapering the jerseys to cut down on obstruction and not allowing a team that ices the puck to change lines (thus leaving tired players in their own zone to increase scoring chances). some good ideas out there too, but these seem a bit odd.

btw, can someone explain to me what touch up offsides is? I don't have a clue.

Puck is in the neutral zone, offensive team has yet to clear the zone. Offensive team can dump the puck in, but may not enter the zone until all players have cleared the zone.

[TazFTW]

Originally Posted by henry296

I've read it that way as well, but it also makes sense to be 20% of the potential payroll. In that way it would be similar to a max contract in the NBA. The scenarios that we have laid out seem to cause a lot of confusion. At what point do you determine what % of the salary a player is taking. I can see a scenario... We would love to trade player X but must keep him so we don't violate the salary cap because then Iginla salary would be 21% of the team.

Yeah, I don't get this.

For example, let's say the owner in Boston is not cheap and they decide to go for the max cap. According to the link that H_B posted the Bruins currently have 4 players under contract worth $2.9 million. Let's say they want to go after Iginla with a $7.4 million deal, wouldn't the Bruins need to sign a lot of guys to get their number high enough, so that they can offer Iginla that contract? Basically, they would have to go after the little fish before going after the big one. The opposite of what usually happens which is going after the 1 or 2 big name guys and then focus on signing support guys.

[bronconick]

Heck, if the Bruins only have 4 guys at 2.9 million, that would mean they can't offer any players more then $747,500, as that player would make more then 20% of the total roster. Otherwise, teams would probably have to submit their payroll "expectations" to the league before free agency and then the league would have to hold them to that number. That situation would have the NHLPA screaming bloody murder as teams make their own salary caps officially lower then the CBA agreed cap. It's a *lot* more likely that it's just 20% of the max salary cap, and they're calling it the "team" cap to differentiate it as the $39 million total for each team as opposed to the 54% "league" cap on salaries.