Andersen over binnington?

It all seems realistic, I think Anton Anderson quit hockey though.

I have a feeling that Binnington might explore his options. I don't have any actual information, but it's easy to forget that the Blues org. pretty much gave up on him until a complete catastrophe of a season gave him a shot, out of the blue. And then he signed a 2-yr deal to take him to UFA. I don't really know where things will stand when extension talks start. Would be fine giving either Freddie or Binner a 4 yr deal.

Damn, didn't know that. I just saw we'd have to sign him to keep his rights so I hit the button. That's a shame.

Oh right I forgot about that. He’ll probably want a 7 year deal and giving that to a 29 year old G is risky. It might cost 7 x 4 to lock up Anderson (he’ll be 31) but less term is better

Yeah that's the other part. Binner hasn't really gotten a big pay-day and I'm really wary about giving goalies that much term if he asks for it. Would def opt for a 4 yr max on a goalie, even if that means a higher AAV.

The cap is guaranteed to go down next season. So, it will probably be lower for your roster as well. Plus, I think Dunn would want at least $5M.

You would guarantee that next year's cap will be lower than this year's? Where are you getting this from? It will be lower than their original projections (84-88m) but I can't see them taking it down from 81.5, and if they do there would be some other compliance maneuvers allowed. I was guessing that next year will be about 82m and 2021-22 would be around 84-85m.

We'll know for sure in two months. Let's see how well these guesses age

It's definitely not a guarantee, but it's more likely than people seem to want to admit. A guy in a Tampa thread jumped down my throat when I mentioned it as a possibility.

You probably know this already, but for people who don't, the cap numbers is based off of a formula- it's a 50/50 revenue split between players and owners, so the average cap number comes in at half the revenue divided by 31, and then there's a percentage that dictates the floor and the ceiling. The players can use a cap escalator if they want, but they usually don't because they could lose money in that scenario if the revenue for the following season isn't as high as they think it will be.

Even if there are playoffs, the ramifications of losing approximately 150 regular season games in a league that profits largely via gate revenue (unlike the other leagues with lucrative TV and marketing deals) is going to be tough to swallow for teams that are barely profitable as it is. With the revenue being a 50-50 split for owners and players, I think it's almost a certainty that based on the CBA's formula alone, the cap is going down this year. I think it's unlikely that they USE said formula this year, especially if there aren't playoffs, because that devastates pretty much all teams, so they'll have to agree on another number. However, any number higher than the CBA formula's number means the owners will be ceding more money to the players than the owners themselves will be getting. Call me a pessimist, but I'm not holding my breath that the guys who are barely paying their arena workers right now(and not all of them are doing that) are going to be raring to give up more money to the players after they shut down the league twice in the last twenty years over pretty much this exact argument.

I think your projection of a flat cap this year and then going up to 84 million next year is realistic. Hopefully the economy recovers enough that the league doesn't lose money next year.