Edited Apr. 20, 2020 at 9:12 p.m.
Quoting: Random2152
I'm saying that you are wrong that the cap is based on the previous years income.
I am also saying that 20+ teams are beyond screwed if the cap goes down. Something has to give. Remember the owners will always get 50% of revenues, so they don't care about where the cap is. The real losers are the NHLPA.
Years ago when the NBA and NBAPA had agreed to a sharing of revenues, (believe it is 57%), the two sides couldn't agree on how it was going to be shared. Finally the owners in frustration said, "We don't care, give all to Micheal Jordan if you want, you figure it out". So the players came up with a solution.
Same with the NHLPA. The majority of players will come up with a solution. And IMO it will everyone player will take a pay cut even with the one's with current contracts.
I'll disagree with the you when you say the owners don't care what the cap is. The owners would prefer a 100m cap, that means the average owner get 100m. A 70m cap means the owners only get an average of 70m each . Lots of those owner expenses are fixed costs....the arena, transportations, meals, the AHL, executive salaries....more cap/revenue is the profit margin.