@palhal @jamiepo @oldnyifan @onex @jack_ @tansor @tomato43 @swinney @BCAPP @Trevorchef

What you guys think?

Depending on how everything shakes out, I think that's quite a cautious estimate

Its strictly based on numbers, no bias.

Never said there was bias, I just think that seems low. And I have no knowledge whatsoever of how the financial's work in the league, but it just seems to me that if this one guy has projected this number and it's completely accurate based on the numbers, more people would have caught on to that by now. I don't know... I'm not to concerned about it until we know what's going on.

I doubt it will be that low.

If for any reason there is a roll back that amounts to several million dollars, (10+, etc), there will have to be a coinciding roll back in players salaries like there was in 2005 after the lockout.

When the the Salary cap was first implemented, there was a 25% roll back in player salaries. A figure of 66 million as a cap ceiling would mean that a salary rollback would follow suit, otherwise there is no hope of most teams icing a competitive lineup.

If the cap drops to 66 million you could expect a rollback in players salaries of approximately 15% to 20% to compensate.

brendan shanahan Said on Tim and sid that he has not heard anything about a cap drop and that the league does not want one because it would Hurley so many teams.

well that guess is way off, somebody was using the wrong calculator. Gary Bettman said in numerous interviews the league plans to keep the cap at 81.5 or would discuss increasing it to 82.5 but hold it there for 3 additional seasons. A cap of 66 million would systematically destroy every team in the league. No team would agree on a cap that low and neither would the NHLPA. For a guy to come up with an estimate like that wow. In general a cap that low would spell the end of the NHL.

Is "Hurley" an Auto-Correct?

Hurt

Like I said, he said the 66 million is strictly based the TV deal revnue.

Yes of course no one wants a reduced cap, but this not going to be about people want... it's going to be about what is possible.


I think salary roll backs will be must at 66 million, but I'm not convinced the NHLPA will agree to compliance buyouts.

Yeah, I thought so. I'm making a collection.

Gate revenue is roughly 33% of the leagues income so a drop of that amount would lower the cap to 50M.

The current escrow rate is 9.5%, an increase to 25 probably raises the cap up to around his chosen number of 66M

I been saying the following for awhile. The league was estimating a 86m cap pre Covid. A 25% drop in revenue is means about 66m cap. It' the owners and NHLPA that have to agree to the cap and how the cap is distributed among the 23 man roster. IMO negotiation will be based ln 86m cap....then ALL players will take 25% pay cut. Most members of NHLPA are mid to low paid members. They certainly aren't to be voting to protect the salaries of players that are already signed and those lower paid players don't want a 20 man roster.
And the reality is....that is hoping for September training camp that might not even happen. Even with full schedule the NHL revenues way down next year. People don't have money to buy tickets and merchandise. And the virus fear will keep people out of crowded arenas.

I think all players in every league will be "hurling" at a reduced cap due to decreased revenues. I won't take any credence in what Shanahan says in public. The Leafs and NHL and have various cap plan, but it' the owner and players that have to come an agreement. Shanahan isn't about lay his desired course on action public airways.

I think that there is a hidden snag inside that reasoning: salary doesn't equate to cap hit. Say two players have a $7,142,857 cap hit, but one gets $8 million in 2020-2021 and the other gets $7.5 million. I haven't thought about this, but the difference in actual monetary effect to the two teams involved would seem to indicate an inequity . . . but maybe not. {I'm currently embroiled elsewhere debating the no-CBO-unless-the-guy-was-on-the-roster-at-the-TDL issue.}

You'r eright. The player that go front loaded contracts for the past few years will be very happy. Others like Werenski have taken back loaded contracts so their qualifying offers will be higher in few years. Now they will pissed. CBO...yea I think one per team is gonna happen though I don't like them personally. They reward some team bad cap management.

I listened to this interview and it was fascinating. Allan Walsh may or may not have all the figures to come up with the 66 million cap but he definitely knows more than any of us do.



The rollback may have to be higher than 20%. I don't know how much attention you have given to health officials saying it will take 18 months to 2 years for a vaccine for COVID-19 but that just about confirms no fans at arenas for next season as well.

Care to do the math on revenue lost for next season?
Players with backloaded contracts will not be happy about rollbacks but this is not something anyone could have predicted.

Indeed. Without fans in the buildings , the losses would be in the hundreds of millions and more likely billions.

Honestly I think this is overly generous. I suspect they may keep the cap the same, but ridiculously increase escrow. But this is a gate driven league. They lost a good chunk of the NHL season this year. Next year may have no gate revenue.

People are broke with minimal discretionary income. I could see revenues down 40+%. Try like 50 million.

But they could still have an 81 million cap or whatever and then just take escrow of 40%