Regarding the return to the game:
1. There will be two subsections of groups that will benefit if the NHLPA ratifies the renegotiated and extended collective bargaining agreement, which will be presented to the union for ratification as part of a comprehensive return-to-play package that will include central city related locations and protocols. with the health / safety coronavirus for the training camp and the Stanley Cup tournament.
And they are: 1) Owners who don’t particularly care if their respective teams win; and, 2) Players with long-term contracts who don’t particularly care if their respective teams win.
2. Because a cap on the current $ 81.5 million for the next two to three years (talk of raising the cap by $ 1 million in Year 3) will strangle the contenders who historically spend on the upper ceiling, and They will have to deal with unrestricted arbitration and free agents without the luxury of increasing, albeit modest, a greater margin of expense. Namely: The cap increased from $ 73 million in 2016-17 to $ 81.5 million over the next three seasons, a jump of 11.64 percent.
Less cap space not only translates to less room to add players, but also less to keep them. The teams will be forced to make purchases. (Sources have told The Post that amnesty purchases have hardly been part of the conversation.) More players will be released to the free agent market. Teams will award fewer long-term deals. As such, there will be more refereeing hearings and more players on the market.
Adopting a flat top will reduce the escrow, but players could have done so at any time by narrowing the band and setting the ceiling at, say, 5 percent above the midpoint of the current 15 percent. Deferring 10 percent of your salary next season will also make custody easier, with that money to be paid after new NHL media rights deals also ease the burden.
And while a cap will benefit boys in long-term deals, players who join free agency in the next three seasons make up a large majority of union members. In fact, 572 players are eligible to access free agency in the next three seasons, 335 unrestricted and 144 eligible for arbitration. (I made a count using the data from Capfriendly.com. If there is an error, it’s mine and not the website’s).
Thirteen teams spent to the top (or beyond, using long-term injury exemptions) for 2019-20, with six more reaching a $ 2 million limit. With a flat top, where are all the free agents going?
Or are we simply going to see an acceleration in a caste system where the rosters will consist of one-percent players, entry-level players, and minimum wage hockey workers?
3. No one has any idea of the 2020-21 income. So the NHL recognized that it would have to violate its principle of linking the cap to revenue, because if that held up, next season’s cap could be as low as $ 63 million with the 2021-22 cap on what, $ 30 million? And that? The teams were unable to build complete game lists.
Therefore, they have come up with this option to split the baby from keeping the current limit while limiting the escrow to give players more time to pay what they owe this season and prevent them from facing an indescribably onerous situation in two. years by the current CBA.
4. But what both parties should have done is negotiate the end of the hardcover system and move to a softcover. The maximum limit would have been $ 63 million (or whatever calculation) with equipment authorized to spend, say, up to $ 83 million on a luxury tax of one plus one. The trust would stop at the soft cap. For every dollar spent above that, the team would contribute a second dollar to the revenue share.
That would end 50-50, yes, but as I’ve been saying for almost two decades, the percentage of the total is a false concept. The teams do not group their income or their payroll / expenses. There’s no room for 50-50 if it stunts growth, as it will. The NHL will be sent to stagnation. A luxury tax would serve as a stimulus.
5. The NHL has approached this as if it had all the time in the world, and it did, but not anymore. The deadline is approaching if the training camps are to open on July 19. Players will have 48-72 hours to chew on a bulky packet and vote. Both sides hope that the vote can be concluded over the weekend.
6. The resurgence of the virus in most of this country (who would have ever guessed it?) Causes the NHL to move away from Las Vegas as a central city. Chicago is believed to be still in the race, but the tournament, if played, may well take place in Toronto and Edmonton.
If both core cities are in Canada, it will create significant NHL savings of approximately 28 cents on the dollar. The league is collecting all team expenses on site.
7. If an agreement is reached, then there are concerns about keeping players and assistant staff safe and healthy. If the membership, which seems less divided than uncertain, rejects the proposal, the tournament will be in grave danger.
Additionally, there is a possibility of a shiver between the sides leading to depression in the next two seasons before a lockout. In other words, even more good times.
.
