The best thing about Mason's deal is that he earned the contract through his play -- he took the reduced salary on the one-year deal. He has played well. It was unrealistic to think he was going to take another one-year deal at a reduced salary.

This deal is about as good as it gets -- I honestly though it'd be $4.5/$4.75.
- AllInForFlyers

yeah thats awesome. what is his AAV?

$4.1m.

yeah thats awesome. what is his AAV?
- stayinthefnnet

$4.1 -- pretty much in the Goldilocks Zone, for me.

You don't know every single one of our prospect's faces by heart? What an amateur
- JAKEw1234

What time is it Jake....??

Looks like it's about quarter to Amateur Hour....

Don't forget, by 2019 the cap ceiling will be 85-95 million
- BiggE

Think it's way too early to assume that.

Unless you feel that people will never fall out of love with the novelty of outdoor games, the exchange rate will never turn, there are more formerly-disinterested huge markets like Chicago and LA that will be able to win Cups, Connor McDavid will indeed be the next Sidney Crosby, etc.

Think it's way too early to assume that.

Unless you think that people will never fall out of love with the novelty of outdoor games, the exchange rate will never turn, there are more formerly-disinterested markets like Chicago and LA that will be able to win Cups, Connor McDavid will indeed be the next Sidney Crosby, etc.
- Tomahawk

I think novelty's a strong word for what the outdoor games are; they're regular-season games with just enough of a whiff of "different" about them that they're worth doing and, most importantly, are profitable.

With the right teams/rivalries and marketing, there's no reason that an outdoor game shouldn't draw 30,000 fans -- regular-season games between the right teams draw 20,000 fans. All those extra thousands of fans are is profit.

$4.1 -- pretty much in the Goldilocks Zone, for me.
- AllInForFlyers

yeah id be happy about that

And as far as cash flow and markets go, there will be expansion, maybe a relocation for Florida if they can't get their poop together...I can see the cap getting to $80.

That doesn't mean all teams will spend to that, we all know they won't.

But the Islanders can/should draw better, Columbus could do better if they win -- and they look stronger...there's still some franchises with room to grow.

I think novelty's a strong word for what the outdoor games are; they're regular-season games with just enough of a whiff of "different" about them that they're worth doing and, most importantly, are profitable.

With the right teams/rivalries and marketing, there's no reason that an outdoor game shouldn't draw 30,000 fans -- regular-season games between the right teams draw 20,000 fans. All those extra thousands of fans are is profit.
- AllInForFlyers

I'm a pretty hardcore NHL fan, but I didn't even catch the WC this year. I was much more into seeing 24/7 again than actually catching the game itself.

I'm not particularly excited about the Stadium Series games, either.

I think once all the bigger market teams have had one/multiple kicks at the outdoor can, fan apathy will start to sink in. You can only go to the well so many times.

we need a defender like Pronger

we need a defender like Pronger
- Winning

So do 25 other teams

I'm a pretty hardcore NHL fan, but I didn't even catch the WC this year. I was much more into seeing 24/7 again than actually catching the game itself.

I'm not particularly excited about the Stadium Series games, either.

I think once all the bigger market teams have had one/multiple kicks at the outdoor can, fan apathy will start to sink in. You can only go to the well so many times.
- Tomahawk

I agree; there will be fan apathy. I fully expect the television ratings to go down.

But at the same time, the NHL is a gate-driven league. In many ways, it always has been. If you get 30,000 fans into an outdoor venue and keep the costs down, you'll have made a tidy profit on ticket sales, parking, concessions -- all the crap they hide when they talk about revenue streams.

I totally agree with you that they won't be as big as they are now, years from now. But I strongly believe that you can hold a Winter Classic every year and have it be profitable -- hell, they hold the Outback Bowl every year, and people still come.

So do 25 other teams
- Giroux_Is_God

*29

What time is it Jake....??

Looks like it's about quarter to Amateur Hour....
- Giroux_Is_God

Get studying, the prospect test is on monday

*29
- JAKEw1234

Meh I don't think the Blues, Preds, Hawks, or Bruins need a Pronger, honestly.

So like I said....26 teams in the NHL need Pronger

I agree; there will be fan apathy. I fully expect the television ratings to go down.

But at the same time, the NHL is a gate-driven league. In many ways, it always has been. If you get 30,000 fans into an outdoor venue and keep the costs down, you'll have made a tidy profit on ticket sales, parking, concessions -- all the crap they hide when they talk about revenue streams.

I totally agree with you that they won't be as big as they are now, years from now. But I strongly believe that you can hold a Winter Classic every year and have it be profitable -- hell, they hold the Outback Bowl every year, and people still come.
- AllInForFlyers

A few outdoor games aren't going to change the profit margin of the NHL all that much, especially since building a rink in football/baseball stadiums is probably not a cheap endeavor...especially x 2 when an outdoor game is being played in southern California. And I doubt the stadiums are rent free, but I'm not sure about that.

No, the money that fuels the cap is the TV deal(s).

http://www.cbssports.com/...adian-tv-deal-with-rogers

I'm a pretty big fan of the Broad Street Hockey site, but they, some others are killing the Mason deal.

That's the thing about measuring things analytically all the time: You sometimes forget that you're dealing with real, live human beings.

Could the Flyers have been harder on Mason in negotiations? Yes. They absolutely could've. They probably would've won a nasty arbitration case, if they really wanted to go that route.

But that stuff...that stuff matters. How you treat people matters.

Shea Weber, for example...he signed that contract with Philadelphia. He was totally willing to leave Nashville. Why? Because they took him to arbitration, kept his money short even though he should've gotten a long-term deal.

You don't have to do players any favors. But you don't have to forget that you're dealing with people. There's a middle-ground.

I'm a pretty big fan of the Broad Street Hockey site, but they, some others are killing the Mason deal.

That's the thing about measuring things analytically all the time: You sometimes forget that you're dealing with real, live human beings.

Could the Flyers have been harder on Mason in negotiations? Yes. They absolutely could've. They probably would've won a nasty arbitration case, if they really wanted to go that route.

But that stuff...that stuff matters. How you treat people matters.

Shea Weber, for example...he signed that contract with Philadelphia. He was totally willing to leave Nashville. Why? Because they took him to arbitration, kept his money short even though he should've gotten a long-term deal.

You don't have to do players any favors. But you don't have to forget that you're dealing with people. There's a middle-ground.
- AllInForFlyers

It's in the talking head's best interest to create drama around everything.

It's in your best interest to ignore them.

A few outdoor games aren't going to change the profit margin of the NHL all that much, especially since building a rink in football/baseball stadiums is probably not a cheap endeavor...especially x 2 when an outdoor game is being played in southern California. And I doubt the stadiums are rent free, but I'm not sure about that.

No, the money that fuels the cap is the TV deal(s).

http://ca.sports.yahoo.co...eal-rogers-194955234.html
- wolfhounds

No, I'm not saying that the NHL needs outdoor games for overall revenue.

When I say that the NHL is a gate-driven league, I'm saying that, for any given game, all you need is to make sure your franchises are selling as many tickets as possible for the maximum amount of ticket pricing the fans will pay.

The NHL's problem has never been its television contract. The NHL's problem has always been that certain markets don't sell enough tickets, which means the stronger franchises have to constantly subsidize the operations of the weaker markets.

Think it's way too early to assume that.

Unless you feel that people will never fall out of love with the novelty of outdoor games, the exchange rate will never turn, there are more formerly-disinterested huge markets like Chicago and LA that will be able to win Cups, Connor McDavid will indeed be the next Sidney Crosby, etc.
- Tomahawk

Except for this season when the cap was artificially lowered by agreement, the cap has risen, usually significantly, every year. I think it is a pretty safe assumption that the ceiling will be in that range by 2019

It's in the talking head's best interest to create drama around everything.

It's in your best interest to ignore them.
- wolfhounds

HA! Good point.

Except for this season when the cap was artificially lowered by agreement, the cap has risen, usually significantly, every year. I think it is a pretty safe assumption that the ceiling will be in that range by 2019
- BiggE

There's been analysis that the NHL's problem has never been the cap ceiling; it's the cap floor.

The Floridas and Nashvilles of the world, Tampa...they haven't always sold enough tickets, at an acceptable ticket rate.

No, I'm not saying that the NHL needs outdoor games for overall revenue.

When I say that the NHL is a gate-driven league, I'm saying that, for any given game, all you need is to make sure your franchises are selling as many tickets as possible for the maximum amount of ticket pricing the fans will pay.

The NHL's problem has never been its television contract. The NHL's problem has always been that certain markets don't sell enough tickets, which means the stronger franchises have to constantly subsidize the operations of the weaker markets.
- AllInForFlyers

I also think at least 2 franchises will relocate to more profitable markets by 2019 and that the league will expand to 32 teams while raking in huge boatloads of cash from the 2 new clubs in initiation fees. Finally, as we just saw in Canada, TV revenues will only increase as its relatively doubtful that the US won't still be in a recession by then as well.

Meh I don't think the Blues, Preds, Hawks, or Bruins need a Pronger, honestly.

So like I said....26 teams in the NHL need Pronger
- Giroux_Is_God

I think everyone needs a Pronger.

There's been analysis that the NHL's problem has never been the cap ceiling; it's the cap floor.

The Floridas and Nashvilles of the world, Tampa...they haven't always sold enough tickets, at an acceptable ticket rate.
- AllInForFlyers

That's why I expect at least 2 and maybe as many as 4 teams to relocate during the next decade. Though Bettman will never publicly admit it, the league already knows that there are some locales that are just never going to develop the fanbase needed to grow their teams successfully.