i think it would make sense that if you go above the median of the cap floor and ceiling that you don't receive revenue sharing. 2nd stipulation is that you can on receive revenue sharing 2 years in a row to prevent teams from "tanking" to get money.
- sens rock

I disagree..I think you should be able to spend up to 3/4 of the cap ceiling. There are a number of teams that purposely don't go over the median in order to keep the revenue sharing. Make so that they can spend up to 3/4th of the cap instead of 1/2. Isn't that the goal that all the teams are spending more? Why penalize them if they want to?

Do u think he's worth it? I mean really a single defenseman...
- PREDX1

Huh? The Wild paid Suter $9.4m per year for 10 years if you drop the last three fluff years off the 13-yr contract. Cap hit for the full term is lower at $7.5+ but still, they paid him a LOT and Weber will command more.

Do u think he's worth it? I mean really a single defenseman...
- PREDX1

Based on the current salary cap, yes, Weber is worth 8 million. But here is the catch. If the cap goes down b/c revenue sharing is lowered to 52%, There are going to be a ton of teams in serious pain trying to fill out a roster when they have 3 or 4 guys eating up 1/2 their cap.

Agreed 100%..."everybody is out to get Nashville"according to Paulie...sniff sniff...Who cares what Tony G says? Grow a thicker skin already. I actually happen to like Nashville. They're a team that has succeeded in a non-traditional hockey market..kudos to them and their fans...but McCann's incessant whining about "mainstream media" is revolting and demeans the entire fanbase

You do realize that Paul McCann has a persecution complex and hates everything Canada right? His blogs are about as dramatic as Tony's garbage....
- chompsey

I disagree..I think you should be able to spend up to 3/4 of the cap ceiling. There are a number of teams that purposely don't go over the median in order to keep the revenue sharing. Make so that they can spend up to 3/4th of the cap instead of 1/2. Isn't that the goal that all the teams are spending more? Why penalize them if they want to?
- dgutzman

you penalize them if they are spending money they know they don't have. revenue sharing is to help teams that struggle to reach the floor and lose money. not the ones that spend to the cap and lose money. that's their own fault for blowing their budget.

you penalize them if they are spending money they know they don't have. revenue sharing is to help teams that struggle to reach the floor and lose money. not the ones that spend to the cap and lose money. that's their own fault for blowing their budget.
- sens rock

In that, I agree, but feel something else needs to be done. There has to be some way to prevent teams from bankrupting themselves trying to be competitive. Minny just offered up 200 million for 2 players on long term contracts. This is coming from an owner that just a few years ago was on the verge of collapse in Nashville b/c he doesn't know how to run a franchise. And just 2 months ago was whining about how they have to control their costs. What is the penalty for a team like Minny that might spend to the cap, but put itself in a financial mess 2 years from now?

Here is what I would like. Put in the new CBA a revenue sharing of 52% for the players. Also include rules that allow a team to trade a player but retain some of their cap. Thus, if a team has a player with 3 years left at 8 million, allow them to trade that player and keep 3 million of the cap and salary. Thus, the acquiring team only eats 5 million in cap and salary. Now you have a way for teams to get out of these silly contracts and still penalizes them as they have to eat part of the contract. However, in doing this, eliminate the rules that allow a team to bury a guy in the minors or on LTR. Also put language in place that if a player on a long term deal that is front loaded retires, the team is on the hook for the cap space their circumvented in the early year over the remaining years of the contract. That way, they get out of spending the money, but are still penalized for circumventing the cap in the early years. So if a player retires and has 3 years left at a cap of 6 million, but you are only paying him 1 million, the result is that you circumvented the cap by 15 million in the early party of the contract. To remedy that, the team gets out of paying the 3 million, but now has 5 million on the cap for the remaining 3 years.

Tony Gallagher is hardly "the mainstream media". He's a local Vancouver hack trying to get noticed.

Hardly worth getting this worked up about.

Huh? The Wild paid Suter $9.4m per year for 10 years if you drop the last three fluff years off the 13-yr contract. Cap hit for the full term is lower at $7.5+ but still, they paid him a LOT and Weber will command more.
- blueline

Yeah but 10 to 12yrs? That's a huge gamble, look at the caps with Alexander Ovechkin? Yeah weber is young but there is now way I would sign him for more than 4 yrs. also I wonder if there is a no trade clause in suters contract? Or when does it kick in..

Yeah but 10 to 12yrs? That's a huge gamble, look at the caps with Alexander Ovechkin? Yeah weber is young but there is now way I would sign him for more than 4 yrs. also I wonder if there is a no trade clause in suters contract? Or when does it kick in..
- PREDX1

If you didn't want to sign Weber for more then 4 years, then i can guarantee you that you would not sign him regardless of what team you are GM for. With the new CBA about to go into affect in a few months, I can guarantee you that Weber will be signed to a lifetime contract. The only question is with whom. There is no way he risks the new CBA restricting contract size and amount.


. As for Suter and Parise, they both have a full NMC and NTC with no clauses.

In that, I agree, but feel something else needs to be done. There has to be some way to prevent teams from bankrupting themselves trying to be competitive. Minny just offered up 200 million for 2 players on long term contracts. This is coming from an owner that just a few years ago was on the verge of collapse in Nashville b/c he doesn't know how to run a franchise. And just 2 months ago was whining about how they have to control their costs. What is the penalty for a team like Minny that might spend to the cap, but put itself in a financial mess 2 years from now?

Here is what I would like. Put in the new CBA a revenue sharing of 52% for the players. Also include rules that allow a team to trade a player but retain some of their cap. Thus, if a team has a player with 3 years left at 8 million, allow them to trade that player and keep 3 million of the cap and salary. Thus, the acquiring team only eats 5 million in cap and salary. Now you have a way for teams to get out of these silly contracts and still penalizes them as they have to eat part of the contract. However, in doing this, eliminate the rules that allow a team to bury a guy in the minors or on LTR. Also put language in place that if a player on a long term deal that is front loaded retires, the team is on the hook for the cap space their circumvented in the early year over the remaining years of the contract. That way, they get out of spending the money, but are still penalized for circumventing the cap in the early years. So if a player retires and has 3 years left at a cap of 6 million, but you are only paying him 1 million, the result is that you circumvented the cap by 15 million in the early party of the contract. To remedy that, the team gets out of paying the 3 million, but now has 5 million on the cap for the remaining 3 years.
- dgutzman

Wow after I read all that I got a brain freeze hahaha
It seem plausible

Yeah but 10 to 12yrs? That's a huge gamble, look at the caps with Alexander Ovechkin? Yeah weber is young but there is now way I would sign him for more than 4 yrs. also I wonder if there is a no trade clause in suters contract? Or when does it kick in..
- PREDX1

Suter has a NMC/NTC at Minnesota.

And yes, I think he was overpaid and the 13-yr contract is a joke. However, I was addressing your thoughts that indicated a lower amount as possibly too much for Weber, which is not going to happen. Shea Weber will get a bigger overall deal (by year, by total dollars - something) than Suter did.

Ridiculous to compare revenue sharing in hockey and football. Football generates most of its money from national tv contracts which is shared for obvious reasons.

NFL also shares a portion of gate receipts but the majority of local revenue is the local team's to keep in the NFL.

Hockey is a gate driven sport and that is where most of their revenue comes from. The argument the big market teams have (Van, PHI, NYR, TOR etc) are the same ones that big market baseball teams have. If we generate the revenue why should we share it with franchises who maybe aren't or can't generate the same amount of revenue. "To grow the game" just isn't a good enough answer for most of those big markets. Growing the game in Carolina isn't going to increase revenue in Toronto to make revenue sharing worth it.

Florida/Phoenix might not have a hockey team if not for revenue sharing...so? No city has a right to a sports franchise. Vancouver couldn't support an NBA team so they moved and if cities can't support an NHL team they should move or fold whether they are Canadian or American cities.

Yeah but 10 to 12yrs? That's a huge gamble, look at the caps with Alexander Ovechkin? Yeah weber is young but there is now way I would sign him for more than 4 yrs. also I wonder if there is a no trade clause in suters contract? Or when does it kick in..
- PREDX1[/quote


WOW...seriously??? All I can say is Thank God you are not the GM of OUR hockey team!!!

A lot of the revenue sharing arguments from both sides have merit.

However, remember one thing - it's the owners (ie: the ones who are sharing their money) who have made the decision as a group to put the current CBA Player Compensation Cost Redistribution System in place. It's their policy, right or wrong.

As in pretty much everything, they will either adapt, change, renew, alter, abandon, decry, lament, enforce, expand, etc., etc., etc. Such matters always have been and always will be in flux as situations evolve.

No biggie. When does the damn NHL season start!

This image bothers me. I can't figure out why.





Must be the green caps on the water bottles...

This image bothers me. I can't figure out why.





Must be the green caps on the water bottles...
- blueline

Why would you give the A to Suter? Parise plays with more heart. No slight against Suter but I would have given it to Parise before him.

This image bothers me. I can't figure out why.





Must be the green caps on the water bottles...
- blueline

Weird. This image makes me swell with pride. Must be the happy young men in the picture.

P.S. You do realize that every free agent that hits the market is 'overpaid' and the contracts are usually unbelievable. It's the price teams pay when they get into a bid war. We are lucky that Parise took less and signed for what Suter did.

Why would you give the A to Suter? Parise plays with more heart. No slight against Suter but I would have given it to Parise before him.
- Graydayz

They are both A's.

They are both A's.
- Nsjohn130

ahh...well good luck to you guys. I'm not happy about the way it went down but that's sports.

ahh...well good luck to you guys. I'm not happy about the way it went down but that's sports.
- Graydayz

Any to you guys. Trotz won't let your team NOT make the playoffs. Think every team would take a guy like Trotz before almost any coach. Classy org.

Uh.

I love assumptions.
- Mattjd123

There are, I know first hand. But like I said, not people who are very into the game, but people who casually follow the team.

Yeah but 10 to 12yrs? That's a huge gamble, look at the caps with Alexander Ovechkin? Yeah weber is young but there is now way I would sign him for more than 4 yrs. also I wonder if there is a no trade clause in suters contract? Or when does it kick in..
- PREDX1

Holy crap are you serious? You have GOT to be kidding me. Very glad you aren't the gm or Weber would be 100% gone and laughing all the way at a 4 year offer.

You do realize that Paul McCann has a persecution complex and hates everything Canada right? His blogs are about as dramatic as Tony's garbage....
- chompsey

So true! I think he is related to Gary Bettman

So true! I think he is related to Gary Bettman
- CygnusX1

Then why do you read his blogs??? Seriously??

Hope you come visit sometime. BTW, can we have Hartnell back?
- Predfan306

Ive been to knoxville gotta get to Nashville though....what a bummer you guys always loose players to free agency...such a great org at finding and maturing defensive talent.

Weber should stay in Nashville! Cant see him play anywhere else it wouldnt be right.

Hartnell is our ginger lol!