What do you think?
Here's the summary of the TSN Solution:
I don't think the players would be jumping at the two way arbitration or the stiffness of the luxury tax but they would have a very hard time saying so in public.
I'm a little wary of the 6 million dollar individual cap as it seems to be a strange way of dealing with the issue of spiralling salaries. Are we going to see 20 players making 6 million - and doesn't it matter if 5 of those 20 are actually superstars worth more than the other 15? I suppose it's a good way of allowing a small market team to keep their home grown superstar - he won't leave for more money.
The 75% qualifying offer is a great idea but will definitely lead to more arbitration - but I'm okay with that I guess.
There will be a lot of sticky points to work out still - how would the $6 million and $40 million dollar numbers change over time - set rate, proportional to revenue, etc.
Does the 6 million dollar individual cap include bonuses?
So, picture this, a phone call this morning....
(1) A hard cap of $6 million on individual player salaries with no cap on how much teams may spend on total payrollsI think it's something that could be a good starting point.
(2) A dollar for dollar, or 100 per cent, luxury tax on all team payrolls in excess of $40 million with the tax monies to be redistributed to those teams with payrolls of less than $40 million but more than $30 million.
(3) A revamped salary arbitration system that allows the teams, as well as the players, to file for arbitration and baseball style "final-offer" arbitration
(4) Liberalized free agency with the age for unrestricted status moving to age 30 or after 10 years service in the NHL, whichever comes first.
(5) Qualifying offers to be 75 per cent of the player's most recent salary level
(6) An entry-level salary and signing bonus cap of $850,000 per year, with no more than 25 per cent of that amount in signing bonus, plus allowable performance bonuses to another $850,000, effectively capping entry-level salaries at no more than $1.7 million a year.
I don't think the players would be jumping at the two way arbitration or the stiffness of the luxury tax but they would have a very hard time saying so in public.
I'm a little wary of the 6 million dollar individual cap as it seems to be a strange way of dealing with the issue of spiralling salaries. Are we going to see 20 players making 6 million - and doesn't it matter if 5 of those 20 are actually superstars worth more than the other 15? I suppose it's a good way of allowing a small market team to keep their home grown superstar - he won't leave for more money.
The 75% qualifying offer is a great idea but will definitely lead to more arbitration - but I'm okay with that I guess.
There will be a lot of sticky points to work out still - how would the $6 million and $40 million dollar numbers change over time - set rate, proportional to revenue, etc.
Does the 6 million dollar individual cap include bonuses?
So, picture this, a phone call this morning....
Bettman: So, Gary, did you watch TSN last night?
Goodenow: Yeah - you?
Bettman: Yeah.
Goodenow: Wadda think?
Bettman: Dunno, wadda you think?
Goodenow: I dunno.
Bettman: I didn't like that there wasn't a payroll cap.
Goodenow: I didn't like that there was a player cap.
Bettman: Stupid TSN.
Goodenow: Yeah.
Bettman: We know the issues best.
Goodenow: We can work it out ourselves.
Bettman: Bye.
Goodenow: Bye. (Click)
