swede316 Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 Looks like a decent deal. A 24% paycut would hurt though. Sneak Preview: New CBA The NHL executive committee will be in New York on Monday to meet with Gary Bettman. This is not a full Board of Governors meeting, rather a smaller group of key owners. The commissioner hopes to have a final CBA document for the committee to review. However, there remains NO guarantee it will be done by Monday. Both sides are continuing their discussions and document drafting through the weekend in the Big Apple. With the help of some key sources on both sides of the table, here's a look at what some of the key issues will look like under the new agreement. Term: Six years. Salary rollback: All remaining contracts will be rolled back 24 percent. The rollback will also impact players who must be given qualifying offers for new deals. Those qualifying offers will be based on a player's salary in his last contracted year, minus the 24 percent rollback. 2004-05 contracts: Those contracts will simply disappear from the ledger. Players, however, will be credited with a "year of service." Years of service can determine a player's free-agent status. Salary cap: Each team must meet a minimum, but not exceed a maximum payroll number. For the 2005-06 season, the high-end threshold will be approximately $37-$39.5 million. The low-end threshold will be between $21.5-$24.5 million. The numbers are based on the league's projection of revenue for the 2005-06 season. The projection is approximately $1.7-$1.8 billion. According to the league, total revenues for the last complete season (2003-04) were $2.1 billion. If revenues increase, the salary cap thresholds will increase on a season-to-season basis. If revenues decrease, the salary cap thresholds will decrease on a season-to-season basis. Buyouts: Teams will be allowed a window of time to buyout player contracts. A player can be bought out for two-thirds of the total remaining value of his contract, minus the 24 percent rollback. A team will not be allowed to re-sign a player they have bought out for a still to be determined amount of time. The money spent to buyout a player will NOT count against the salary cap. Escrow: A still to be determined percent of players salaries will be placed in an escrow account. In the new deal, league-wide payroll can't exceed 54 percent of total league-wide revenue. If league-wide payroll is determined to be more than 54 percent of revenues, the escrow account will be passed back to the clubs. If league-wide payroll is determined to be less than 54 percent of revenues, the escrow account will go to the players. Individual team-by-team player cap: No single player can earn more than 20 percent of his team's total payroll. For example, a team with a total team payroll of $37.5 million couldn't pay a single player more than $7.5 million. Revenue-sharing: The top 10 revenue clubs will contribute to a pool that will be redistributed to the bottom 10 revenue clubs. The NHLPA proposed a similar revenue sharing component in 1994 during the league's first lockout. Unrestricted free agency: It will remain frozen at age 31 for the first year of the new CBA. It will gradually decrease to age 28 during the life of the deal. Salary arbitration: The club and the player will both have ability to elect to go to arbitration. Although not confirmed, I believe NHL will go to a baseball-style arbitration system that calls for both sides to submit a salary figure and an arbitrator to decide on one number or the other. There will be a limit on the number of times a team or player can go to arbitration. And, the clubs will have a limited number of times they can walk away from an arbitrator's decision. Under the old system, the clubs could not take players to arbitration. Qualifying offers: Players making less than $660,000 must be tendered qualifying offers of 110 percent of their final contracted season's salary. Players making between $660,000.01 and $1 million must be tendered qualifying offers of 105 percent of their final contracted season's salary. Players making over $1 million must be tendered qualifying offers of 100 percent of their final contracted season's salary. Entry level contracts: Entry level contracts will be capped $850,000 per season, with a maximum signing bonus at 10 percent of salary per season. The contracts will be three years in length. Minimum salary: The minimum salary will be $400,000. Under the old agreement, the league minimum was $175,000. 2006 Winter Olympics: The NHL will shut down operations in February 2006 to allow players to participate in the Winter Olympics. To accommodate the scheduling issues, the league will cancel its 2005-06 All-Star Weekend (scheduled for Phoenix). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralonzo Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 I'm thinking the Sabres are dancing pretty in such a situation. They have their core locked up, and can fill the rest of the roster from a buyer-friendly perspective. Let's GOOOO hockey! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 Sounds like a great deal...for the owners. But I won't be crying for the players, who'll still be making WAY more than the average working man, to play a game. As for the Sabres, I wonder if they can spend to the max without going into debt? If so, this is a great deal for them as well and will finally allow them to compete fairly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 I thought the Sabres might be in trouble as they are also going to be passing some major rule changes to accommodate a more wide open style of hockey. Seems the scratch and claw style the Sabres use maybe negated by the changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 I thought the Sabres might be in trouble as they are also going to be passing some major rule changes to accommodate a more wide open style of hockey. Seems the scratch and claw style the Sabres use maybe negated by the changes. Well now maybe the Sabres can afford to get players with more skill, who won't NEED to resort to clutching and grabbing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PTS Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 I thought the Sabres might be in trouble as they are also going to be passing some major rule changes to accommodate a more wide open style of hockey. Seems the scratch and claw style the Sabres use maybe negated by the changes. 378493[/snapback] What? Open ice hockey can only help out the Sabres especially with the small skills guys they have this is a win-win for Buffalo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gross Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 Sounds like a great deal...for the owners. But I won't be crying for the players, who'll still be making WAY more than the average working man, to play a game. As for the Sabres, I wonder if they can spend to the max without going into debt? If so, this is a great deal for them as well and will finally allow them to compete fairly. 378484[/snapback] My guess, not knowing revenues but general size of market, is that the Sabres would possibly be beneficiaries of the revenue sharing. Regardless, it's a lot easier for a team with $34M in salary to keep up with a $37M salary team than a $100M+ salary team... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 My guess, not knowing revenues but general size of market, is that the Sabres would possibly be beneficiaries of the revenue sharing. Regardless, it's a lot easier for a team with $34M in salary to keep up with a $37M salary team than a $100M+ salary team... Oh definitely. I was just hoping that they'd also be able to spend up to the cap, to REALLY level the playing field. But I can live with just a $3M discrepancy in payroll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkyMannn Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 My guess, not knowing revenues but general size of market, is that the Sabres would possibly be beneficiaries of the revenue sharing. Regardless, it's a lot easier for a team with $34M in salary to keep up with a $37M salary team than a $100M+ salary team... 378585[/snapback] I heard the revenue sharing slice would be like 1-2 million $$$. If the Sabres can't compete with this CBA, they may as well hang it up. I thought the league projection of total rev's going down from 2.1 to 1.7 billion $$$ is conservative. I would guess even lower while they struggle to get fans back and other revenue streams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 What? Open ice hockey can only help out the Sabres especially with the small skills guys they have this is a win-win for Buffalo. 378583[/snapback] Derek Roy + Thomas Vanek + Ryan Miller = bright Sabres future Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corp000085 Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 not that i'm suggesting you made up that entire article, but where's the link?? I'm really close to getting excited about the return of the buffalo sabres, but i'm holding back till i can see some sort of linkage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fake-Fat Sunny Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 Sounds like a great deal...for the owners. But I won't be crying for the players, who'll still be making WAY more than the average working man, to play a game. As for the Sabres, I wonder if they can spend to the max without going into debt? If so, this is a great deal for them as well and will finally allow them to compete fairly. 378484[/snapback] I think the devil is in the further details to see if this really advantages the owners as a group or the players as a group. In the first place, even more so that the NFL there is a huge difference from one owner to the next owner with the NY teams with their large cash cow of population on one hand and Cnandiam teams operating with not only a smaller poputlation base of customers to sell product to that it really does not reflect realty that to lump all of them together as benefitting or being hurt by the very same CBA. This is true of the players as well where the differences in contracts between the top players and the journeyman vets is huge. As you point out, even the "poorest" of the NHL players us doing quite well, but again it is simplistic and inaccurate to cite all of them as winners or losers in a particular deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DPR4444 Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 i'm probably being optimistic, which is rare for me, but between the new CBA and the proposed rule changes to open up the game, the NHL might finally be getting it right. now just get rid of the stupid instigator rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralonzo Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 Derek Roy + Thomas Vanek + Ryan Miller = bright Sabres future 378760[/snapback] Call me crazy, but I think Paul Gaustad will be an underrated addition too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsGuyInMalta Posted July 11, 2005 Share Posted July 11, 2005 Great news...Sabres are going shopping in the next few months! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swede316 Posted July 12, 2005 Author Share Posted July 12, 2005 not that i'm suggesting you made up that entire article, but where's the link?? I'm really close to getting excited about the return of the buffalo sabres, but i'm holding back till i can see some sort of linkage. ESPN insider article by Hradek.You need to be a subscriber so if you are here is the linky. http://insider.espn.go.com/insider/magazin...Blog?id=2098316 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corp000085 Posted July 12, 2005 Share Posted July 12, 2005 ESPN insider article by Hradek.You need to be a subscriber so if you are here is the linky. http://insider.espn.go.com/insider/magazin...Blog?id=2098316 379297[/snapback] thanks... keep the insider coming. i don't have a subscription. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts