Skip to content

Report: Owners’ proposed salary cap would be $59.9M

Oct 17, 2012, 9:00 AM EDT

Gary Bettman Getty Images

PHT already added details about the owners’ latest proposal last night, yet additional bits of information continue to filter through.

OK, that wave of information (and the links below) should catch you up to speed on the owners’ big new offer. Players hope to clarify a number of issues today, so stay tuned.


Montador’s comments

More details regarding the offer

When to expect an NHLPA response

Deal must be done by Oct. 25 to preserve 82-game season

Teams would be able to go above salary cap with new offer

NHL proposes five-year maximum contract terms

Owners offer 50-50 revenue split

  1. ducksk - Oct 17, 2012 at 9:23 AM

    If I were an owner I’d say take or leave it. I’d sign whoever wanted to play, force them to make decision to play in the NHL or they can seek employment elsewhere. I think we will see a free market at its best. If a player gets 3 million instead of 4, it’s up to them to play NHL or not. The tail does not wag the dog.

    • challer9 - Oct 17, 2012 at 9:47 AM

      “I think we will see a free market at it’s best.”

      Yes, because a contract length limit, a salary cap, and revenue sharing are all hallmarks of the free market. Read a book.

      • kitshky - Oct 17, 2012 at 10:42 PM

        No kidding. I love the simplistic (and ignorant frankly) point that keeps coming up from hockey fans, that this somehow has anything to do with ones right to ply their trade or anything to do with the fundamentals of capitalism.

        This has nothing to do with how the free market or capitalism works, its labor negotiations between two parties who have agreed to Collective Bargaining Rights as partners in a $3B dollar enterprise.

    • kyzslew77 - Oct 17, 2012 at 10:51 AM

      Yeah, that’ll definitely get the NHLPA to break up! Great plan! You don’t really get how the whole management/labor relationship works when the labor has very specialized skills that no one else in the world has, do you?

      Replacement players worked so well for MLB in 1995, I see no reason why the NHL shouldn’t use them this year (and beyond!).

  2. capsfan19 - Oct 17, 2012 at 9:29 AM

    Not very crazy about a much small ceiling

    • therealjr - Oct 17, 2012 at 11:59 AM

      It’s in line with what it would normally be at that max number. If anything it’s still too high. Do we want a repeat of Florida over paying guys every year to get the the floor? All that is doing is devaluing other players’ contracts.

  3. capsfan19 - Oct 17, 2012 at 9:30 AM

    Much smaller****

  4. ducksk - Oct 17, 2012 at 9:54 AM

    And your point is employers can’t make work rules? You must work for the government, time to bust this union garbage and players to shut up or not play in the NHL. Their choice. There are some great young players ready to fill their skates. You really think Sid or Stamkos and others are not going to play in NHL? Really?

    • kyzslew77 - Oct 17, 2012 at 10:54 AM

      Yes. Really. If the owners did what you say they should do, I promise you not one All Star caliber player would take the offer. You’d get some low level players who aren’t household names leaving the NHLPA to play in this “new” NHL, but no one who’s good. They’d play elsewhere.

    • wretchu - Oct 17, 2012 at 11:23 AM

      If another league treats them better, absolutely. NHL players aren’t easily replaceable commodities like waiters or fast food cooks.

  5. zetaone - Oct 17, 2012 at 9:55 AM

    I feel like if they players don’t agree to this, or something similar, then it really was their egos’ fault the whole time.

    50/50 is as fair as you can get for putting up no cash to risk of your own while gaining half of the profit. And a $60 mill cap is only 3 mill less than we had last year, so it’s not an outrageously lower amount.

    I think we’ve all gotten a little Stockholm Syndrome and have chosen a side that is good or evil. Let us all realize the people fighting are not starving teachers or out of work lower class folk. These are millionaires fighting billionaires over what amounts to pure silliness in the grand scheme of life.

  6. nyrangersnation - Oct 17, 2012 at 10:53 AM

    With a little refinement from the NHLPA’s side, this deal is great for everyone. The NHL is going after the big-market teams and trying to help spread out the talent and the money. No rollbacks and players will be paid back for any money lost. People have been complaining about the 5-year max contracts but that is a GREAT move. Check out the NBA where max contracts are 5 years or 6 years. I’m 99% sure it’s 5 years. It drives up spending and to prevent big-market teams from taking advantage, you can’t give a guy like $15M-$10M-$5M-$1M-$1M as his payout. It would be more like $11M-$9M-$9M-$7M. Not 100% about that but I believe that’s close to what it would be like, I might’ve overestimated. It protects teams from contracts such as Redden’s and DP’s. Also, for example, Nathan MacKinnon is hyped up to be the next great elite player. If this deal is accepted, he could come in with a 2-year entry level contract. Let’s say he has his first 2 years be very good, similar to John Tavares. The team he is on can only give him a 5-year contract meaning they could get 5 more years of him at about a $5M cap hit. That’s 7 years with an elite player and that helps out the small-market teams keep their drafted talent. This is a great deal for both sides. Obviously it needs a little fine-tuning, but if a deal isn’t done in the next 10 days, it’s a joke.

Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. P. Kessel (1524)
  2. P. Kane (1374)
  3. S. Matthias (1250)
  4. M. Zuccarello (1164)
  5. D. Carcillo (1129)