Skip to content

Video: Projected rise in salary cap could have some players ‘licking their lips’

Dec 12, 2013, 7:15 AM EDT

A substantial projected increase in the salary cap for next season could mean greater salaries for some of hockey’s brightest stars.

That’s according to TSN’s Bob McKenzie, who joined Liam McHugh of the NBC Sports Network on Wednesday to talk about items of interest from the NHL Board of Governors meetings. It’s believed the salary cap could increase to $71 million for next season – up from where it stands now at $64.3 million.

McKenzie highlighted two players – Chicago Blackhawks’ forwards Jonathan Toews and Patrick Kane – who might particularly benefit from the cap going up. According to, both come with a current cap hit of $6.3 million, and have contracts that are up at the end of the 2014-15 season.

“Well … there’s a lot of agents and a lot of players who are licking their lips and looking at that $71 million cap next year and thinking, ‘Geez, the year after that, it will probably go to $75 (million), and then it will probably go to $80 (million), and then it will probably go to $85 million,'” said McKenize.

“And it won’t be long, maybe in the life of this current CBA, that it’s closer to $100 million than it is now.”

  1. polegojim - Dec 12, 2013 at 8:21 AM

    That’s part of the issue… many top paid ARE top performers, but certainly quite a few that aren’t living up to their part of the bargain… and shouldn’t be rewarded with top money for that.

    To start – how about for centers and forwards, they begin with a league-level base salary of 250,000… plus $35,000 per point? True top shelf guys like Crosby, Datsyuk, Toews, Ovechkin could get $50,000-$75,000 per point. There can be provision for injury and time lost.

    20 point utility player makes 950k.
    70 point superstar could make up to 5.5 mil per year… IF, IF, IF they perform and deliver the points.

    Isn’t that how we all operate in the business world?

    • joey4id - Dec 12, 2013 at 9:00 AM

      Why wouldn’t some of the top players prefer playing in the KHL for $8 million guaranteed?

      • polegojim - Dec 12, 2013 at 12:44 PM

        Maybe they would… but my comment was intended to make some initial points on pay for play.

        The NHL hasn’t hired me yet to help with negotiations.

      • joey4id - Dec 12, 2013 at 12:49 PM

        Lol. I get your point. But that would work if there was no credible threat to the NHL’s current hold on the best players the world has to offer. Maybe you’re just ahead your time.

      • polegojim - Dec 12, 2013 at 12:56 PM

        ; ) Hold on Joey… I have Mr. Bettman on the other line…

      • joey4id - Dec 12, 2013 at 12:59 PM

        u the man! Tell him Joey says hi. :-)

      • polegojim - Dec 12, 2013 at 1:02 PM

        He wants to hire you too… say’s he likes my idea but I’m too extreme… can you start on Monday???

      • joey4id - Dec 12, 2013 at 1:07 PM

        Yeah! Tell him it’s a package deal. You and me or nothing!

      • smgraff4 - Dec 12, 2013 at 6:51 PM

        KHL contracts are not guaranteed and have a maximum length of five years. Any player who asks for a 10-year contract in the KHL is ridiculous. There’s more GUARANTEED money in the NHL than there is in the KHL, and contracts can be cancelled at any time. There’s also no restrictions to trades within the KHL. Yes, some players may make more money in the KHL, but like the NHL, those teams are taking on huge risks in signing those players. But even the reported values Kovy and others got (here) were lower than initially thought–so other factors, being close to home, culturalisms, etc. play into being willing to move home (or abroad).

      • joey4id - Dec 12, 2013 at 7:29 PM

        smgraff who can say that won’t change if the NHL can’t pay top dollars for their superstars?

    • supercoop8 - Dec 12, 2013 at 9:26 AM

      You think there are no under-qualified underachieving people making insane amounts of money in the business world and that payment is by the bushel?? You are drunk with your disappointment of Stephen Weiss.

      Though you have constructed a nice system for implementing a player strike.

      • polegojim - Dec 12, 2013 at 12:50 PM

        My point is how to better control the business end of production, not see if we can add to people getting paid ridiculously for not producing.

        Do you always repeat poor business practices because others are doing so???

        Weiss is only one of the supposed top guns who are producing no more than ‘squirt gun’ results.

        See also Rick Nash, even taking away his injury and doubling games and points. 7.8 mil for that?… you can pay the bill then.

      • supercoop8 - Dec 12, 2013 at 5:51 PM

        Your system ignores the intangibles of a player; why should a player that notches a few more points be paid more than a selke candidate?? Then how do you then pay defense-men, should Letang make grossly more than Suter??? Or how about the lack of accountability when players begin to poach instead of skating back. It also creates parity in the market for teams that play wide open and teams that play collective and cautious; an unfair draw for UFAs.

        A sample size of a few under achieving marquee names is not a fair assessment in completely over hauling the system. The decisions a GM makes can be a gamble and every team is accountable and they are the ones that have been too compliant in long term big money contracts; they are the employers they bear the responsibility.

        If guaranteed money became extremely low two resulting effect- 1.Players would chase safer contracts in Europe 2. When the market for UFAs became heated again teams would then offer more and more on on the guarantee which would eventually land back at this present Weiss issue. This all being hypothetical because under your model the players would strike before the ink was dry.

        Point being- The owners locked the players out due to their own frivolous spending and cap avoiding contract drafting. Then after the lockout they still recklessly hand out contract. You can’t punish the workers because of the sins of the boss and the unsteady hands of Stephen Weiss.

      • polegojim - Dec 13, 2013 at 10:28 AM

        You know that Suter is a Defenseman, right?

        Reread my comment… and not even talking about D-men. I leave D-men pay for performance salaries for you to work out.

        Point Being – Do I think the NHL will actually do it… Heck No… CMon man…

        Point Being 2 – last time I checked Weiss IS a ‘worker’… but the overpaid, under performing issue is MUCH greater than Weiss…

      • supercoop8 - Dec 13, 2013 at 10:33 AM

        I do realize Suter is a defenseman as pointed out in the beginning of the sentence.

        Lets just agree to disagree this isn’t going anywhere.

      • polegojim - Dec 13, 2013 at 10:38 AM

        I agree

  2. myroncopesflask - Dec 12, 2013 at 9:11 AM

    No that is no where near the way the business world operates. If you work in production you might get paid only get paid for the volume of your production. In the world I know and live your paycheck depends on several equally important aspects.
    Production matters… So does potential, quality of work, and the demand for your specific skill set.

    • polegojim - Dec 12, 2013 at 12:55 PM

      I agree that demand can cause even mediocre performers to get paid more than they’re worth… but a skilled business person is CONSTANTLY looking to trade up… not stick with that scenario.

      So… if I score 1 amazing, highlight reel, QUALITY goal each season… I’m good then???

      In your business… how long to you keep paying people top dollar for ‘potential’?

      Please let me know which business school teaches students to pay for potential without recourse for not reaching potential???

      Potential is only as good as it’s reality. At some point, ‘potential’ either is or is not reached… and pay should be commensurate with either end.

      True Business Production includes quality and quantity… period.

  3. pitpenguinsrulez - Dec 12, 2013 at 10:14 AM

    Ah I remember the days when the cap was once $39 million in 2005-06

  4. travishenryskid - Dec 12, 2013 at 11:06 AM

    I would like to take this moment to give the middle finger to everyone involved in the lockout.

  5. dirt2013 - Dec 12, 2013 at 2:20 PM

    For whatever reason hockey is popular right now and making more money off of TV than they ever have and people on a message board want to fix that problem. LOL carry on.

  6. joeyashwi - Dec 12, 2013 at 6:33 PM

    1. Cap goes up
    2. Owners recklessly spend
    3. Bettman locks out players
    4. Repeat at end of every CBA

Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. P. Kane (1724)
  2. P. Kessel (1489)
  3. M. Richards (1252)
  4. P. Datsyuk (1084)
  5. N. Backstrom (1063)