There will be a strike

[tantalum]

Under the "linkage" system, as more and more teams spend at the floor instead of the ceiling, the players aren't getting their 57%. By my math on capgeek they're barely over 50% of the reported league revenues of $3.3 billion. The players want to get closer to their linkage amount by encouraging spending by the weaker franchises, while capping the amount of the raises in the cap floor. I suspect this is going to be a very attractive prospect to the multitude of cap floor owners, because even under the League's proposal there is still potential for huge jumps in the cap floor if revenues continue to grow at 7-8%.

The players are indeed guaranteed 57% of the share of HRR. Not more and not less. (from the CBA itself: The dollar amount represented by the Players' Share in a League Year (i.e., Leaguewide Player Compensation) shall equal (i.e., shall never exceed nor be less than) the Applicable Percentage of HRR, as calculated pursuant to this Article 50). Escrow isn't about clawing money from the players it's the mechanism in which they are guaranteed their share.

How does cap geek give you the different numbers? I think the following:

1) the players share is not calculated through the cap hit but rather the actual yearly salary that is paid out. For example, Luongo's contribution of salary to the calculation if not the $5.25 mil cap hit but the $6.7 mil he was actually paid.

2) that 57% share also includes other player related costs such as health insurance, per diems, required payments for relocation etc

3) injury call ups get paid and contribute to that 57% and may not be accurately captured just by looking at cap geek.

4) As Gilman has said...they aren't always right

[Topper]

I believe high school dropout are uneducated.

[Southern_Canuck]

1) the players share is not calculated through the cap hit but rather the actual yearly salary that is paid out. For example, Luongo's contribution of salary to the calculation if not the $5.25 mil cap hit but the $6.7 mil he was actually paid.

I don't think that is correct - but if it is, Weber, Suter, and Parise are hated men! Although their individual escrow amounts would be eye-opening... Unless bonuses are not included, I assume the 57% has to be calculated off of the collective cap hit... no?

One thing is clear in this thread, there are many posters that don't understand escrow. It is nothing more than a mechanism to ensure that the players get exactly 57% of the HRR.

They could wait until the end of the season, calculate the revenues, and then give each player their actual revenue-adjusted amount. But it seems that most players like to receive regular paychecks, so they have to hold-back 12-20% to ensure that the players don't owe money at the end of the year.

S_C

[Strangelove]

[
Ummm not a helluva lot of "reality" there buddy.

I'd like to have a my team of lawyers go over the books of both the Preds and subsidiary Powers Management

....

You just don't believe if, you impune and assail the writer, the Editor of the good name of the Tennessean a prominent newspaper and all you can say is I just don't believe it

I didn’t disagree with anything in the article.

I merely pointed out the fact the writer only reports what Pred spokesmen tell him.

As I said, one would need “a team of lawyers” (and open books) to know more.

The writer doesn’t know how Powers Management (Pred’s subsidiary) is making out.

He doesn’t know how much of that $60mil was lost last year (perhaps only $2mil)

(in other words are things getting better? - Cogen’s remark seems it indicate they are).

He doesn’t know if the Pred’s financial future looks bright.

Whether or not things are getting better (withOUT a new CBA) is key.

Attendance has been steadily growing (97.5% capacity last season)

.... and ticket prices, as I said, are going up:

http://www.ontheforecheck.com/2012/5/28 ... sth-prices


I suspect the Preds are doing just fine going forward even WITHOUT a new CBA.

Sounds to me like they just got their lackey local writer to only tell a small part of the story.

So like I say: Not much “reality” there buddy!

[Strangelove]

I'm saying the combination of neo-con owners and undereduacted meadhead players will result in yet another season lost.

I'm saying you're wrong.

BTW Mondi are YOU "undereduacted"?

Are YOU saying undereducated is not a word?

No I'm saying "undereduacted" is not a word!

Well actually I'm just pointing out a really really ridiculously funny blooper on your part....

Or are you just implying that I'm a high school dropout?

Mondi I would NEVER imply such a thing!

But now that you bring it up... are you?

You'll have to excuse my choices of words, or hockey players.

Tut tut ole bean, just having a little fun is all, chin up and all that rot...

If I were a Hall of Fame-type player, who might need an extra 1 to 2 seasons to solidify my spot, I might be upset that my meathead colleagues and greedy-capitalist-pig owners were costing me a possible spot.

So you're saying IF you were a meathead....

[tantalum]

I don't think that is correct - but if it is, Weber, Suter, and Parise are hated men! Although their individual escrow amounts would be eye-opening... Unless bonuses are not included, I assume the 57% has to be calculated off of the collective cap hit... no?

It is indeed correct. Team cap hits and "payroll room" for the season are calculated using what the CBA terms "averaged player salary" but the players share is calculated using "Actual Club Salary". The terms are pretty self explanatory...average is the total amount opf the contract over contract years...what we all call cap hit (note the Kovalchuk/Luongo rule which was later added to help alleviate concerns over the front loading). The actual is what the player got in terms of paycheques; what he got paid in that NHL calendar year (July 1 to June 30). You can read all about it in Section 50.2(c) of the CBA.

That actual club salary includes all salaries and bonuses for players who have been on the active roster, IR, injured non-roster and non-roster, paid deferred bonuses, buyout amounts, 35+ contract bonuses. They then add in the player benefits and that's what makes up the players share of HRR. Essentially if you want to get technical the actual players share as set out by ACtual Player salary in section 50.2(c) is added to the benefits in section 50.3(a). This gets a percentage and then the escrow stuff kicks in and puts money where it needs to go...back to the players or to the owners or both.

So yes if there are a bunch of front loaded contracts this will result in the players having to give back money to the owners in the escrow fund. It's something I had actually pointed out when they first started having these front and back loaded contracts that at some point it was possible that it was going to catch up to the players a bit by causing them to "lose" more of that escrow money.

[Southern_Canuck]

It's something I had actually pointed out when they first started having these front and back loaded contracts that at some point it was possible that it was going to catch up to the players a bit by causing them to "lose" more of that escrow money.

Thanks for explaining that - HOLY! As a player, you wouldn't want your big bonuses year (like this next year for Suter, Parise, and Weber) to be a year where HRR went down - then you would give up a big chunk to satisfy the 57% (or whatever it ends up at) that season on aggregate with your teammates... and then when/if you are on the tapering years near the end of the contract and the HRR goes way up - you might get your full salary, but it will be a much smaller amount that you make up...

S_C

[tantalum]

I understand why the players have an issue with the escrow system. Under a framework like the current one the owners could go a long ways to bridging the gap by trying to minimize escrow or by at least partially insulating the players over revenue losses when it comes to the issue of linkage(for instance no reduction in player share if it's one year of lower revenues, multiple years the share comes down. Just one idea). But the whole contract limits or making actual salary = cap hit (or near to it) is also something that could help the players.

[Blob Mckenzie]

Taking this in a different direction....... What if another season is pissed away ? How will Bettman and the NHLPA decide who gets the first overall pick in the 2013 draft ? To me the idea of a weighted lottery in favour of teams like the Jackets, Leafs , Islanders and Flames is a joke. Just because those teams were shitty leading up to the lockout , who's to say they wouldn't have made the playoffs this coming year ?

The Canucks could lose both Sedins due to injury, Schneider craps the bed , Burrows and Edler are flogged at or before the deadline for prospects and picks and the team finishes 28th. The weighted system is a joke and that's why the NHL will use it. The league is a bush league. Gut the NHL head office from tip to tail and get hockey people in there, not fucking lawyers. Every team should get one ball in the lottery if it gets to that, but that would make far too much fucking sense.

[Potatoe1]

1) the players share is not calculated through the cap hit but rather the actual yearly salary that is paid out. For example, Luongo's contribution of salary to the calculation if not the $5.25 mil cap hit but the $6.7 mil he was actually paid.

I'm about 95% certain that you are correct on this point.

And I'm about 80% certain that the players have been making hefty payments into escrow since the lock out. They have been taking the 5% kicker clause with out fail every year so the cap mush be higher then it's supposed to be which means the difference is being made up via escrow.

I'm 100% sure they detest it, and it's probably their biggest beef with the current agreement.

The players want escrow gone I suspect they are far less concerned with a few points of Hockey related revenue.

[tantalum]

I'm 100% sure because the geek that I am has a file called NHL_CBA.pdf on my desktop. Yeah I'm that pathetic.

I have a feeling you are correct as well. ANd I know people say it's all the owners mess but the player have helped create the situation with that 5% inflator and finding/participating in the loopholes etc. I also agree that if the league comes to the table and insulates the players somewhat from escrow as well as short term revenue drops this might get done in a hurry, but as I have been saying it requires that explicit linkage to remain intact.

[FAN]

Thanks for explaining that - HOLY! As a player, you wouldn't want your big bonuses year (like this next year for Suter, Parise, and Weber) to be a year where HRR went down - then you would give up a big chunk to satisfy the 57% (or whatever it ends up at) that season on aggregate with your teammates... and then when/if you are on the tapering years near the end of the contract and the HRR goes way up - you might get your full salary, but it will be a much smaller amount that you make up...

Maybe Tant can explain this a bit. But my understanding is that signing bonuses are factored into the salary cap but does not go towards escrow? I'm not sure if signing bonuses are calculated as part as percentage of revenue paid out in salaries, but my understanding of it is that once that percentage is determined, the player only loses escrow money based on their base salary and not signing bonuses?

For example, Parise's base salary is $2M this coming season with a signing bonus of $10M. My understanding is that whatever escrow money Parise has to give, it is based on the $2M base salary and not $12M. Is this correct?

[Meds]

Question, if the season is in the tank, and nobody plays, what happens to some of the bonuses and stuff that may be performance related etc.....do the players then lose out?

[wienerdog]

Question, if the season is in the tank, and nobody plays, what happens to some of the bonuses and stuff that may be performance related etc.....do the players then lose out?

If there's no season, they're not even going to collect their base salary, let alone performance bonuses.

[FAN]

Question, if the season is in the tank, and nobody plays, what happens to some of the bonuses and stuff that may be performance related etc.....do the players then lose out?

If there's no season, they're not even going to collect their base salary, let alone performance bonuses.

What wienerdog said and realistically, performance bonuses only apply to players on ELC contracts, veteran players recovering from long-term injuries that signed one-year deals, and 35+ year old players on one-year contracts.