Jump to content

Photo

CBA issues explained


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 Jmorc2003

Jmorc2003

    Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 116 posts

Posted 13 September 2012 - 08:43 AM

So I just want to make sure I fully understand what is going on with the current CBA negotiation and pending lockout. I keep reading about players taking a pay cut, and that is based on the percentage of hockey related revenue (HRR) allocated vs what the owners keep. Now is that directly related to the salary cap, as in the salary cap is determined by the percentage of HRR teams are allowed to spend on player contracts? So if the percentage goes down, that results in less money to give players?

How does revenue sharing play into all of this?

Can someone please explain the topline issues? Thanks.
  • 0

#2 squishyx

squishyx

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,281 posts

Posted 13 September 2012 - 09:15 AM

Currently 57% of HRR go towards the players (they have an escrow account to help make sure they get this figure). The NHL is claiming that some teams are still losing money so the way they want to address that by lowering the players share, that leaves more for the owners of those struggling teams (and more for the "well off" teams as well).

Players on the other hand want more revenue sharing between the teams, there is a little of that now, but I guess not enough to keep those who need afloat. They want big market teams to contribute a bigger share to the overall revenue sharing pot for the smaller market ones instead of taking a pay cut.
  • 0

#3 Jmorc2003

Jmorc2003

    Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 116 posts

Posted 13 September 2012 - 10:12 AM

Currently 57% of HRR go towards the players (they have an escrow account to help make sure they get this figure). The NHL is claiming that some teams are still losing money so the way they want to address that by lowering the players share, that leaves more for the owners of those struggling teams (and more for the "well off" teams as well).

Players on the other hand want more revenue sharing between the teams, there is a little of that now, but I guess not enough to keep those who need afloat. They want big market teams to contribute a bigger share to the overall revenue sharing pot for the smaller market ones instead of taking a pay cut.


Thanks. That's what I thought. So 57% of HRR (hockey related revenue), how do they come up with that number? Total combined revenue of all the teams, divided by number of teams, and then 57% of that number? "League's revenue" (see below) is throwing me off.


From Wiki... "The actual amount of the cap varies on a year-to-year basis, and is calculated as a percentage of the League's revenue from the previous season; for instance, in 2007–08, the NHL's salary cap was approximately US$50.3 million per team; for the 2008–09 season it was $56.7 million; for the 2009-10 season it was $56.8 million; and for the 2010-11 season it was $64.3 million"
  • 0

#4 squishyx

squishyx

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,281 posts

Posted 13 September 2012 - 01:00 PM

Thanks. That's what I thought. So 57% of HRR (hockey related revenue), how do they come up with that number? Total combined revenue of all the teams, divided by number of teams, and then 57% of that number? "League's revenue" (see below) is throwing me off.


From Wiki... "The actual amount of the cap varies on a year-to-year basis, and is calculated as a percentage of the League's revenue from the previous season; for instance, in 2007–08, the NHL's salary cap was approximately US$50.3 million per team; for the 2008–09 season it was $56.7 million; for the 2009-10 season it was $56.8 million; and for the 2010-11 season it was $64.3 million"

It's what they agreed upon at the last CBA, I believe originally the players accepted a deal at 54%, incrementing 1% per year until 57% and there it held until now.

As far as HRR math works you have it right. How they determine what exactly counts as revenue and what doesn't is disputed somewhat and not well documented for the general public. All we know is what the HRR they use to determine the cap is, and in fact league doesn't even explicitly release that, we just reverse engineer them by knowing what the cap formula.

Salary Cap = (HRR / # teams) * .57 + 8m...

Since we know the number of teams (30) and the salary cap (70.2m) we can re-arrange the formula to

HRR = (# teams * (salary cap - 8m)) / .57

and get 3.23b as the total HRR. That may have been more then you were asking though... so sorry for the tangent. :P
  • 0

#5 Jmorc2003

Jmorc2003

    Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 116 posts

Posted 13 September 2012 - 01:14 PM

It's what they agreed upon at the last CBA, I believe originally the players accepted a deal at 54%, incrementing 1% per year until 57% and there it held until now.

As far as HRR math works you have it right. How they determine what exactly counts as revenue and what doesn't is disputed somewhat and not well documented for the general public. All we know is what the HRR they use to determine the cap is, and in fact league doesn't even explicitly release that, we just reverse engineer them by knowing what the cap formula.

Salary Cap = (HRR / # teams) * .57 + 8m...

Since we know the number of teams (30) and the salary cap (70.2m) we can re-arrange the formula to

HRR = (# teams * (salary cap - 8m)) / .57

and get 3.23b as the total HRR. That may have been more then you were asking though... so sorry for the tangent. :P



Answered my question exactly. Thanks.
  • 0

#6 SterioDesign

SterioDesign

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,698 posts

Posted 15 September 2012 - 04:47 PM

fvck Bettman

Players shouldnt have to take a paycut to compensate and help sh!tty teams who can barely survive in a market where hockey had no business there in first place. It's his own problem, deal with it you fvcking troll
  • 1

www.SterioDesign.com

 


#7 mouse

mouse

    Assistant Coach

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,494 posts

Posted 16 September 2012 - 12:20 AM

fvck Bettman

Players shouldnt have to take a paycut to compensate and help sh!tty teams who can barely survive in a market where hockey had no business there in first place. It's his own problem, deal with it you fvcking troll


+1. Overexpansion, especially in crappy markets damn near killed the league. They finally manage to make some progress despite failing to solve that problem (though Winnipeg's success certainly gives them a model), and let it sh!tcan this season.
  • 0

Sumus Legio
You don't turn this around in a couple shifts. Its going to take a little time, but I know the guys will come back. Because I can see it. -- Jacques Lemaire

 

sguq.jpg





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users