Cap to $52 million next season?

[JayUp88 1]

Its going to take more then one cap bump to make the NHL what is was before. good for the wings thought i want to see some of the boys back in 07-08

[zetterbergfuturemvp 0]

Yes, it's true:

Celios - performance bouns of 0.300

Hasek - performance bonus of 1.100

nhlnumbers.com

how did the bonus's work??????? i thought hasek got 450g's per round , so shouldnt he have gotten 900k ?? and what did chelios get 300 k for ??????? for playing 60 games ? lol

[Guest DetroitIan]

Good news, indeed, for the Wings. And I'm all for it. However... Bad news for the league. In just a few years, we'll be right back where we started before the lockout.

Hell yes. Although most would say we really never fell off our plateau even with the lockout and salary cap. I guess you just can't keep a great organization down.

[Guest jaytan]

You guys actually believe this article?

I wish it were true, but I've got my fair share of doubts.

[glasgowcelticwing 18]

Hey, if it means we can keep Markov, Schneider, Hudler and Bert, as well as give Dom a raise (if he comes back), I'm all for it!

I second that , if the raising of the cap helps the Wings resign most of their UFA's then I'm happy.

[Mighty Wings 0]

Indeed, one PA official told Slap Shots on Friday that Gary Bettman's recent proclamation that 2006-07 revenues would be close to $2.4 billion "is disconnected" from 2007-08 cap reality. Fact is, even if the PA does, as expected, assert its right to build a 5-percent bump into next year's cap (according to a union source, the 5-percent bump is a default number unless waived by both parties) it now appears that next year's upper limit will be no higher than $48.5 million.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/06102007/sport...ooks.htm?page=2

Edited June 10, 2007 by Mighty Wings

[A.T.Hun 0]

what I don't like about the rules (pre- and post-cap era) is how it f* the teams with long term success and strips them from quality draft picks. yes, I understand the league has to give a chance to the teams to rebuild, but with salary cap giving teams some freedom to trade their assets (and fish valuable guys from the market) why sticking with current drafting order (worse teams pick first). they now have tools to rise from league bottom, because if they need to rebuild they can just move veterans at trade deadline for draft picks.

One "unintended consequence" of a salary cap is that it requires GMs and upper management to be really smart. Before the cap, the Wings could spend their troubles away. Lower-income teams whined that they couldn't keep up. Now with the cap, the Wings management needs to be smarter and not just rely on Mr. I's bank account to bail them out. GMs of lower-income teams no longer have financial inequity to complain about. Thus when Edmonton ham-handles the Smyth situation, they are justifiably crucified for blowing it. Also, lower-income teams can no longer dump their bad contracts on big-market teams who are making a run at the Cup. GMs are exposed for what they are. In that way, a salary cap is cool. As an aside, that's how we know the Lions are run by blithering idiots.

The only thing I really don't like about the cap is that it punishes teams that really work at their franchises. Mr. I bought the Wings when the Norrises had almost totally destroyed the franchise and built it up to a powerhouse. Franchises that are either incapable or unwilling (or both!) to do the same have less fiscal pressure to improve their teams because the cap is there to bail them out. I'm thankful that at least there is a salary floor as well to keep there from being a hockey equivalent of the Kansas City Royals who take in loads of revenue sharing cash but don't actually spend it on salaries.

Edited June 10, 2007 by A.T.Hun

[FinWing 26]

I second that , if the raising of the cap helps the Wings resign most of their UFA's then I'm happy.

Well duh, dude!