A Tough Time after the CBA Agreement?

There are big talks about the New York Rangers being “screwed” after the CBA agreement.

My problem with that is that people use their uninformed mind and express their opinions on that. Saying that the Rangers will have such a hard time once a CBA agreement will take part for the 2004-2005 regular season. I want to challenge that, and I will obviously say that will not be the case.First of all, it is utterly impossible to see a salary cap of $40-$45M inserted in the league. That will not happen.

That will only lead to chaos for teams that have payrolls over $45M. They will be forced to trade their key players. And why should they? After all, in my opinion, it is the NHL’s fault to not forsee this in the first place. NHL Comissioner Gary Bettman should have known better, he should have expected something like this to happen, and just in a matter of a year that this issue has been broguht up, he wants to do something to do about it?

A fair salary cap should start at $50M, at the very least. That will not force NHL team owners to buy out contracts of players, or for GMs to try and trade players, paying half their contracts to teams that can then squeeze them in their payroll so it won’t touch the salary cap.

In any case, let’s cut to the chase and let’s look at the facts, and at the numbers with the Rangers. WIll they have such a hard time with their payroll? For some crazy reason people are saying it is $80M, and I still cannot see how they get that number. I even went to the NHLPA and looked it up, it does not come up to that number. People keep making stuff up or maybe they are putting it in Canadian Dollars? I am not sure, but I guess they are just idealists that can only come up with ideas. When they do come up with ideas, and ideas about anything, I always tend to respond “ok, then you may start your own little world”. Talk about psychos….

In any case, these are the players that have contracts running in the 2004-2005 season:

Pavel Bure may make $11M dollars in that season, however, it is a club, team, option. The Rangers can refuse to take that option and let Bure walk else where.

Mike Dunham will make $2.8M on his last year of his contract, in 04-05.

Bobby Holik, after this season, will always make $6.875M. Well, he wanted a $6.5M a year deal with the Devils months before July, yet the Devils declined. Why? I don’t know, I guess they felt like offering him $8.2M a season in July?

Darius Kasparaitis will always make $4.1M.

Eric Lindros will make $2.1M base salary on his last year on his contract, which runs in the 04-05 season.

Petr Nedved will, and I find this ridiculous, $5M during the 04-05 season, the last year of his contract.

So, these guys will total up to either $31.8M, if Bure’s option is included, and if it is not then the total is $20.8M.

However, what about the other guys? Well, I am goin gto make estimations here, or projections of other players’ salaries that could run in that season:

I don’t think Matt Barnaby will be re-signed after his contract expires next season since Garth Murray or Ryan Hollweg can easily replace the pesty annoyance on the ice. I will exclude him.

Dany Blackburn should make about $1.6M since in 2003-04 he will make $1.21M.

I have a feeling that Anson Carter will get $4.5M, but let’s test it at the highest, let’s give him $5M for the 04-05 season.

Alexei Kovalev will certainly make $8M.

Dan LaCouture, I like the guy, he is very energetic and he is making 500K, so my guess is that he might stay and if he does, then he will probably end up making 700K.

Will Brian Leetch stay? It depends if he will be loyal enough to take a pay cut. Teams will make nice offers for him, so I would not be surprised if the Rangers could not match another team’s offer, since they will have to re-sign Carter and Kovalev. But, let’s go high and make it $6M.

I am quite positive that Malakhov will not be a Ranger after his contract expires.

Same goes for Sandy McCarthy.

I would like Boris Mironov to stay. He has played solid as a Ranger and I could see him play well with Russian rookie Fedor Tjutin. Let’s get him up to $3.6M

I doubt Ronald Petrovicky will stay, though he is still young and the most he will probably make is 650K. If he stays.

Ales Pisa does not make all that much at all, the most he’ll get for the 04-05 season would be 800K.

Tom Poti has a tough agent, and I am not sure if he will get a multi year contract, but if so, then the most he could get is $2.8M.

And then there is Purinton, and I doubt he will stay a Rangers with outher youngsters coming up.

So, with these guys, the total is $29.2M.

Add that with the possible, and probably, $20.8M, then the whole total with those players would equal to right about $50M.

Now, that just meets up with the salary cap that I am projecting. However, that is not the point. The point is that the Rangers will not have such a “hard” time to deal with the CBA agreement, or they will not be “screwed”. I am not coutning Bure, and I could also not count Leetch, and without Leetch it could go down to about $44M.

In the end, we will see how this all turns out. But, again, the main point of this article is to show you that the Rangers are not screwed. People exaggerate that. They make up numbers, and they come up with ideas. It’s like Dr. Evil’s father hwo accused chestnuts of being lazy. Why? No reason. Why would peopel accuse the Rangers for being too rich to handle the CBA agreement? I don’t know, they are clueless…..weird?

So again….the Rangers will not have such a hard time dealing with the CBA. I am not saying they will be secure, nor am I saying that I am right. This is the way I see it….and it is my opinion.


118 Responses to A Tough Time after the CBA Agreement?

  1. saiklo says:

    Boy are you big market team fans shaking in your boots.

  2. Kingsfan1 says:

    man what’s all this talk about a cap? the NHL, if smart, will not have a cap. They will have a luxury tax, something similar to baseball. If thats the case a 32 million dollor “cap” is reasonable. Doesn’t mean you have to stay below it. But you will be penalized if you go over. And the money your penalized will go the the lower teams. Thats the most fair and reasonable thing i see happening with the league.Take the Yankees for example. I don’t see Stienbrener worried about being over the baseball tax.He still signs whoever it takes to win. And teams in the NHL will do the same. Some owners could probably afford the tax. And the Canadian teams will sure benifit from it.

  3. Yashin says:

    A player cap is most ridiculous thing ever. How would this stop all the big market teams from stockpiling players. So what if Sakic can only make 7 million a year most teams still wont be able to afford it. I will put it this way I am the NYR and you are Edmonton. I have 1.00 and you have .25 and we are buying players that have a cap of .05 . Who is gonna be able to accuire more stars? Me of course there is no point of having a player cap if the teams still cant pay the slightly lower salaries. Plus the NHLPA would never ever let this happen.

  4. Flyers_01 says:

    You must be joking about the Baseball luxury tax. What does it say when it affects only one team in the league that has 4x the salary of the lower 10 teams and even then Steinbrenner was talking about cutting front office employees and not player contracts. Luxury tax deals don’t work.

    The best example of a good cap is football with Dan Snyder playing the role of Sather/Dolan. Every team except the Redskins has a chance every year and every single team has the ability to go to the cap every year. Think about it — Alexi Yashin not performing up to expectations … cut him and hire someone who is. Wouldn’t it be nice for the Rangers if they had the ability to drop everyone’s contracts at the end of the year, take the hit next year and hopefully emerge as a competitive team in 2005?

  5. Stogie7 says:

    What about messier and Richter. You left out a few names.

  6. TC_4 says:

    Well, don’t get too pissed about this now!!! Come on buddy, 40-45 million dollar cap? Your ridiculous! This league’s owners aren’t making any money, they have to get salaries down. There not going to cater to the Rangers, Stars, Wings, Avalanche, Flyers, Blues, and Leafs just because they’ve blown there payroll out of wack. They deserve it(the Rangers). There ONE(not the only)of the reasons why these prices have been driven through the roof. When they went on there shopping spree of 99 and bought everybody, what’s everybody supposed to do? They want these players, so then you get Tom Hicks saying that he can match them and has to if he wants Pierre Turgeon(for example), so he does, and so on. The cap will be around 35 million, give or take, that’s the number floating around. All the journalists and broadcasters are saying that’s the area they want. But, I think what you’ll see is that players salaries will really have to take a major hit before the cap really takes effect. The Rangers and the rest of the teams over the cap will have some years to trim it down.

  7. TC_4 says:

    I agree 100%. The NFL has the best system by far. The NBA’s is too restrictive, and the MLB’s is hardly restrictive, although it will the small market teams make some money, they still can’t compete with the Yankees, Red Sox, Braves, Rangers, Cardinals, Cubs, and D-Backs.

  8. Bishop7979 says:

    I remember a couple weeks ago I was listening to a radio broadcast and this topic was brought up the idea that was suggested was the following.

    stagger the salary cap, start with a number in the 55-60 million range and lower it over a 3-5 season span till it gets to the 30-35 million mark that bettman is trying to install. Second set up a system in which teams have to put a team “on the ice” that fits within that cap, this means as an example say the rangers do have an 70 mil dollar pay roll, and ill use the current roster since i addmit i dont know enough about them to speak of the future, anyways say they have a 70 mil, the Gm might look at the team and see they have to trim 10+ mil, and say that Bure or Lindros isnt playing up to the value of their contract, the Gm could put them on a list of players who would still get paid, but would be ineligiable to play for that season in any league. At this point these players have the option to sit on their ass and get paid or declare themselves UFA’s and hopefully get to play somewhere else even if its at a smaller contract. The Rangers then may or may not get compensated with a draft pick from a team that would sign one of these players.

    Personally though I would like to see an NFL type of system where players can be cut with little penalty to the team. How many people out there have players that they wish their Gm hadnt signed and could just be gone with a snap of their fingers? Maybe the oilers could have kept carter if they could have cut guys like reasoner at the begining of the season, maybe the pens could have kept Kovie fi they could have cut Wilson Laukanen Pushor Jonnson ect ect at the begining of the season, its time to make players work for their contracts, and if they dont perform they dont get paid.

    B

  9. TrojanMan says:

    plus, yashin wasnt plucked vis free agency, he was traded for and then signed

  10. habsoverserver says:

    5 years?????????? Tthe league does not have five years.

  11. beckfan says:

    You say that the payroll will be down to $50 mill after all is said and done. Do you realize what team your talking about? What makes think that Jim Dolan wants a Ryan Hollweig or a Garth Murray out there. He wants stars out on his ice. This is what weve been going through for the last decade or so. Hes got money so hell tell his G.M.’s to use it. We cant get roll players anymore. Anson Carter isnt a third line player, but on the Rangers he is cause of all the stars ahead of him.

    Like I said once and ill say it till the day he sells the team, Jim Dolan is going to continue to ruin the hockey, and basketball, club as long as hes in charge.

  12. rojoke says:

    A scenario happened a few years ago with St. John’s. They signed a local kid named Terry Ryan, who was a Montreal free agent. St. John’s signed him to an AHL contract, meaning he could play in the American League, but his rights remained with the Canadiens. If a player signs an AHL contract, he can’t be recalled unless the parent club signs him to an NHL contract first.

    The ECHL does have some teams affiliated with the NHL and the AHL, but most of them are independent.

  13. guinsfan4life says:

    A cap will not start out at an enormously low number. Realistically speaking it may start at say 50 mil or 45, then each year after it would decrease by a million or so in order to bring the league back where it belongs.

    I think the league could do something like this to deal with the large salaries and how they’d fit in under the cap, and the Rangers wouldn’t be the only ones affected by this.

    –Say that each contract deemed too high for cap purposes-and the Rangers would decide which players that is- they could take 15% of that contract and buy it out which in turn would let that player become an unrestricted free agent. That number could get higher or lower depending upon economics and such.

    I think the Rangers and other teams that spend friviously will have a hard time in the post labor economics of the NHL. Will they amount to the problems the smaller markets are having now?

    I doubt it.

    Either way, it will be better for the league. Once players realize the money ain’t gonna be out there-at least as much as they are making now, they will change their attitudes.

  14. guinsfan4life says:

    The average salary in the NFL is 1.2 mil. NHL-1.4 mil. How can that happen when the profits of the NHL don’t match that of the NFl?

  15. guinsfan4life says:

    And out of those, are they making millions, or ten/hundreds thousands?

  16. guinsfan4life says:

    But in turn that solves nothing.

    A league wide cap and revenue sharing would put that money back into the league for all the teams to share. After all, this league is operated by one entity. THe key for survival is the entire NHL not just each individual team.

  17. guinsfan4life says:

    Let them strike. The NHL wouldn’t start out with such a low payroll and not allow the Rangers to get out of their contracts.

    Something would be done to tear up those contracts or defer them to the point where the team would pay 15% of the total value of the contract and then the player would become a free agent.

    They would have to vote on a new CBA anyway in order for it to get passed. There is NO way, as you suggest, a salary cap in the 60 million dollar range will be proposed. No way. The league would fold first.

    THis is what the players and owners have created, a monster. Now they have to make amends and kill it. Strike or whatever they need to do.

    Good chance the sport of hockey will be changed forever.

Leave a Reply