The league themselves said 7% growth, not 5%. There was more than 5% growth every year.

3.8b plus 7% + 180m for outdoor games = 4.246b.....works out to a 70.8m. Cap.
- burn

That 70.8 would be AVG. The upper limit would be 8mil higher I believe

I figured. Do the fish in Lake Ontario only have the one head?

Any of them have legs...
- bixll

lake ontario fish are fine, they are cleaner than Erie...and everyone raves about lake erie perch and walleye.

i think the cap will be 70-72 mil which is pretty accurate with this, but, that being said it does have the chance to go higher than this.
- big_dion

That guy thinks others wise .... Lots if false facts to prove it too.

fair enough.. and yes.. admittedly.. its completely based on assumed percentages

the calculation itself is sound tho

on a game by game basis.. the revenue stream was higher than ever
- Dozzer

I'll check this out with my accountant, Barry Profit.

I'll check this out with my accountant, Barry Profit.
- Cooshie

He is in South America

if i was gay it would be between you and mr lupul
- big_dion

If you have a decent laptop/desktop plugged into a tv buy the online version.
I have to buy it since the wife is a devils fan
But some really cool features
- IrishRage

I just use my iPad at home and I don't drink or party much if at all so it just comes out of my entertainment fund anyways. I might have to sell my cats though just kidding I would never.....no one would take them

Where are you getting the 3.8B figure from?
- Cooshie

Projections. Was 3.6 before the lockout, at 7% (leagues numbers) it goes to 3.8 and then over 4b if that 7% continues.

He is in South America
- mantosh

I got his cell number!

actually your 3.6 is high

last year.. according to forbes.. revenue was 3.374 billion.

50% of this is 1.687 billion / 30 teams = 56.234

so.. your argument stands to this point.. but what you are not accounting for is that the league lost 1020 games last year, the outdoor classic, and the all star game

now.. revenue comes from a variet of places but lets say 60% can be attested to a game by game basis. therefore.. if the league made 3.374 billion x 0.6 = 2.0244 billion

divide that by number of games played per team (48) = 0.042175 billion

thats your per game league wide so multiply it over a full 82 game schedule = 3.45835 billion.

then add the 40% back in we took off in the first place ... therefore
3.45835 + 1.3496 = 4.80795 billion

not including all star game and outdoor classic

you are forgetting that the projections these people are making are based on a shortened season.. not a full 82.. on a game by game basis.. they've been higher than they've ever been

i am aware i am probably a lil high.. but its not unreasonable to assume the cap will be between 70 and 80million
- Dozzer

Mr. Dozzer, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

I figured. Do the fish in Lake Ontario only have the one head?

Any of them have legs...
- bixll

I want to know...does he use a magnet to catch steelhead?

He is in South America
- mantosh

Projections. Was 3.6 before the lockout, at 7% (leagues numbers) it goes to 3.8 and then over 4b if that 7% continues.
- burn

So 3.6 was before lockout and estimated 7% increase (per year) over 2 years (last year was partial season but if we extrapolate over a full season) then yeah, next year should be over 4.2B with the Outdoor Games.

What is being debated as wrong in this??

So 3.6 was before lockout and estimated 7% increase over 2 years (last year was partial season but if we extrapolate over a full season) then yeah, next year should be over 4.2B with the Outdoor Games.

What is being debated as wrong in this??
- Cooshie

People like to hate the leafs and apparently we are the only team in cap restraints so they argue this.

So 3.6 was before lockout and estimated 7% increase (per year) over 2 years (last year was partial season but if we extrapolate over a full season) then yeah, next year should be over 4.2B with the Outdoor Games.

What is being debated as wrong in this??
- Cooshie

The other guy doesn't know his poop.

Mr. Dozzer, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
- hscesq

jokes on you for expecting rational though t from me

Ive been saying for while now (along with many others) that I believe the cap will be around 69-70 million next season.

Phaneuf will still be too costly.
- Fakepartofme

don't agree. if the CAP goes to 70, that's 6M of additional space.

there's an additional 2.5M because of the end of the Tucker, Armstrong, Frattin CAP hits.

take Liles hit or half of it off the books.

8.5M + 2.2M(Liles) = 10.7M

following guestimates:

Kessel - assume 2.6M pay increase - Phil gets 8M
Phaneuf - assume .5M pay increase - Dion gets 7M (no I don't think he's worth it)
Bolland, McClement, Kulimen and Fraser (UFA)s will average out to the same total amount , not much of difference.

Ranger, contingent upon play will either get 2M per season or stay at around 1.0-1.2 - let's be optomistic and call it .5M hit

so - before RFAs - who have little or no leverage typically... 2.6+0.5+0.5

Franson gets 3.5-4.0 - in short he gets Liles money - 2.0CAP increase

Gardiner - total wildcard - but worst (cost) case... he gets 2.5 for a couple bridge type deal 1.4CAP increase

Reimer is #1 -gets 3.5M - 1.7M CAP increase


net net 10.7available CAP

Leaf UFAs 3.6 new cap hit
RFAs 2.0 + 1.4 + 1.7 = 5.1 new CAP hit

3.6 + 5.1 = 8.7 verus 10.7 => 2.0M available

add Reilly 1.75M CAP increase
subtract Gunnarson (trade) 3.2 CAP decrease

People like to hate the leafs and apparently we are the only team in cap restraints so they argue this.
- Yeti1181

like Iggy arguing the Leafs would not be able to sign Franson and Kadri this year?

Then today, after both are indeed signed, Iggy says "I ARGUED they won't both be signed to long term deals" LOL

"Argued" - like anyone would have argued that? Considering everyone and their mother knew the Leafs were trying to sign both to bridge contracts.

Leaf-haters are nothing but windbags.

So 3.6 was before lockout and estimated 7% increase (per year) over 2 years (last year was partial season but if we extrapolate over a full season) then yeah, next year should be over 4.2B with the Outdoor Games.

What is being debated as wrong in this??
- Cooshie

FYI , based on that equation and using 5% growth( way too low) you go from 3.6 to 3.78 to3.969 for this year. That means you need 230m form outdoor games to get 70m cap. That other guy is saying 180milfrom those games.

Everything points to it rising significantly. It's not far off from 70m with ridiculously low grow.

Mr. Dozzer, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
- hscesq

Projections. Was 3.6 before the lockout, at 7% (leagues numbers) it goes to 3.8 and then over 4b if that 7% continues.
- burn

nope. 3.3 billion

don't agree. if the CAP goes to 70, that's 6M of additional space.

there's an additional 2.5M because of the end of the Tucker, Armstrong, Frattin CAP hits.

take Liles hit or half of it off the books.

8.5M + 2.2M(Liles) = 10.7M

following guestimates:

Kessel - assume 2.6M pay increase - Phil gets 8M
Phaneuf - assume .5M pay increase - Dion gets 7M (no I don't think he's worth it)
Bolland, McClement, Kulimen and Fraser (UFA)s will average out to the same total amount , not much of difference.

Ranger, contingent upon play will either get 2M per season or stay at around 1.0-1.2 - let's be optomistic and call it .5M hit

so - before RFAs - who have little or no leverage typically... 2.6+0.5+0.5

Franson gets 3.5-4.0 - in short he gets Liles money - 2.0CAP increase

Gardiner - total wildcard - but worst (cost) case... he gets 2.5 for a couple bridge type deal 1.4CAP increase

Reimer is #1 -gets 3.5M - 1.7M CAP increase


net net 10.7available CAP

Leaf UFAs 3.6 new cap hit
RFAs 2.0 + 1.4 + 1.7 = 5.1 new CAP hit

3.6 + 5.1 = 8.7 verus 10.7 => 2.0M available

add Reilly 1.75M CAP increase
subtract Gunnarson (trade) 3.2 CAP decrease
- BorjeFan4Ever

Not that it makes a big difference to this painted picture but Kessel will get more then 8Mill per....

People like to hate the leafs and apparently we are the only team in cap restraints so they argue this.
- Yeti1181

the waiver and trade wire this weekend should be VERY interesting around the entire league

like Iggy arguing the Leafs would not be able to sign Franson and Kadri this year?

Then today, after both are indeed signed, Iggy says "I ARGUED they won't both be signed to long term deals" LOL

"Argued" - like anyone would have argued that? Considering everyone and their mother knew the Leafs were trying to sign both to bridge contracts.

Leaf-haters are nothing but windbags.
- Cooshie

So true.

You guys call yourselves fans, but can't pay a buck or two for LeafsTV ?!
- MCharisma91

ummmm 3 bucks