Well you're also assuming that Seabrook is only using other NHL players and teams as a measuring stick. Maybe he uses his rational and compares his value to what his teammates are making, his opportunities to win, and his opportunity to stay where he has already established himself.

I don't care what you say, Seabrook is not a 10 million dollar player. He's not even 8 million. If he wants that much then let him walk. If I were Stan I would pony up until the 7.5 million dollar a year mark(give or take a few ticks). He's 30, he's only going to regress, he has never won or even been considered for Norris, has never made an All Star team, etc.

This all tells you that part of his success is predicated on who is around him(and vice versa).
- Bjm84

Have you read anything I wrote? I said Seabrook is looking at 7+ easy

and the part I quoted you on, I guess being on the Canadian olympic team doesnt count?

Yes - but - Florida, Arizona, NJ, Detroit - problems have existed there for a long time - and STILL the cap was supposed to go to $72MM this year, and then $80MM within three years.

The current immediate problem is the Cdn$, which in January, 2013 was above parity, and in November (one year ago) was above $.95, and is now at just above $.88. That's a 7%+ drop in the value of the new Canadian TV contracts and arena revenues, which is what goes into the cap calculation.

Trust me - if you want to drop Florida, Arizona, and one or two other US non-hockey markets, I'm all for it. The current issue, however, is the Cdn$.
- StLBravesFan

And tell me how Bettman is doing wonderful things for this league?

Have you read anything I wrote? I said Seabrook is looking at 7+ easy

and the part I quoted you on, I guess being on the Canadian olympic team doesnt count?
- FourFeathers773

Yes I read every word. And I am saying that he will get 7+ max. And yes I know, 2010 Canadian Olympic team and not the 2014 team.... lending more credence to my point.

yea, you know the term on those contracts as well?

Pietrangelo is nice to want to compare to and all, but at the end of the day, that contract will have been given to pietrangelo 3 years before seabrooks new one. Also, pietrangelo hasnt won jack poop. Seabrook has a gold medal and is a top pairing dman with two stanley cups
- FourFeathers773

Pietrangelo is also 5 years younger and considered a Norris candidate.

I fully understand what Seabrook has done, and what he has won. I also understand that he is paired with a 2 time Norris trophy winner, and as much as Savvy1 believes that Seabrook props up Keith, it goes both ways.

I'm not saying he is not a good player, and his leadership qualities are "unmeasurables", but the fact is, to be one of the top couple of defenseman salaries he would need to be thought of much higher than he is. He wasnt on the 14 olympic team, he isnt thought of for the Norris, he WONT command Subban $

Yes - but - Florida, Arizona, NJ, Detroit - problems have existed there for a long time - and STILL the cap was supposed to go to $72MM this year, and then $80MM within three years.

The current immediate problem is the Cdn$, which in January, 2013 was above parity, and in November (one year ago) was above $.95, and is now at just above $.88. That's a 7%+ drop in the value of the new Canadian TV contracts and arena revenues, which is what goes into the cap calculation.

Trust me - if you want to drop Florida, Arizona, and one or two other US non-hockey markets, I'm all for it. The current issue, however, is the Cdn$.
- StLBravesFan

Bettman addressed a BOG meeting and projected a $71M cap but said that was a number that wouldn't be finalized until after the season ended. Part of the reason it ended at $69M had something to do with the NHLPA and the effect a higher cap figure would have on player escrow payments.

I fully understand the $U.S./Cdn exchange rate - I deal with it every day of my life. What you can explain for me in detail is what you seem so sure of - how much every percentage drop in the Canadian $ affects the maximum the cap can go to - as opposed to these awful U.S. markets selling another 200,000 tickets or so annually, because those teams aren't going away any time soon.

Bettman addressed a BOG meeting and projected a $71M cap but said that was a number that wouldn't be finalized until after the season ended. Part of the reason it ended at $69M had something to do with the NHLPA and the effect a higher cap figure would have on player escrow payments.

I fully understand the $U.S./Cdn exchange rate - I deal with it every day of my life. What you can explain for me in detail is what you seem so sure of - how much every percentage drop in the Canadian $ affects the maximum the cap can go to - as opposed to these awful U.S. markets selling another 200,000 tickets or so annually, because those teams aren't going away any time soon.
- RickJ

With all the talk about the Canadian dollar decrease I wonder if the NHL engages in any currency hedging? Many other business would, why not the NHL

New Blog is up!

Bettman addressed a BOG meeting and projected a $71M cap but said that was a number that wouldn't be finalized until after the season ended. Part of the reason it ended at $69M had something to do with the NHLPA and the effect a higher cap figure would have on player escrow payments.

I fully understand the $U.S./Cdn exchange rate - I deal with it every day of my life. What you can explain for me in detail is what you seem so sure of - how much every percentage drop in the Canadian $ affects the maximum the cap can go to - as opposed to these awful U.S. markets selling another 200,000 tickets or so annually, because those teams aren't going away any time soon.
- RickJ

Rick, you're not reading what I'm writing (or I'm not saying it well).

I don't know the relative cost of the bad markets vs. the dropping Cdn$ - I'm just saying that had the Cdn$ stayed where is was a year ago, the cap would be $3MM more than it is now. THAT is the proximate cause of the drop in the cap from what Bettman said the could spend to a year ago. The situation with the bad market teams hasn't deteriorated from a year ago; the value of the Cdn$ has.

Last July - when the cap was going to be reduced to $68 (I think) because of the drop in the Cdn$, the league decided they could borrow against future revenues to increase the cap to $70; the escrow would have increased. The PA members with contracts voted to have it go up to only $69 - this lowering the escrow.

Well you're also assuming that Seabrook is only using other NHL players and teams as a measuring stick. Maybe he uses his rational and compares his value to what his teammates are making, his opportunities to win, and his opportunity to stay where he has already established himself.

I don't care what you say, Seabrook is not a 10 million dollar player. He's not even 8 million. If he wants that much then let him walk. If I were Stan I would pony up until the 7.5 million dollar a year mark(give or take a few ticks). He's 30, he's only going to regress, he has never won or even been considered for Norris, has never made an All Star team, etc.

This all tells you that part of his success is predicated on who is around him(and vice versa).
- Bjm84

I agree , Seabrook is not an 8 to 10 million player. Matter of fact, I think Seabrook is worth 6 .5 million( give or take a few ticks). Unless the cap goes up by 3 million, it will be suicide to sign him over 6.5 mil. We would have no money to resign Krueger, Saad because of the mega contracts Kane and Toews received. Furthermore, what are you going to do with the discounted 1 year contract Richards has? If he does well this year, I am quite sure he wants at least 3 million next year. McNeil might replace him in the future but he wouldn't be ready for at least another season.