Bill Meltzer: Meltzer's Musings: Tuesday Games, Today in Flyers History

Martin Hostak. Put up some decent numbers with Hershey that one season, but didn't stick around in North America very long.

Thanks for continuing to give us something to read in this time of woe, Bill.

Martin Hostak. Put up some decent numbers with Hershey that one season, but didn't stick around in North America very long.

Thanks for continuing to give us something to read in this time of woe, Bill.
- tangent_man

We should hire a focus group

Bill Meltzer: Meltzer's Musings: Tuesday Games, Today in Flyers History
- bmeltzer

Good Read.... Thank you Bill

HEY NHL! THE WNBA CALLED TO THANK YOU!

was there any logic for dealing Beranek for antoski?

Bill Meltzer: Meltzer's Musings: Tuesday Games, Today in Flyers History
- bmeltzer

kapanen!


just finished watching the 2010 boston series and i really thought i'd be missing richards... but most of all the loss of pronger is what really stood out to me.

man i really miss him

was there any logic for dealing Beranek for antoski?
- nails

Clarke wanted to add a tough guy type and Antoski was a fast-skating one who was a former 1st round pick..... That's all I've got.

Where's Duane B!?!?!?

Clarke wanted to add a tough guy type and Antoski was a fast-skating one who was a former 1st round pick..... That's all I've got.
- bmeltzer

Did Antoski actually win any fights? I'm sure he did, but I seem to remember him taking a beating most of the time. Or maybe I'm thinking of Scott Daniels.

poop just got real lol

http://deadspin.com/59518...tm_campaign=recirculation

poop just got real lol

http://deadspin.com/59518...tm_campaign=recirculation
- Philly1980

oh my

Where's Duane B!?!?!?


- aightwebang17

Martin Hostak. Put up some decent numbers with Hershey that one season, but didn't stick around in North America very long.

Thanks for continuing to give us something to read in this time of woe, Bill.
- tangent_man

He was no Dale Kushner. Maybe if he had fought Tocchet in camp he would have gotten a decent shot at a call up or two.

yey math! might be interesting posted this on another thread.


I did the numbers from cap geek...players are already getting less than 50%.

Follow me:

If the cap this year is 70,200,000 then that times 30 = 2,106,000,000.

if that is supposed to be 57 % of revenues than i can assume that 2,160,000,000/.57 = the whole pie which equals = 3,694,736,842

Actual cap salary for the current year as reported by cap geek = 1,821,198,034.

So its safe to assume that the players share for this year is = 1,821,198,034/3,694,736,842 = .492916. So in actuality the players share this year is already 49%....Math is awesome.

yey math! might be interesting posted this on another thread.


I did the numbers from cap geek...players are already getting less than 50%.

Follow me:

If the cap this year is 70,200,000 then that times 30 = 2,106,000,000.

if that is supposed to be 57 % of revenues than i can assume that 2,160,000,000/.57 = the whole pie which equals = 3,694,736,842

Actual cap salary for the current year as reported by cap geek = 1,821,198,034.

So its safe to assume that the players share for this year is = 1,821,198,034/3,694,736,842 = .492916. So in actuality the players share this year is already 49%....Math is awesome.
- Philly1980

Something tells me this is wrong.

I don't know why, because I'm not really a CBA whiz or anything like that, but I'm going off the basis of, "if it's that simple/if the players already have 49%, why are we doing this right now?"

I don't know just have a hunch you're conceptually off somehow. I could be wrong though....wouldn't be surprised if I was

yey math! might be interesting posted this on another thread.


I did the numbers from cap geek...players are already getting less than 50%.

Follow me:

If the cap this year is 70,200,000 then that times 30 = 2,106,000,000.

if that is supposed to be 57 % of revenues than i can assume that 2,160,000,000/.57 = the whole pie which equals = 3,694,736,842

Actual cap salary for the current year as reported by cap geek = 1,821,198,034.

So its safe to assume that the players share for this year is = 1,821,198,034/3,694,736,842 = .492916. So in actuality the players share this year is already 49%....Math is awesome.
- Philly1980

You're mixing your years together. You're using the cap numbers for the coming year against the salaries from last season.

yey math! might be interesting posted this on another thread.


I did the numbers from cap geek...players are already getting less than 50%.

Follow me:

If the cap this year is 70,200,000 then that times 30 = 2,106,000,000.

if that is supposed to be 57 % of revenues than i can assume that 2,160,000,000/.57 = the whole pie which equals = 3,694,736,842

Actual cap salary for the current year as reported by cap geek = 1,821,198,034.

So its safe to assume that the players share for this year is = 1,821,198,034/3,694,736,842 = .492916. So in actuality the players share this year is already 49%....Math is awesome.
- Philly1980

I think the initial assumption that EVERY club has to spend to the cap roof for the players to get 57% is incorrect, since that has never happened (and probably never will). so instead of multiplying 70.2million by 30 to get the players share, the number is a bit lower (and I'm sure the number NHL uses is based on some statistical distribution that correlates to the clubs current cap situation).

So if NHL revenues are 3.3billion, then 3.3 * 0.57 = 1.881million. Based on this value and the distribution of how the clubs cap are, they determine the cap roof and floor. Since the NHL can't decide how the clubs are spending, the total amount of money that goes to the players won't be exactly 57% but probably pretty close (there might be some mechanism in place to adjust it, I don't know).

This is just me guessing, of course.

I think the initial assumption that EVERY club has to spend to the cap roof for the players to get 57% is incorrect, since that has never happened (and probably never will). so instead of multiplying 70.2million by 30 to get the players share, the number is a bit lower (and I'm sure the number NHL uses is based on some statistical distribution that correlates to the clubs current cap situation).

So if NHL revenues are 3.3billion, then 3.3 * 0.57 = 1.881million. Based on this value and the distribution of how the clubs cap are, they determine the cap roof and floor. Since the NHL can't decide how the clubs are spending, the total amount of money that goes to the players won't be exactly 57% but probably pretty close (there might be some mechanism in place to adjust it, I don't know).

This is just me guessing, of course.
- PhillySteen

Yes, that too. The cap is based on a mid point.

So they've come to the 50/50 split with games starting Nov. 2nd. What will the NHLPA do now?

Yes, that too. The cap is based on a mid point.
- mayorofangrytown

I'm really hoping the new offer from the NHL gets it done or at least gets the process moving quickly. If they start 2 November, I'll be happy, but I also want all the players playing in Europe back over here before another one gets injured.

So they've come to the 50/50 split with games starting Nov. 2nd. What will the NHLPA do now?
- mayorofangrytown

Anyone know any other details? Ie: it's great that it's 50/50 but is the whole HRR issue sorted out along with no rollback?

I'm really hoping the new offer from the NHL gets it done or at least gets the process moving quickly. If they start 2 November, I'll be happy, but I also want all the players playing in Europe back over here before another one gets injured.
- Hextall271

This is all going to get hung up on ice conditions.

Anyone know any other details? Ie: it's great that it's 50/50 but is the whole HRR issue sorted out along with no rollback?
- Hextall271

They're (the media) saying it might hinge on how they get them to 50%. The players already despise the escrow. If that's how they're doing it not including rollbacks is just a smoke screen.

They're (the media) saying it might hinge on how they get them to 50%. The players already despise the escrow. If that's how they're doing it not including rollbacks is just a smoke screen.
- mayorofangrytown

Interesting.. on the surface without rollbacks and with the NHL saying that the current definition of HRR will be maintained, it looks like a deal the players should take.