Larry Brooks provides some insight as to where action might begin, what the playoffs could look like, and maybe almost more important, the potential salary cap the next three years. Reading the latter piece provides a pretty good indication why resuming play continues to remain on the table despite all the strikes against that option. Plus that number - if accurate and comes to fruition - could result in pandemonium and fear in the hearts of every Rangers; fan and possibly individual who roots for a team close to the salary limit.

Slapshots. Challenges facing NHL are manifest not only this year, but next few. Creativity needed. https://t.co/f5khbUp6Jm via @nypostsports

— Larry Brooks (@NYP_Brooksie) April 18, 2020

We can tell you that while it is true that the NHL has explored the possibility of completing the 2019-20 season in a remote location such as Manchester, N.H., Sixth Avenue has determined that the infrastructure in such a locale would be insufficient to support such a massive endeavor.

Rather, Slap Shots has learned that the league is now focused on playing in an NHL city (perhaps more than one) that has been spared the worst of the coronavirus pandemic, whose curve tracks positively, and is located within a state whose social distancing regulations would be relaxed by the time the first puck is ready to be dropped.

The effort faces the same massive obstacles that have been catalogued repeatedly over the past few weeks that apply to every sport, not just hockey. The athletes and team support staffs, etc., would essentially have to be segregated from society for the duration of their respective seasons while tested regularly for COVID-19. Of course, the games would be played without fans.

All of this sounds great, but as Brooks noted and we have discussed, major challenges remain. Those obstacles, at least for right now, despite the best of hopes and intentions, may prove insurmountable. But the desire to resume play is linked, as noted in my first paragraph, to the escrow.

Yes, guys want to play, and not only because of escrow implications. But we can authoritatively tell you there isn’t anything close to unanimity within the Players’ Association on the matter of players leaving their families behind for what would be up to a couple of months for those on teams advancing deep into the playoffs.

Slap Shots has learned that union leadership told the players on a Thursday conference call that a summer resumption would generate approximately $350 million in revenue from existing television and sponsorship contracts. That number is believed based on a 24-team playoff format that would be preceded by two or three exhibition games per team.

The NHL has said that resumption could generate between $450 million and $500 million, but that range is believed based on completing the full schedule. Both sides agree that $1 billion in hockey-related revenue will be lost if there is no further play this year.

Brooks notes that teams out of contention likely won't want to play, especially if the only way to play is to be segregated from family etc. A 24-team playoff with a few exhibition games could be a workable arrangement. With so many teams close to a playoff spot, including all may be the only possible option, especially if several teams view the need to return to a shortened season as an option not worth pursuing.

The league’s focus has been devoted all but entirely on this season. But the more massive issues lay ahead. The hard cap/escrow system and current CBA under which the NHL operates will not be sustainable for this consortium — which generates between 40-50 percent of its revenue from gate receipts, concessions, parking, etc. The NHL keeps talking about the necessity of having a full 2020-21 season, but what does that even mean under the most likely scenario of most (if not all) NHL cities still barred from holding events with mass gatherings when the fall rolls around?

There have been talks between the NHL and PA about the possibility of extending the CBA that is currently set to expire following 2021-22. The players were told Thursday about a possible plan to stabilize the cap over the next three seasons at the current $81.5 million in order to ease their escrow burden

In my opinion, the PA should not be negotiating a long-term labor agreement under these adverse conditions. The league is obviously fine with its 50-50 split enforced by escrow withholdings that could be as high as 60 percent next year alone (not including carryover escrow from this season), but this hard-cap system linked to HRR is not a viable governing doctrine under these circumstances.

Seventeen teams were within $1 million of the cap with another five clubs within $3 million of this year’s $81.5 million when the season stopped. You tell me how teams will be able to operate under a flat cap for the next three years in a system that features arbitration. Though a month ago I suggested amnesty buyouts would be required, the PA isn’t likely to be wildly supportive of a mechanism, which could throw an additional 30-60 players a year onto the free-agent market in a depressed economy.

There is a need for a transition agreement under which the cap and HRR are somehow delinked that provides for a cap on escrow. Perhaps the PA would agree to suspend arbitration and reduce the max term of a contract from eight years to five. Regardless, business as was usual will not be sustainable for this hard-cap league.

Here’s one: Sixth Avenue could certainly help matters by including Seattle’s $650 million expansion fee in HRR in a one-time exception that the commissioner could call a stimulus package. At least 25 million of our neighbors have lost jobs during the pandemic — with millions more facing financial distress, if not ruin — so no one is suggesting you should have sympathy for pro athletes who face significant cuts in take-home pay. But this should be a shared burden between the players and the owners.

The league’s focus is trained on this summer and all of the enormous obstacles that stand in the way or a restart. But a greater vision is required for next season and the ones that hopefully will follow. Both sides should get to work on that as soon as possible. Maybe they can meet in Manchester, N.H.

Look at the bold above. If that doesn't send shivers down your spine nothing will. The $81.5 million was reported by Andy Strickland on Friday, and while Pierre LeBrun said that the figured wasn't finalized, he also didn't say that this wasn't a feasibility. In addition, as LeBrun notes, players are getting their 2018-19 escrow return next week so they are getting funds there. The question is what to do with last paycheck this season, which is worth about $140 million in total, given the escrow the players will owe the system.

This was told to me this morning by a prominent #NHL agent. There have been many ideas and scenarios presented to the players including the cap staying flat. At this point there are several variables that will determine the cap number for next season.

— Andy Strickland (@andystrickland) April 17, 2020

NHLPA spokesman says that’s not accurate. That no decision has been made yet on next year’s cap.
My own take: as I wrote a few weeks ago, freezing the cap a few years at the current number or close to it is possible, yes. But not decided yet. https://t.co/GnJkkT5FSx

— Pierre LeBrun (@PierreVLeBrun) April 17, 2020

NHL players have deferred their decision on the last paycheque until May 15. Sense is this will allow more time for the NHL and NHLPA to figure out if there will be games this season... Players have been debating whether to forgo some or all of the last paycheque to help escrow

— Pierre LeBrun (@PierreVLeBrun) April 18, 2020

Players are getting their 2018-19 escrow return next week so they are getting funds there. So question now remains what to do with last paycheque this season, which is worth about $140 million in total, given the escrow the players will owe the system

— Pierre LeBrun (@PierreVLeBrun) April 18, 2020

If the $81.5 million figure comes to pass, the Rangers and many other teams, as Brooks notes, will be up the creek without a paddle. In addition, if the italics is accurate, one possible solution to create cap space will be lost. An amnesty buyout, which could mean the ability to wipe dead cap space off the books, seemed to be a viable option to find a way to create space if the salary cap remained flat. Removing that option would make life even more difficult for teams, adding to the need and desire to create revenue with the hopes that the cap might rise.

What we see is that the ramifications of playing or not playing is beyond just finding a champion. Resuming action on the ice and determining how to utilize the revenue will impact the salary cap, potentially for the next three years. As Brooks notes, the league and PA should be working through this issue now rather than waiting, coming up with possible solutions and options.

Follow @airjan23

Join the Discussion: » 62 Comments » Post New Comment

» Rangers-Capitals: Reading the Numbers, Looking for an Advantage

» Rangers-Capitals meet again, though for first time since 2015, in playoffs

» Rangers check all the boxes in 4-0 win over the Senators

» Rangers face Ottawa, win clinches division, conference & Presidents' Trophy

» Rangers rally behind Panarin/Shesterkin to defeat Islanders 3-2 in shootout