NO Crouse or Rantanen
- 2Real

I agree. I say no to Crouse as well.

No. The cap isn't based solely on HRR. Its HRR less direct cost which includes the salaries of any employee directly effecting events that generate HRR. That includes coaches. Or so Jeff Marek and the guys on Leafs Lunch have discussed
- mayorofangrytown

There are some revenues that teams take in that are not part of HRR, for cap purposes. The salary cap is based soley on what constitutes HRR.

One way or another we are getting the best prospect on draft day that we have in years. No more JVR turds please.

I wish there were a way we could keep 7 and still move up into the top 15 with the other pick.
- hereticpride

JvR was a turd? Dude was one of the better picks for draft position, we just sucked the wrong year and lost the lottery. He was a fine pick.

Of course we can keep 7 and move into the top 15. Which combination of Giroux, Voracek, Simmonds, and Sanheim are you willing to part with?

Sure they'll complain about it. They'll complain if they have operating expenses of $0.01. The owners primary care is to maximize profits, which means to maximize revenue and minimize expenses. As for saving themselves from themselves, that has been happening since before the salary cap, and it doesn't work. The rich can still (theoretically) pay for the best, all things equal. So, basically, they're all hypocrites, especially the most profitable teams.
- jmatchett383

Absolutely. Not to mention the games they play cooking the books.

So, basically, they're all hypocrites,
- jmatchett383

Yep. Looking forward to the next lockout so they can "get things under control" and then promptly proceed with business as usual when it's over.

Absolutely. Not to mention the games they play cooking the books.
- MJL

Sepp Bladder

A guy like Pegula only has a certain amount oh HRR coming in based on the 50% share. Every owner is in the same boat there. However, guys like Pegula/MLSE/Snider/etc. can also incorporate their capital into their HRE (i.e. include "out of pocket" money as well as their share of HRR).

Yes, they'd like to reduce their HRE (is that even a real term or did I just invent it) to increase their overall profit, but some teams just have way more $$ to spend for off-ice personell.
- jmatchett383

*pluck D string on bass sharply*
*feedback*
*sharp inhale*
*Guitar riff*
- Giroux_Is_God

Sweet!

JvR was a turd? Dude was one of the better picks for draft position, we just sucked the wrong year and lost the lottery. He was a fine pick.

Of course we can keep 7 and move into the top 15. Which combination of Giroux, Voracek, Simmonds, and Sanheim are you willing to part with?
- jmatchett383

Was and is a turd. I loathed his woe is me attitude and his dumb rat face.

Franking pigeon.

don't like rantanen...if crouse is not there id rather take provolov
- mydoglicks

Agreed. Don't want him to be the pick in a big way

Craig Ramsay was the rock Eakins leaned on in Edmonton for experience.

It's a no brainer to bring murray on board

Was and is a turd. I loathed his woe is me attitude and his dumb rat face.

Franking pigeon.
- hereticpride

Yeah I never liked jvr. I always thought he was a bit of a weasel.

There are some revenues that teams take in that are not part of HRR, for cap purposes. The salary cap is based soley on what constitutes HRR.
- MJL

Your reading comprehension remains pitiful at best. I said the salary cap is based on HRR less Direct Cost.

I didn't say they counted all revenue as HRR. Why do you keep insisting on correcting things that are already correct?

Here I found a link that's pretty simple to read. Give it a try. Please take your time. You might want to read it twice.

http://www.si.com/nhl/hom...is-hockey-related-revenue

Agreed. Don't want him to be the pick in a big way
- Just5

which one? Rantanen or crouse? or both?

Rantanen and barzal are my two picks i'd prefer.

http://bleacherreport.com...-on-penguins-stars-future

Interesting.

Some were judging you harshly. I mean, how can you complain about the king when you fall short?

- bodiva88

nah...it's all in good fun. i loved the joke. i just get irritated when i do that because i'm typing and not thinking. why my brain chooses one word automatically over the other, i don't know.

and i can complain about anything. ask Nasty.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2487511-evgeni-malkin-latest-news-rumors-speculation-on-penguins-stars-future

Interesting.
- benjichronic

Malkin is a monster when Crosby is out. He wants/needs to be "the guy."

Malkin is a monster when Crosby is out. He wants/needs to be "the guy."
- Scoob

I'd like to see malkin get moved. Nashville should go after him. They're a team that needs a 1c, and I feel like malkin wouldn't mind playing for a small market.

Your reading comprehension remains pitiful at best. I said the salary cap is based on HRR less Direct Cost.

I didn't say they counted all revenue as HRR. Why do you keep insisting on correcting things that are already correct?

Here I found a link that's pretty simple to read. Give it a try. Please take your time. You might want to read it twice.

http://www.si.com/nhl/hom...is-hockey-related-revenue
- mayorofangrytown

Speaking of reading comprehension issues, I did not state in any way that you said they counted all revenue as HRR, so you're mistaken there.

I'm already aware of what constitutes HRR, as I said in my previous post.

The exact post of mine that you quoted clearly stated that there is some revenue that teams take in, that is not considered part of HRR. It's not HRR less direct cost. Revenue that is not considered part of HRR is never included as HRR, so there is no need to deduct it. It's simply not counted as HRR for cap purposes

I'd like to see malkin get moved. Nashville should go after him. They're a team that needs a 1c, and I feel like malkin wouldn't mind playing for a small market.
- benjichronic

Toronto. I heard he's going to Toronto. Everyone loves Toronto. One of the guys from the TRIB during the playoffs said he saw Malkin's list of teams and the Leafs were there.

Speaking of reading comprehension issues, I did not state in any way that you said they counted all revenue as HRR, so you're mistaken there.

I'm already aware of what constitutes HRR, as I said in my previous post.

The exact post of mine that you quoted clearly stated that there is some revenue that teams take in, that is not considered part of HRR. It's not HRR less direct cost. Revenue that is not considered part of HRR is never included as HRR, so there is no need to deduct it. It's simply not counted as HRR for cap purposes
- MJL

Again with reading comprehension.

Click the link. Read.

It is HRR less Direct Cost.

Again with reading comprehension.

Click the link. Read.

It is HRR less Direct Cost.
- mayorofangrytown

I don't need to read the link, I've read the CBA, multiple times

"Now, to make things just a little more confusing, when it determines the salary cap, the NHL doesn't use HRR. The league also subtracts Direct Costs from it. Those Direct Costs include "any costs, including fixed and variable costs, attributable to a revenue-generating activity" -- anything spent while accumulating HRR, including the salaries of employees whose duties contribute to the revenue activities."

JFC!!!! Some of the people on this thread!!!

Again with reading comprehension.

Click the link. Read.

It is HRR less Direct Cost.
- mayorofangrytown

I don't need to read the link, I've read the CBA, multiple times
- MJL

Never tell MJL the odds!