I love the fact that there is a cap. Makes it interesting. I follow sports where there is no cap, and it is the same few teams competing every year, and the other teams being development teams for the bigger ones.

Salary caps add another level to the game. GMing a team is part of the sport, imo. Which organization can create a team that attracts players to their team, how well they can spend their money within the cap space etc. That's part of the game. If you take that element out, then it's just who has the biggest pocket book and the league becomes lopsided.

As a European, I think the Cap is a great invention. Football could very well use something like that because of the absurd wealth of teams backed by oil money, or just the big behemoths in general (say Barcelona or PSG). The big teams with bottomless pockets can vacuum up all the talent in the world without even blinking. It's sad. Salary Caps are a great invention in closed leagues like the NHL and will hopefully stay. Cheers 🍺

THG the only KZfaqr that can explain the salary cap that well

when i was a cap abolitionist i used to think like 'well it's not like Rangers even won that often without the cap' but looking more closely its like even teams like penguins were having a hard time keeping up with the spending

Hard cap is only suboptimal for players. Fans get more competitive teams to cheer for, owners have a good grasp of their spending every year

I'm for a hard cap. Keeps the game more competitive. If you look at leagues with luxury tax it doesnt really curb massive out spending smaller markets by larger markets. The hardcap keeps teams more responsible with their purse strings. Plus without a salary cap say goodbye to Winnipeg, Ottawa, Edmonton, Pittsburgh, Columbus and possibly Minnesota... and lets be frank it will be deathnail to ever seeing Quebec City back in the laugue.

THG getting creative this last few days. He’s itching for regular season action

Salary cap doesn't change the fact that teams with deep pockets can spend a lot on the fringes that make a difference in attracting and keeping players. How family is treated, training rooms, how many doctors and support staff, analytics department, facilities etc that make a huge difference. Tampa is a team that has been known to spend to the max to make the players lives comfortable and enjoyable while playing in Tampa. That money spent doesn't count against the cap, yet that money makes a huge difference.

Hockey Guy, you rock! Despite liking Boston as I am a Habs fan, I love your videos and respect how well you follow the NHL!

The problem I have is it’s $230 before parking, fees and a drink for two to sit in the upper deck.

Glad you have come around! I remember those videos, and I imagine I noted something along the lines of things being much worse, including for Arizona and (at the time) Carolina, if there was no cap. There's zero chance we have 32 NHL teams--likelier 24, maybe--if they hadn't implemented the cap. Arizona, Nashville, Pittsburgh, Ottawa, NY Islanders, New Jersey, Florida, Winnipeg, and Tampa Bay I could see not existing. No system will ever be perfect, but I have increasingly lost interest in MLB because only maybe 10 teams even have a chance the vast majority of seasons. In the NHL there's more parity than ever, simply unmatched in the MLB and NBA. NFL I imagine is comparable parity because it is a similar system.

Acknowledging you have a problem is part of being a responsible person, gotta respect the league for saying "Hey, self-control, this just isn't our 'thing'.". Lol. Btw, I think the salary cap is necessary, not really just for parody, but so that teams have the ability to build team around players without just shipping them out of town after 3-4 years.

MLB has a form of a luxury tax. First year above the line equates to a small penalty, 2nd increases the penalty, 3rd is not insignificant. Edit; Forgot to mention - I really dislike the 'ice fewer players to get under the cap' loophole. I've seen teams short 2 or even 3 players due to this.

What I find interesting, is the Red Wings signing Brett Hull, influenced the request by owners for a salary cap. Now the Red Wings are one of the few teams who are under the cap. Proof that big hockey market teams can stay under the cap, and succeed.

Salary cap is the best thing to happen to the NHL. All sports should implement it. The players are still very well paid, the owners get their share so they'll keep the lights on and the playing field is even between small market teams and large market teams. Next thing they should do is decide on a hard ceiling for ticket prices.

Yea I like the cap too. Makes for more drama and grinding teeth over mismanaged salaries. Makes for good youtube content too so it's part of the livelihood for some. Remember how little news about salaries there were before the cap?

Salary cap makes this entire thing acutally interesting. Teams trying to manage cap is basicaly the most interesting part of the league. Like, yeah, the hockey's good sometimes, but man the managment part of the thing is the fun part. It also brings a whole another level to trading, contracts, everything.

I never thought I would like the Cap. But it makes the league competitive and for great entertainment. I have moved as a fan from NFL and MLB to NHL solely because of this.

Shannon, you’re the best…no cap

No thank you to no cap. Why i don't watch baseball.

I agree the cap is good for the league. I am so excited for Tuesday night.

I sure don't miss the days of teams like the Leafs, Rangers and Avs having almost 3x the payroll of the Oilers and other smaller market teams. Funny that the Oilers have a super rich owner so it doesn't matter nearly as much these days but it sucked watching players get too expensive and being traded because of it. It's so much more even now, even if it isn't perfect. Long live the Hard Cap!

With the cap and minimum salaries we always have to keep in mind inflation adjustment.

Hockey Night in Canada needs to give you a between periods segment!

would it help resolve problems for the salary cap to be a percentage of revenues (same 50% split between owners and players), with players contracts negotiated as percentage of salary cap?

i used to be a hardliner on the salary cap issue, poked fun at those weho supported it BUT as a die hard canadian fan if it weren't for the cap canadian teams would be done, except of course for toronto and the habs

Another great video!

1. Cap is fine. It adds an interesting team building dimension to NHL. 2. Hard cap... I mean, there are couple things I won't be against. Like, have a cap not yearly, but on 3/5 year stretches, so that you can accumulate cap space in rebuilding/retooling years and weaponize it while getting out of rebuilt/retool. So, basically I'm against fines/taxes for going over the cap that can just be paid with money, I want something that costs you cap space down the road. At worst, maybe allowing every team one contract that doesn't count towards the cap? 3. I get why agents and Toronto fans dislike hard cap. But there is no way it's gone any time soon. Current system is good because smart management and a bit of luck can make any team a contender in, like, 5 years.

Did you ever do a reaction video to Allan Walsh's comments on how the players could eliminate the cap by nullifying the CBA?

I like the sal;ary cap and I think ALL major spots leagues should have one.

would or could players ask to be in as in getting paid for expension fees in the near future?

I think that all contracts should come from the league itself, so all contracts are taxed the same.

The gap basically does work. The only part that sort of doesn't, depending on your perspective, is the LTIR, retirement parts. You contrast something like what CHI was able to get away with Hossa and Kane, or TB and Kucherov, vs. VAN and Luongo and it can seem unfair. It's also not optimal when teams can be dumping grounds for bad contracts just to get to the floor. But the basic principles work well. Look at VAN. They signed all those ludicrous deals with Myers, OEL, Eriksson, Garland, Roussell etc etc etc. Take away one two of those mistakes and the Luongo thing is hardly even a bother. The point is parity and punishing profligacy and mostly that is what happens. Even CHI paid the price for half a decade for those three cups, one earned only after the Cap Guardian Angels healed Patrick Kane the day the season ended.

I’m thinking that a couple of tweaks to the salary cap might address some of the issues. Eliminate signing bonuses and average salaries. There’s nothing to stop a team from signing a player to a five year contract with an aav of $5 million that pays a $1 million salary per year with a $4 million bonus due each July 1st. Also, correct me if I’m wrong, they could pay $21m in the first year and $1 m per in the last 4, and still have a cap hit of $5m per year. Both these scenarios give an advantage to the wealthiest teams and give them an unfair advantage. Also, taxes obviously impact income. As an example, if a player has reason to want to live in a particular region, the teams in that region may have different tax structures that could impact the player’s decision regarding where to sign; eg. if he preferred to play in the Pacific Northwest, Seattle could offer the same salary as Vancouver, but have the advantage of lower taxes, potentially making the difference. The salary cap could be adjusted to compensate for differences in tax structure. The NHL employs a lot of accountants who are smarter than me, I’m sure they could figure this out.

There're no free markets. Those in power call the shots.

As a Yankees fan growing up, the system in place for the MLB has manufactured resentment for me. I don't watch baseball anymore and haven't been invested really since 2001 when the Yankees were a fun organic team to watch.

Thank goodness for the salary cap. The Columbus Blue Jackets would/ could not survive I am not a fan but living in the area I keep up with them.

I'd think the revenue sharing would be a good place to attack the cap from.

I like a lot of things of the hard cap but we cant glance over the fact it inherently keeps salaries lower than they likely should be.

happy 7th anniversary

I’m fine with the hard cap, but I cannot believe the league hasn’t been able to make back whatever they lost during the pandemic, with all the increase in advertising

To those who say that we wouldn't need a cap if the teams were more disciplined, think through how that would work... If one team alone says "I won't spend more than this amount", it wouldn't have much affect on the overall salaries, it would just make that one team non-competitive. If all of the teams got together and informally agreed, "we are spending too much money on salaries, let's keep it below this level", that would probably be illegal collision. But even if it were legal or they got away with it, do you really want to see such a system agreed to in secret behind closed doors? A formal and transparent salary cap, where the NHLPA has some input on the rules, would definitely be preferable to that scenario.

People may think the players are doing the best in the MLB because of no cap but still only a average of 50% of revenue goes to the players the difference is the top 25% make most of the money the bottom 75% different story 40% of players make the minimum 2/3 make less the the league average. What happens is small and mid market teams refuse to spend more then what they can still make money even if it means they can not win and sure enough only one team in over thirty years has won a World Series with a payroll in the bottom half

Go Twins! Our window is open for another 8 hours.

MLB does have a luxury tax on the high end

League did give competitive balance draft picks to poorer teams, like they do in MLB. As well as get draft picks when you sign tier 1 and 2 Free Agents. You should also be able to sell upto 10% of your cap space.

I'm broadly in support of a cap but the NHL only seem to plan financially (+everything else) on a 12-18 month cycle. That's what's causing headaches for GMs. They simply can't plan ahead and if they do, they risk getting bitten. No other business with a $5bn revenue base works on such a short term basis. I hope Marty Walsh pushes for a 3-5 year salary plan going forward. If revenue is shared, there needs to be a joint plan with the PA.

I do not think the NHL would ever change the hard cap, however I am mostly in favour of implementing a luxury tax system.

I am pro-cap, but do think it is much lower than it should be. A raise or three of 15 or 20 million, bringing it closer to what leagues like the NFL have, would raise player compensation to much closer to what their peers in other sports are making. Throw in a raise to minimum contracts too, just to keep it fair but allow teams extra room for retaining players and for attracting new talent. I want an NHL salary cap that's closer to 15p million, allow big cities like NYC and Toronto to blow huge amounts of cash on stars, but not so huge a cap that smaller markets like Winnipeg are just left in the dust.

The only way you will see the salary cap change is if there becomes a competitive league l, which starts taking the best players. The way I could see this happen if europ started a supper hockey league with all the best club teams.

The top 3 spenders in MLB all failed to make the playoffs this year. Mets, Yankees and Padres.

Any argument against splitting revenue between ownership/players, and capping rookie salaries, max contracts based off that slice just seem to be idealistic “everything should be free market”. The NHL wants to have successful franchises in as many markets as can support them. Not only do they want competition…they depend on it.

The NHL as far as major professional sports goes, is still a primarily Gate-based business. Salaries simply cannot continue to climb regardless. The NHL needs to increase revenue aside from gate without compromising uniforms with patches & stickers, nor hologram advertising during games. The NHL as a business, has to do better.

NYR would spend all the money on all the free agents back in the day because they were part of the larger MSG conglomerate that also owned the Knicks, etc. It was basically a write-off losing money on the Rangers because they made so much with the Knicks. That's not really fair. The cap helps with that.

The league has a 'Salary CAP' but no 'Salary Floor', so you still have the situation of the 'Have and Have Nots'. Not to mention that there are always those teams who take on contracts of players who will never set foot on ice for that team, but they will pay that player's salary. I never liked the idea of taking on a contract and not getting anything for your money. I know, I know, people will claim that they get draft picks, and that's why they do it. Keep in mind that the percentage of drafting a player and having him turn out to actually be a quality NHL player is very small. It's the sports teams version of gambling. I sometimes wonder if small market teams wouldn't be better to demand a player who is on an NHL roster that you know has some actual skills, rather than gamble on a young prospect who has a really small percentage to make it? That might make an interesting video. What's the percentage of the chance that a drafted player makes a roster and actually plays for the team that drafted him.... and plays at least (3?) seasons. I'll guess that it's a very low percentage.

MLB has a Luxury tax for teams over $250M

Agreed, that cap is here to stay. The players got the 50 - 50 revenue split and it appears to be working. MLB does have a small tax system in place but it's non-consequential. The high revenue teams like Yankees, Dodgers etc will spend whatever they like with no real impact. The NBA has lost it's control over the players, they can dictate where they want to go and who they want to play with. That is stupid! The NFL has a form of a cap that appears to work. Other than the NHL, it's the most competitive of the other 3 major sports leagues in North America. I do like the cap, teams like Columbus, Florida Arizona and even Winnipeg, Ottawa and Calgary can somewhat compete against the big money owners.

I'm all-taThe cap is the greatest way to ensure perennial competitiveness. It adds a strategic element to the league. I loathe sports where a massive media market permits the buying of a lineup.

The hard salary cap is the best thing for parity and competitiveness. It’s bad for players and stuff. But I think allowing teams to exceed the cap is just ripe for Toronto and Rangers to be just allowed to buy better rosters

For people who say that the cap isn't a good thing I tell them to look at our soccer over here in Europe, unless a club gets taken over by some super rich oil tycoon from the middle east then you can predict the 2-4 teams that will be in contention to win every league single European for the next 20 years, maybe in the EPL we will have a bit of rotations as we now have 5-6 really rich teams so over time they will crest and fall but it very quickly becomes boring if you aren't a fan of 1 of those teams you are unlikely to ever win the league. The only change the NHL needs to change to the cap is just add it to playoff rosters, can be done with something as simple as prorating the cap hit of every player into a per game salary & what ever 1/82nd of the cap is for a given year is the limit for each playoff game.

I think it's a necessary evil, but I wish it were firmer with fewer dodgey capologigists' workarounds. If there's going to be no cap during playoffs, it almost kind of defeats the point of having one in the first place. I also think no one player should be able to earn above a certain percentage of their team's cap, maybe 10-12% max (and I say that knowing with each passing season more players earn 13-15% of their team's cap or more).

There are positives and negatives to the cap but I think if you give incentives for players to stay on the team that drafted them then you can keep them in their own markets. If you told Sabastian Aho that if he stays in Carolina then he can get more money in merch sales, tax rideoffs, more term, a better retirement plan, etc...then you may not have players as willing to flee. Right now, teams like Toronto and New York generate all this revenue but it all goes into ownership pockets instead of the players. That's not cool. And also as you mentioned, trades are hard to finish and you can't even go with a full roster sometimes, but I think the hard cap has to go as it is more of a burden on the quality.

Look back to when the owners had the players and fans by the gonads...

The cap also helps save rich teams from themselves. Ala... Bobby Holik.

I feel like there should be a slighter higher salary cap for the Canadian teams to adjust for their higher taxes.

I'm pro cap but really dislike the hard cap. I'd like to see a soft cap with a hard cap/luxury tax system where a team can exceed it by 10% and must pay a 200% tax for every dollar their over the soft cap. It allows for more flexibility while still keeping parity.

Cap era 2005-2023: 12 different SC champions in 18 seasons, including 6 first time winners + 2 "very long waiters" with previous cups in CHI(49y), BOS (39y). This can only be good for the NHL. Good management is rewarded above financial might

MLB caps how high a team can draft if they spend over a certain amount.

My issue with the cap is this... with the elites demanding a large portion of a teams salary cap the league has a growingly large number of players that simply shouldn't be in the NHL. Every team has these players. Because of this you can almost make a case that all the best hockey players in North America are not in the NHL rather just the elites are.

I hate Gary's triple hard cap. When he introduced it in 2004, he said it was "for the fans." He's fighting for us. He promised ticket prices would fall in a hard cap. He's for the owners. I'd rather watch the best hockey players in the world get their free market value.

are the salaries in U.S. dollars?

The only people complaining about the hard cap are the SDPN like every single day.

I love the cap. Makes everyone competitive.

The only thing I feel is that salary cap should go up more . I think the NHL has enough people to know how to " COOK THE BOOKS" to not tell the truth about the revenue there taking in .

Even if there was no salary cap it doesn't guarantee the big market teams win anything

Bottom line is - the fans pay for all of this. Price the games out of most fans reach? Stick the fork.

I believe a cap is needed for parity, but the split shouldn’t be 50/50. 32 owners do not deserve 50% of profits.

It is absolutely a level playing field. Every owner got into this knowing the rules. Every last one. If they didn’t like the rules, they should not have gotten involved. If they can’t afford the rules when they change, sell the team to someone who can. The salary cap nonsense is just that. Nonsense. Now, we must remember, even though the owners know this, they love the fact that their expenditures are capped. As an example, James, Dolan of the Rangers ownership, may not like never winning a Cup under his watch, but he loves making tons of money. He likely makes more money with a cap, then he would if he had $150 million payroll.

I'm all for Cap. Sure top players could get twice or thrice as much as they're paid now, a few players had 10 mil contracts pre-Cap era so elite players salaries didn't grow that much but the lower and middle class level guys earn much more than before. So sorry, I won't cry for 10mil guys not getting 20mil. Instead Cap helps salary gap between elite and bottom players not to become too big. I don't think that without the Cap bottom players would also start getting more money, it's mostly for top guys' sake. The only downside I see that is important for me, it's how mentally straining it's for those who got big contracts and couldn't live up to those big money. In a Cap league people will quickly turn on them, because they hurt the team and it's hard to get rid of the contract. Without the Cap it's relatively easier. But I like that is also one of the examples how Cap makes GM's job is that much more challenging. You know who wants to get rid of Cap the most though? Sure, you can say it's elite players. And you're right, they do. But even more than them it's their agents who sleep and dream of NHL without the Cap. They don't really care for middle and lower class level players' salaries, they need top guys to get as much as they can so their comission would also be that much more substantial. That's why someone like Allan Walsh and his lackies such as Steve Dangle Podcast guys are so loud for Cap abolition. Also Walsh seems like is really gunning for Gary's place as commissioner.

Do I think it was created for bs reasons to keep the player’s salary down? Yes. Do I think a side effect is it helps even the playing field? Yes.

July 2nd!!! 2:36 I thought I was going crazy now that I've been hearing people say dates like "July Two" in the past few years. I've always said second, saying July Two sounds weird to me!!!

It's not a perfect system, it should consider the cost of living and taxes in the city the team is located in to really make it fair for every city. Also, the cap should be for the 20 players roster at game time and not the full 23 men roster and should be applied in the playoffs too, that's the way to fix the LTIR abuse.

I like the cap but it desperately needs to go up a significant amount. 1 million here and there is pennies

The salary cap should be points - not dollar-based. Players sign for a percentage of the cap. If net revenues are better they get paid more and vice versa. This eliminates inflation issues and makes player salaries more comparable.

I think the NHL has the best salary cap in the major sports that’s not saying it’s perfect but it’s better

The salary cap makes so much easy content for the hockey media to generate. Why would they give that up? :D

i guess i'm expressing a minority opinion on here given most of the other comments, but i hate the hard salary cap for the sole reason that it's motivated by a desire on the part of owners to cull their expenses. i don't deny that teams tried to buy championships, but how often did it work compared to how often it failed? i would support abolishing the cap but i would preserve the salary floor as a percentage of revenues similarly to how it's calculated now. that way, Arizona or the New York Islanders can't spend $15 million on total player salaries only.

I like the salary cap, I think there are some minutae that should change, but the cap itself brings parity. NFL is healthy, MLB arguably not. NBA definitely not.

I think the NHL should adopt some of NBA contract management, taking the ability to have one drafted, homegrown & developed player, be exclude from the cap. Also there's a bunch of lewd bots in comments lol

I’ve said since Day One of theHard Cap system that the NHLPA should have said “Fine. But no Draft” Then players sign where they want or can right from the start

Seeing how here in Europe, teams can pretty much only survive in top leagues by taking oil money sponsorships or the like, no thanks. Also, how's a cap different from teams only having a certain amount of money availableto spend and being capped by that? As far as I can see, the only difference really is a more balanced league and less risk of teams going under with the cap in place. Restructure the cap? Sure. Get rid of it? No thanks.

Canuck fan hates the salary cap. Anyone shocked? I like my team to have an equal chance to win. As an Expo fan I watched my team get priced out of MLB. Every year young talented players left and Montreal became a second division feeder team which no one has an interest in watching. Canadian teams with the hard cap still have struggled but I think one of them will eventually figure it out. Maybe Ottawa is on the verge of having done so. Not this year but next. Gives the GM's something else to do. Makes them do math and cost benefit analysis.

If it wasn't for the Cap Detroit would still be in the playoffs and would probably have one another Stanley Cup. Probably wouldn't have Seider or Raymond though so mixed bag I guess

I might have a little more sympathy for the hard cap, if the egregiously cheap money grubbers of the league weren't so aggressively petty. it's known that prior to the last CBA, the leafs' training facilities and staff would remain open during the offseason, and the team would support players and prospects if they wanted to make use of them. For fringe prospects, or players trying to rehab injuries, those facilities and staff could've been the difference between them playing another game in the NHL, or going home to europe, or leaving hockey entirely. I didn't even read that the leafs were the only team that did this. only that the leafs were the biggest name, some considered it a "competitive advantage", and so it had to go Post 2020, travel expenses to their city, living expenses while there, and team facilities and staff all have to be paid for by players out-of-pocket, if they decide to make use of them. ignoring the facilities and staff costs, toronto's one of the most expensive cities on the continent to live in. so is new york, and LA, and vancouver. now the big markets are at a competitive disadvantage, cause cheap penny pinchers want "fairness". as if fringe prospects and broken has-beens won the leafs a cup. as if the leafs dont trade away or waive a future superstar almost yearly. Is the NHL a professional league or not? shit or get off the pot.

I am from Europe... Not a single league on any sport has a salary cap... That being saíd: I LOVE THE SALARY CAP!!! WHY? Every European League of any sport has max 5 teams, who dominate the rest of the league, for decades! FC Bayern Munich just became German Soccer Champs for the 12th time in a row... Boring af! Real Madrid and FC Barcelona is the same in Spain... England has the 5 team at the top... Hockey in DEL has 4 teams (to fight for the championship) and thats it... The salary cap is the tool, to have a balanced league! You will never change my mind on this... Maybe you guys from North America look at the situation in Europe!!! I dont talk about the atmosphere in the buildings, but the leagues themselves... The atmosphere is better in Europe live at the games, but if you are fan of a team or two, salary cap is the way to go! So everybody should be celebrate something in life time... Well maybe everybody, but us Leafs fans. xD The salary cap is a great idea, which could be done better, BUT its the right way to go imo!

In my opinion, 1 major point against the hard cap is that parody erodes a product sometimes. There is something to be said about dreading the yankees, the lakers, etc. Fans stay interested because the power balance is not always fair. Again, just my opinion, but the NHL product is so diluted, i dont feel anything towards it sometimes.

Good video. Just a few thoughts here ... The biggest downside to the salary cap is that it results in far too much player movement in free agency. I lost a lot of interest in the NHL after 2005 because players were always migrating away from my favorite team for "cap reasons," and it was impossible for the team to build a roster over time the way it used to. This mirrors my complete loss of interest in pro football back in the 1990s after the NFL implemented a salary cap, by the way. THE single best thing the NHL could do under these circumstances is give teams a strong incentive to keep players on their roster for a long time. Perhaps a player's salary cap hit would reduce over time if they stayed with one team -- like, 20% of the salary is exempt from the cap after the player's 4th year, 40% after the 7th year, 60% after the 10th year, etc. If a player stays on his original team for 15 years, then NONE of his salary counts against the team's cap. This would help promote continuity and team loyalty, and help fans identify their favorite players with the teams that drafted and developed them. The NHL could help mitigate the minor imbalance this would cause between "rich" and "poor" teams (since "rich" teams will still be better positioned than "poor" teams to keep their home-grown talent for 12+ years) by having the exempted portions of the players' salaries drawn from a common revenue pool that is dedicated for these long-term "player-team identity preservation" contracts.

I don't mind leagues having a luxury tax. Teams with big money could go over the tax and the teams that don't get the tax money. It all balances out in the end.

The reason for a salary cap is that there would be nothing stopping the owners with money to spend. If there are no rules WHY would the owners with money not spend it? The owners are not one big blob who think or acts the same and the owners with money would use it to get all the best players on their team so his team will have a bigger chance to win. Would it make a great league? NO! Which is why there is a salary cap so ALL teams can compete. Simple really... So it is disingenuous to say that "the owners" are spending money left and right. NO, the owners are NOT one big blob which means SOME owners would spend al lthe money gaining an unfair advantage making for a poor product overall on the ice.