NHL Playoffs 2015 edition

It's become a daily routine now. I get off the train, and all the Flames fans get on and head to the sadledome

okay for now, let's pick your teams to win

and pick your top five players.

Anybody else thinking Bolts and Ducks in the finals?

Ducks looks really strong... but I am not sure about bolts.

Ducks are strong, but after last night's game, I have hope for the Flames.

However…



Damn Refs…

Well, by now the hawks are my favourites they're looking really solid!

GothicGothicness said:

Well, by now the hawks are my favourites they're looking really solid!

Click to expand...

I agree I'm changing my prediction to Hawks and Bolts.

Of course that will probably change in a few days too. I'm fickle like that.

Hockey stopped becoming interesting for a long time, because a few American clubs have enough money to buy a victory and the other poorer clubs basically don't stand any chance. Even the venerable Habs who have won 23 Stanley cups and sell out for every single one of their games cannot dream of paying such salaries. As soon as the likes of Dallas and Los Angeles became seriously invested in this sport it was all over.

Humanity has risen! said:

Hockey stopped becoming interesting for a long time, because a few American clubs have enough money to buy a victory and the other poorer clubs basically don't stand any chance. Even the venerable Habs who have won 23 Stanley cups and sell out for every single one of their games cannot dream of paying such salaries. As soon as the likes of Dallas and Los Angeles became seriously invested in this sport it was all over.

Click to expand...

Hmmm, quite the conundrum. If only there were some sort of system in place by the league to limit the amount spent by each team on players. Some sort of…..cap…on the salaries.

http://www.forbes.com/nhl-valuations/list/

Notice the top three teams in total revenue. New York, Toronto, Montreal, in that order. All Original Six teams. Two Canadian teams. Been over 20 years since any of those teams won the Cup, and since 1967 for Toronto.

But hey, nice theory. Let's blame Dallas (Ranked 16th total revenue) and LA (Ranked 7th).

In the Flames I do have faith. The Oilers.....now, that is another tale, but this next season could be interesting indeed!

Nephologist said:

Hmmm, quite the conundrum. If only there were some sort of system in place by the league to limit the amount spent by each team on players. Some sort of…..cap…on the salaries.

http://www.forbes.com/nhl-valuations/list/

Notice the top three teams in total revenue. New York, Toronto, Montreal, in that order. All Original Six teams. Two Canadian teams. Been over 20 years since any of those teams won the Cup, and since 1967 for Toronto.

But hey, nice theory. Let's blame Dallas (Ranked 16th total revenue) and LA (Ranked 7th).

Click to expand...

If you look at the revenues the clubs aren't that different. What it does is raise the stakes significantly. For instance the Molson family will never have nearly as much revenue as some of the oil barons who own professional sports teams. It represents much more for them. It is much harder to justify paying for a superstar player who will command a big salary in these cases. Add to that the fact that a hockey player from Toronto or Montreal will have to pay much more in taxes then it means that these clubs are put at an even bigger disadvantage.

Nevermind that the league has a salary cap.

The NHL has more parity than any of the other major pro sports in NA. It's been longer since any team won consecutive championships than in the NFL, MLB, or NBA.

Humanity has risen! said:

If you look at the revenues the clubs aren't that different. What it does is raise the stakes significantly. For instance the Molson family will never have nearly as much revenue as some of the oil barons who own professional sports teams. It represents much more for them. It is much harder to justify paying for a superstar player who will command a big salary in these cases. Add to that the fact that a hockey player from Toronto or Montreal will have to pay much more in taxes then it means that these clubs are put at an even bigger disadvantage.

Click to expand...

If that's the case then Calgary and Edmonton should be always winning since they're the oil capital of North America

Humanity has risen! said:

If you look at the revenues the clubs aren't that different. What it does is raise the stakes significantly. For instance the Molson family will never have nearly as much revenue as some of the oil barons who own professional sports teams. It represents much more for them. It is much harder to justify paying for a superstar player who will command a big salary in these cases. Add to that the fact that a hockey player from Toronto or Montreal will have to pay much more in taxes then it means that these clubs are put at an even bigger disadvantage.

Click to expand...

You have no clue what you are talking about do you?

All teams have to spend X amount of money a year and all teams can not spend more than Y amount of money a year.

"The NHL's salary cap for the 2014-15 season is $69 million, and the floor is $51 million. According to capgeek.com, 14 teams are currently projected to be within $2 million of the cap ceiling this season and 25 teams are projected to be above the midpoint of $60 million."

Also like any good team in almost any sports they do it through the draft. Which means they can not really leave a team until they reach the requirements of free agency.

"Unrestricted free agency[edit]

On July 1 of a given year, the following players become unrestricted free agents, free to sign with any team without compensation to the former team.
1.Group 3 free agents: Players who have reached age 27, or have 7 accrued years of NHL experience, whose contracts have expired
2.Group 6 free agents (must be elected by the player): Players who have reached age 25, who have 3 accrued years of professional experience (that is, beyond junior or collegiate hockey), and whose contracts have expired, but have played less than: 1.80 NHL games played for forwards and defensemen.
2.28 NHL games played for goaltenders.

3.Players whose contracts have been bought out by their former team.
4.Players who do not meet either Group 3 or Group 6 requirements, but who have not been tendered a contract offer by the Monday after the NHL Entry Draft or June 25 (whichever is later). All other players are Group 2 restricted free agents. (See the next section.)

For purposes of the above, an accrued year is generally defined as having been on an NHL roster for 40 games in a season (30 for goaltenders).

The current NHL CBA also had a Group 5 unrestricted free agency category, but when the age for unrestricted free agent dropped to age 28 after the 2006-07 season, it became moot, as such players would become Group 3 free agents.

Under the 2013 CBA MOU, teams are allowed to interview players from other teams, but cannot discuss contract teams, following the NHL Entry Draft until July 1.

Restricted free agency[edit]

All players whose contracts have expired, but who do not qualify as Group 3 or Group 6 free agents become restricted free agents (Group 2) on July 1 of a calendar year, provided that a team has tendered a qualifying offer by June 25 or the first Monday after the NHL Entry Draft, whichever is later. A qualifying offer is a single year contract offer that is either the same amount as the previous year, or a slight raise, according to the previous year's amount, and must be for the following amount as listed in the table below. For purposes of the table, a one-way qualifying offer is an offer that pays the player the same salary if assigned to the NHL or to the AHL, as opposed to a two-way contract, which has a higher NHL salary than an AHL (or for entry-level contracts, an ECHL) salary."

Unlike in Baseball where a team can spend over the salary cap and pay a luxury tax to the other teams. Or the NFL where they can structure contracts upfront or at the tail end. The NHL does not let these sort of practices happen.

Well, when is the last time that Toronto or Montreal got a superstar player? There's a reason they elude them.

Imagine you're the new Mario Lemieux. You have the choice of going to Texas where you will be taxed at I don't know, 30%, or to go to Montreal, where you will pay more than 60%. Which will you choose?

Humanity has risen! said:

Well, when is the last time that Toronto or Montreal got a superstar player? There's a reason they elude them.

Imagine you're the new Mario Lemieux. You have the choice of going to Texas where you will be taxed at I don't know, 30%, or to go to Montreal, where you will pay more than 60%. Which will you choose?

Click to expand...

Please read above? They don't have a choice and where do you think the best player(Connor Mcdavid) in the last 30 years or ever will be playing? Edmonton has the first pick this year so unless they are completely foolish he will be theirs for at least 7 years.

But please don't use any logic....