Salary Floor

[Commissioner]

A salary floor is when a franchise has a MINIMUM yearly salary requirement for on ice personnel.

Discussion, opinions, thoughts?!?!

[Carolina GM]

I do believe in a floor and a ceiling .. which sounds like a salary cap!

[ColumbusGM]

I'm of the opinion that teams should build however they want, a salary floor is not neccessary, as any team not paying enough cash to ice a decent team will lose fans anyways, it is basically it's own punishment.

[Detroit Cherni]

I've always stated that I am a friend of players making their money, and am NOT a supporter of a salary cap. However, some of the contracts we've seen in recent years, going above the 8 - 9 million dollar per year on average range, to me, is totally out of tune with the reality of the game. And the fact is, we have players being signed (Marc Savard aside cuz that was a good deal for Jack), that are making much more than their value. I'm sorry, but the frenzy of this past free agent market showed how average players are starting to make well above average salaries.

Yes, times are good in the NsHL financially. However, my question is, why not nip it in the butt before we are having to have this discussion a couple years down the road when the NsHLPA is charging you $6,000,000, for a fourth line plugger. And this isn't the PA's fault. A salary cap is ordinarily the fault of owners who give their GM's too much leeway to spend. And when they've overspent, it only then becomes an issue. There were I believe four players that I bid on personally this past off season and offered a fair, decent contract with money as to what their game brought in comparison to other players of their caliber in the league. Not one of them signed with me. And all four of them signed for millions more than they were probably worth. Once again, it's not the PA's fault, as their job is to do what's best for their clients. Most of the time these types of signings come from desperate GM's who are either too eager to win it all, or to eager to repair previous mistakes.

Now I'm not going to mention names here, but I do agree that there has to be some control, and we better start adding to the controls of the GM's because the last two seasons it has started to get a little stupid. However, there are rules in place that do help control that. The age of free agency being 31, I believe is a little outdated, but it helps control things. And the fact that I believe there's a five year cap on contract signings. So you can't sign a guy for 15 years or so.

Anyhow, as someone who's spent a lot of time around the NHL in my media days, I can honestly say I do, unfortunately see this starting to become an issue in our league. It's not about small markets vs. big markets, as the league was proactive in correcting that before it got too out of hand, with revenue sharing. But this is to control General Managers who can't control their spending. And I believe that we're almost at that point that free agency is within a couple years of spiraling out of control.

[NYRangersGM]

Dave, the discussion is salary floor not salary cap, I know one will lead to the other some day. I'm putting on my Gm Hat for this one.
if we do not have a salary floor it appears it could affect some teams trying to make the playoffs. we play each team in our division 8 times, say Atlanta is in a division with 5 teams and two of those teams are playing with mostly ahl talent on their roster. this means they play 16 games against teams that are not making their best effort to win games now. you fatten your point total against weaker competition and say Boston is kept out of the playoffs by 2 points playing in a tougher division where each team is trying to win every night. all divisions are not filled with the same talent and no one can expect each divisions talent to be equal, we just want an even playing field. its this way in major league baseball, look at the Yankees and red sox's spending to get better and teams like the Pirates dumping salary. the fans in New York and Boston are happy and go to the ball park, the fans in Pittsburgh get screwed and feel used. salary floor forces teams to spend money to put the best possible team on the ice. I'm a team with a very high payroll, but I want to win and not watch the playoffs. my team makes money with the high payroll. Philly has spent a lot of money this off season but Jack wants to win now, this is the attitude that makes this league a winner. you make every attempt to put the best team on the ice to win period. teams can still win now and draft and develop prospects. look at the prospects in LA, Vancouver, Ottawa. these are teams that have consistently won games. its about making every attempt to win

[LAKingsGM]

Salary floor comments, please. Salary floor. Dave......salary floor.............salary floor. Thank you.






Salary floor...





Salary floor.

[LAKingsGM]

Did I mention I want to talk about what people think of a salary floor?



Okay.



And now, back to salary floor comments already in progress.

[CapitalsGM]

Given the fact that this thread is restricted to comments on the salary floor, I will only say that although I do understand the reasoning behind implementing a salary floor, I do not think it should be implemented without a formal salary cap on both team spending and individual contracts handed out to players.

I think that the salary cap, salary floor and individual player caps go hand-in-hand and I for one, feel that if a salary floor is implemented, the other two salary constraints should be as well. All three constraints will further perpetuate the parity in our league, which I feel is becoming increasingly important.

[torontogm]

I also agree that any discussion around a salary floor should include discussion around salary cap. I'm not a big fan of either, but will live with whatever reality comes of these discussions.

Here's my concern about a salary floor on its' own... a team goes into the season with a fairly young club close to the salary floor and struggles horribly (yeah, I know parts of this sounds like an autobiography here) and then at the trade deadline cannot move veterans (or youngsters for that matter) to improve their team in the future due to money constraints - this hurts the struggling team, and limits the opportunity for the top teams to make a deal that will help their playoff chances. My other concern is that this may artificially inflate contracts - with only a salary floor the temptation becomes signing players for massive 1-year contracts to make sure you are in compliance for the season. That would have far greater damage to salary structures than anything that's happening now - it would not necessarily make their teams any more competitive and would ultimately make it tough for teams that are not in rebuilding mode. The NsHLPA would be crazy not to jump at deals like that, but it would make determining fair market value pretty crazy.

Currently the majority of teams have reasonable salary levels - only one team is projecting to go into the red at the moment (and they are almost certain to get a round or two of playoffs in, so it's a calculated risk). Currently 3 teams are projected to have more than $10 million more in their bank at the end of the season (Cal +16, Car +25 & TB +11) - it would seem reasonable to assume that they will spend as their core players get better & enter the free agency market with more gusto as their teams become more competitive (sorry you three- not trying to take a shot at your current clubs). At the other end, 15 teams are projecting to be down more than $10 million in their bank account by the end of the season (Ana -10, Bos -10, Buf -18, Chi -18, Cmb -14, Dal -10, Det -24, Nas -19, NYR -25, Ott -10, Phi -20, Phx -12, SJS -12, Van -23), and most of those teams have a pretty good shot at playoff revenue, which should counter balance things a bit & only the one previously mentioned club is at risk for a financial meltdown (which is correctable through trades or playoff success). Of these 15 teams, those that miss the playoffs this year will have to reign in their spending next year, which suggests that a cap is probably not the way to go, either. I've only been around the league for one season, but at the moment I think that all the teams are pretty healthy in terms of competent player management, player development, and fiscal responsibility. Count me as moderately opposed to a salary floor (& cap).

As for Rich's argument about the schedule of playing in divisions with weak teams, this is also part of the natural cycle of a league... having said that, could the schedule be adjusted to make it less of a factor (sorry to open another can of worms, but Buffalo 5 games out of 9 to start the year is killing me ).

[Anaheim GM]

I am completely impressed with Jade's arguments and agree with them.

From my chair, the NsHL(PA) HAS gone through a business cycle, albeit a small one. Years 1 and 2 were years when teams spent somewhat wildly, followed by years 3,4, and 5 being much more conservative, particularly 4 and 5. Goalie salaries, defensemen, and role playing forwards came down in prices, I felt. Year 6 I think we saw a jump in salaries, however, I completely feel this to be driven by a new simulator that supposedly is a bit more consistently kind from a dollar standpoint.

Businesses move in cycles. Salaries will go up when the demand for players rises and teams have the capital to spend. Salaries will constrict when the opposite occurs, simply put.

Keep in mind that the NsHLPA Director and those involved with the NsHLPA are ALSO RESPONSIBLE FOR UPHOLDING THE INTEGRITY OF THE LEAGUE.

It does not happen very often, however, there are times when salary offers must be discussed with league officials before they can be approved in cases when a team is not financially viable. In other words: If you don't have the money, you can't afford to sign large ticket players, plain and simple.

The BOG/BOD has done a magnificent job of "watchdogging" the financial component, in my opinion. It has gotten involved when it had to and it made tough decisions to the betterment of the league.

This game is about balancing ALL of these components including the financial model. You can be the most successful game day coach and win every game, however, if your franchise is broke---GAME OVER.

This league takes a balance of winning and financial success to be considered successful. I strongly feel that with the "watchdog" policies that the BOD has in supplement with the addition of the BOG to watch the financial component, that are league is in very good hands. Couple this with a very solid group that make up the NsHLPA. This group looks after it's clients needs and wants, however this group also balances that by working hard to preserve the integrity and success of this league.

I think if we are all on the same page the financial component will flow NATURALLY over into the new league once GMs get a grasp on how much cash flow they actually will have in a season.

I've always been a proponent of letting business take it's course. My personal feelings are that it is a bit early to be discussing salary constrictions either way until this season has been totally completed in the new sim.

Just my two cents.

[ex-BluesGM]

I agree largely with the comments made by jade and Mark. While a salary floor may seem like a nice, tidy, impersonal way to deal with the issue of fair competition, it does a lot to alter the ultimate outcomes of the games. As Jade alluded you will see player salaries increase, trades be handcuffed and teams take on somewhat of a drone personality instead of the personality of their respective GMs.

The way to go about this situation is to rely on the internal methods already established by the BOD (and now also the responsibility of the BOG to some extent.) The BOD & Nate have done a good job in the past of weeding out the GMs who would harm the league and as not nice as that may be sometimes its necessary. The real issue that creates all the problems in this league financially (NOT THAT WE REALLY HAVE MANY PROBLEMS) is job security. Pretty much everyone's job is safe if they send in their lines, and don't lose money. The moves made by many GMs in this league would probably get them canned in real sports were they to backfire. Hell even just years of inadequate finishes (that only works for the Pitt Pirates in pro sports) will get you shown the door. I'm not saying people should be fired from their position so easily but I'm saying they can continue to be watched, realistically by the BOD and handled appropriately.