GM Meetings - video review, OT and $68M cap

[Canada 02]

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=445720

- more video review for situations like Detroit vs LA, puck going out of play, but undetected by refs
- talk of extending OT and switching sides for longer line changes
- possible $68M cap next season instead of $71M due to Canadian $ falling - lower cap next season should be good for the Flames with all their cap room and other teams having $3M less space than originally anticipated

[The Fonz]

With a 68M ceiling, where does that put the floor?

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

With a 68M ceiling, where does that put the floor?

According to Wikipedia it's 16M below the cap so 52M.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NHL_sal...ry_cap_history

Edit: or maybe not.
http://proicehockey.about.com/od/nhl...salary_cap.htm

- After estimating NHL revenue for the coming season, the league calculates the "midpoint" of the projected salary range.
- The salary cap is set at 15 percent above the midpoint. The salary floor is 15 percent below the midpoint.
- The range between salary cap and floor cannot fall below $16 million or rise above $28 million.

That would make it around 50-51M???

[EldrickOnIce]

30% less than cap, no?
So about 48.5?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by the fonz

with a 68m ceiling, where does that put the floor?

$50.26m

[Jacks]

If 68M is 115% of the midpoint then the midpoint would be 59.13M.
15% below 59.13M would be 50.26M.

No idea if that is right or not.

Edit: ^^ what he said.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

30% less than cap, no?
So about 48.5?

not exactly - it doesn't work off the cap, it works off the mid-point.

$59.13M x 1.15 = $68M

$59.13M x .85 - $50.26M

(but it isn't the cap ($68M) that is determined, it is the mid-point. So until we know what that is, we can only reverse-engineer a guess)

[schteve_d]

I know that they are not going to get rid of the shoot-out but I would like to see at least a longer overtime. At the very least a ten minute period. I hate everything about the shoot-out.

[Enoch Root]

A 10 minute OT, with the longer change (change ends) would produce a lot more winners IMO. Not going to check but if I remember correctly, about 13% of the games are decided by a SO. If we could get it to about 5%, I would have no problem with it.

[mikephoen]

Even 8 minutes with the long change would halve the number of shootouts I bet.

[Canada 02]

is there evidence that the long line change leads to more goals scored? In other words, are there more goals scored in the 2nd period than other periods?

Also, are more goals scored in 4 on 4 play than 5 on 5?

Longer OT is obvious. There is 1 goals scored every ~11 minutes in a typical NHL game, so if OT was increased to 10 minutes, ~91% of OT games should end before the shootout. That doesn't factor in long line changes or 4 on 4.

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by Canada 02

Also, are more goals scored in 4 on 4 play than 5 on 5?

Absolutely.

With the long change and 10 mins of 4 on 4 OT, I bet that 12.5% would fall to 5%.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by Canada 02

is there evidence that the long line change leads to more goals scored? In other words, are there more goals scored in the 2nd period than other periods?

Also, are more goals scored in 4 on 4 play than 5 on 5?

Longer OT is obvious. There is 1 goals scored every ~11 minutes in a typical NHL game, so if OT was increased to 10 minutes, ~91% of OT games should end before the shootout. That doesn't factor in long line changes or 4 on 4.

Yes, more goals are scored in the 2nd period than other period. Goal scoring by period from 97/98 (that is as far back as NHL.com went) until now is broken down as follows:

1st Period: 29.700%
2nd Period: 34.691%
3rd Period: 33.809%
Overtime: 1.800%

Edit: to add to this, 7-8% of all 3rd period goals are empty netters as well. So realistically the 2nd period shows significantly higher scoring with the 3rd period actually being the lowest scoring.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

So happy to hear about the OT. Anything that leads to the elimination of the shootout is great news to me. Such a silly way to determine a game.

[Heavy Jack]

The biggest news is the 68 mill cap. I hope Burke feasts on teams with this at the draft, we are set up perfectly to take advantage of bad deals to gain significant young assets and picks.

[Joborule]

Longer OTs is a good step. 5 minutes extra is no big deal and should lead to more results. Still would like to see Ties returned if game isn't deiced after extra time.

[schteve_d]

Originally Posted by Joborule

Longer OTs is a good step. 5 minutes extra is no big deal and should lead to more results. Still would like to see Ties returned if game isn't deiced after extra time.

Me too, but let's face it, it's not going to happen.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Heavy Jack

The biggest news is the 68 mill cap. I hope Burke feasts on teams with this at the draft, we are set up perfectly to take advantage of bad deals to gain significant young assets and picks.

I wonder if the cap not rising as expected will change the recent mentality to give out the Suter/Parise type deals in free agency. It seems a lot of teams have been doing business in a manner that expectations were the cap would eventually get close to $80 million. Could be a while until the CDN dollar gets back to par.

Not a fan of lengthening OT as games are long enough as is and it would make taking young kids on a weeknight pretty difficult.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by Joborule

Longer OTs is a good step. 5 minutes extra is no big deal and should lead to more results. Still would like to see Ties returned if game isn't deiced after extra time.

By far the biggest, most obvious problem is incenting teams to play for ot. Go to straight win/ losses and a lot less games would go to shoot out.

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by Joborule

Longer OTs is a good step. 5 minutes extra is no big deal and should lead to more results. Still would like to see Ties returned if game isn't deiced after extra time.

No thank you. A tie is such a gross way to end a game.