First off, I'm a HUGE hockey fan. I grew up in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada (the Oilers) but moved to Atlanta back in 2000 (I'm 45 now). When I moved to the US, between the state of the Canadian dollar and no cap being in place, there were 3 teams in Canada that could have easily been moved after 2 had already left Canada. Then the lockout of 2004/2005 hit. I was firmly in the owners corner during that lost season. At the time, payroll for the players compared to income was around 77%. Seriously WAY too high. And the last thing I wanted to see was my Edmonton Oilers move.
Now we're down to 57%. The NHL while saying 46%, will take around the 50/50 mark. And when you look at the NFL, NBA and even MLB, they're all around that mark.
That said, I agree with the players should not be taking a pay cut. They gave back a lot after loosing the season back in 2004/2005. And I agree with increased revenue sharing. But the cap is what keeps teams like the Rangers and the Leafs don't spend huge amounts trying to buy a team. It's what allowed more parity in the league.
What I think what will end up happening, is sliding scale over the next few years decreasing the players share while not hitting them with a pay cut. The only question is if they will have an agreement before September 15 when the owners WILL lock out the players. There is no way will the league let Donald Feur take the NHLPA into a strike as playoffs are coming up. He did that with the MLB and the owners will never let him that kind of power.