why can't the NHL have a salary cap like baseball?

[FLWINGSFAN4013 5]

why can't the NHL have a salary cap like baseball? then we could pay luxury taxes just like the yankees if Mr. I wanted to, and have the players we want. big teams can not help that they have the $$$ while teams are giving big contracts just to be at or barely over the floor.

[xBrave_Heartx 0]

because then its not an even playing field is it?

[Statts 4]

Not familiar with the MLB cap structure.

I wouldn't mind something that says a team can retain drafted players and be slightly over the cap. But Im probably being a homer when I say that.

[Echolalia 2,961]

The MLB's salary cap prevents parity from occurring, which is what the league hopes will stimulate failing markets. The idea is, if there team has a better chance of making it to the playoffs, more people might be interested in paying attention to a more successful team. As long as Holland stays ahead of the curve I can't really complain with the cap. A lot of me thinks it is a good idea, but I would also like to see something implemented where drafted and developed players only count 50% towards the cap or something similar. This way the playing field is still evened, and it is also able to reward organizations for their investment in behind-the-scenes folks. This may also lead to a greater interest in minor league hockey (although doubtful).

[Statts 4]

The MLB's salary cap prevents parity from occurring, which is what the league hopes will stimulate failing markets. The idea is, if there team has a better chance of making it to the playoffs, more people might be interested in paying attention to a more successful team. As long as Holland stays ahead of the curve I can't really complain with the cap. A lot of me thinks it is a good idea, but I would also like to see something implemented where drafted and developed players only count 50% towards the cap or something similar. This way the playing field is still evened, and it is also able to reward organizations for their investment in behind-the-scenes folks. This may also lead to a greater interest in minor league hockey (although doubtful).

Agree with the bolded.

That's what I was trying to say, but you said it a lot better me.

[FLWINGSFAN4013 5]

who cares if it is even....its a business and whoever has the best product so be it.....just because you have the best players on paper doesn't guarantee a championship

[thedisappearer 291]

Agree with the bolded.

That's what I was trying to say, but you said it a lot better me.

The NBA kinda does something like that. You can offer more money, above league max, to resign players, and they exemption levels for certain things.

[Drake_Marcus 890]

why can't the NHL have a salary cap like baseball? then we could pay luxury taxes just like the yankees if Mr. I wanted to, and have the players we want. big teams can not help that they have the $$$ while teams are giving big contracts just to be at or barely over the floor.

Because the Cap in baseball is a joke. Baseball fans think it's pathetic, why should we adopt it?

[FLWINGSFAN4013 5]

is it not a joke to have a floor cap? the marlins spend the least amount and can produce and play in front of 500 fans a game and still turn a profit.

[Louisville 112]

I'd rather the NHL do it like this, and I was curious to see what you guys thought. A guy on Buccigross's column suggested putting a clause in the CBA by which a team who signs a player they drafted signs to an extension when they become a UFA will only have a certain percentage of their salary go towards the cap. His point being that the cap was supposed to stop crazy free agent spending, now it just seems like teams who draft well are getting screwed. Here's the letter:

Hi John,

Almost as soon as he was signed, the Wings said that the Marian Hossa signing was likely a one year and out situation as they could not retain him and Zetterberg and Franzen for 2009-10. But, looking at their cap situation for next year, I don't see how they will be able to keep more than one of the three.

Assuming Hossa signs elsewhere, Holland will need to give both Mule and Z big raises, likely around $5 million and $8 mil, respectively. But they will probably have less than $9 million in cap space going into free agency. So, unless both decide to take a gigantic hometown discount, one of them is likely going to walk, simply because of the cap restrictions. This seems totally unfair to the Wings.

Much has been made of the fact that guys like Lidstrom, Datsyuk, Zetterberg and Franzen were taken ridiculously late in the draft, but have all become star players. But what good is that when, because of the cap, you won't be able to keep your own players? The cap was supposed to curb crazy free-agent spending by big-market teams; but, in this case, it seems to punish teams who draft well and simply want to keep their players. Why couldn't there be a clause in the CBA by which a team who signs a player they drafted to an extension when they become a UFA will only have 60 percent of their salary count against the cap?

Matt Hutter

Upland, Calif.

I think that would be a reasonable discussion to have, Matt. To be able to keep players at a cap discount if they were drafted by the team or with the team more than, say, five years. It's important for the NHL to have great teams. To have 30 of the same kind of team would be boring.

I think it's brilliant.

[Barrie 900]

Yea I think there should be something where teams can go over the cap if they are re-signing their own players.

I'd also be for a luxury tax, even if it's 100%. I think the hard cap is a bad idea. Parity sucks!

[Wingsor 2]

teams can go over the cap if they are re-signing their own players.

PERFECT SOLUTION! And this also allows for some exciting dynasties to exist, and players and fans are rewarded for their loyalty instead of this communistic home wrecking CBA nonsense (and dynasties once in awhile help sell the game. fat chance of that happening anymore with the CBA blech)

PERFECT! someone please make this a petition or something!

Edited February 4, 2009 by Wingsor

[talex 1]

cap = welfare for teams that cannot support themseleves, sports are supposed to be about strongest getting to the top, it will eventually cause all teams to be equally crappy and despite what Bettman thinks, it will cause loss of interest in an already struggling product, may not be in the next year or 2, but it is coming. The luxury tax is the best way, but it needs to spread around to the lesser markets to aid them in competing, not forcing a market that cannot compete to be competitive. The draft discount idea is interesting, but it would damage free agency so I do not know if the NHLPA would approve of that...

Who knows, I just hate the cap.

[egroen 384]

I love the idea for a "cap discount" to sign your free agents you drafted. There is also talk of exceeding the cap for one franchise player on a team.

Somehow Holland has managed to keep the Wings near the top, but for the vast majority of NHL teams, when they get there, their team is more than likey to blow up within a season or two, and they will find themselves near the bottom. That sucks, and is horrible for keeping a fan base.

[Datsook 0]

The MLB's salary cap prevents parity from occurring, which is what the league hopes will stimulate failing markets. The idea is, if there team has a better chance of making it to the playoffs, more people might be interested in paying attention to a more successful team. As long as Holland stays ahead of the curve I can't really complain with the cap. A lot of me thinks it is a good idea, but I would also like to see something implemented where drafted and developed players only count 50% towards the cap or something similar. This way the playing field is still evened, and it is also able to reward organizations for their investment in behind-the-scenes folks. This may also lead to a greater interest in minor league hockey (although doubtful).

I also agree, that seems to be a very good idea; rewarding those who can draft and develop well.

[BeeRYCE 2]

PERFECT SOLUTION! And this also allows for some exciting dynasties to exist, and players and fans are rewarded for their loyalty instead of this communistic home wrecking CBA nonsense (and dynasties once in awhile help sell the game. fat chance of that happening anymore with the CBA blech)

PERFECT! someone please make this a petition or something!

You REALLY need to change your avatar/signature.

[up2here 41]

I think the cap works for now. I was tired of people saying the Wings won because they had the highest payroll.

[Hockeytown_Ryan 119]

And with all the talk and debate about attendance?(whatever) Have you seen the ticket prices in New York?????? (For the Yankees) 61.00 for the cheap seats

with a high payroll means we as fans pay more for it....

Edited February 4, 2009 by Hockeytown_Ryan

[BlakChamber 8]

And with all the talk and debate about attendance?(whatever) Have you seen the ticket prices in New York?????? (For the Yankees) 61.00 for the cheap seats

with a high payroll means we as fans pay more for it....

Heh, that's a good point. If they Wings went back to an 80 million dollar payroll, there's no way in hell the ticket prices would go down.

[VM1138 1,921]

I think the cap works for now. I was tired of people saying the Wings won because they had the highest payroll.

Me, too, but I'm also tired of crappy teams weighing everyone else down because hey can't afford to run their teams. That only guarantees teams will exist longer than they should, which ruins the product being sold.

[NeverForgetMac25 483]

And with all the talk and debate about attendance?(whatever) Have you seen the ticket prices in New York?????? (For the Yankees) 61.00 for the cheap seats

with a high payroll means we as fans pay more for it....

Cue OsGod.........

[BlakChamber 8]

Cue OsGod.........

[dat's sick 1,002]

But.. if we don't keep Hossa we will probably be able to keep all our "homegrown" players, like Franzen.

I think we are all just really spoiled and don't like the thought of possibly having to give up a great player.

I'm sure the cap has it's share of problems, but overall I think the NHL is much, much more interesting now than it was before.

The battle for the playoff spots that we're starting to see now is almost as interesting to me as the playoffs itself.

[Opie 308]

The NFL cap is proven to be the best in the major sports, following it is a good idea for any league thinking of using a cap.

The goal of a cap is to create parity, so you can have a Superbowl (championship) like this past one. Where regardless of record (because in the NFL, on any given Sunday, anyone but the Lions can win) the game will be closely contested and create high interest, not just in the one game but the league.

The problem lies with ownership not the league on this one. If Nashville wanted to be successful they would live a little higher off of the floor than currently, it is their fault they are not more competitive.

Same with the Lions, it is not the cap or parity's fault they went 0-fer, that is the orgs fault for not evaluating talent better.

A team like the Wings, proven astute eye for talent (deeper in the draft and FA) will always be near the top, same for the Steelers, Colts, and Patriots. The ORG values winning (or at least sees winning as a better way to create revenue) more than they do the money currently in pocket.

In any league/industry you are going to have people that use the system to THEIR advantage. With no cap the Wings used the system to put together an all star roster and win a cup. In the new NHL Nashville is taking advantage of the situation by getting money from other teams to help them pay for their team.

I do however agree with, and really like, the idea of being able to keep you drafted players at a lower % cap hit!!!

[Lovin Jiri Fischer 147]

I think a good idea would be for players that a team drafted to not count toward the cap, or to have it higher for drafted players. This would encourage teams to draft and develop their own home-grown talent rather than buy a bunch of players.