38 replies to this topic

[shoe]

Something they have been talking about on the sports radio stations here in Toronto was that winning teams should get a salary cap increase reward for teams that make it to the finals. Its actually a Bob Goodenow idea.

As Glenn Heally talked about it: players that take their teams to the finals have completed the ultimate goal and should get a raise for doing a good job so for the next 2 or 3 years that winning team should get a cap raise of a few extra million.

I personally like the idea why should a team that has drafted and traded well have to loose its assets because of player inflation when younger kids with promising careers come out of heir entry level contracts. I think its good for player/employee - team/employer retention.

They talk about it here ( past the half way mark of the clip)

http://pmd.fan590.co...llick-(7am-hour).mp3

[sherwood40]

Thats the stupidest thing I have ever heard of. So because chicago won the cup they get an extra 2 million to pay out for possible more talented people in the free market, giving them a lot better chance at winning the cup again the next year. It also means teams like florida, toronto, islanders who are getting good draft picks won't be able to make the finals due to a lower salary. Time for this topic gets thrown in the trash.

[rick zombo]

Sure why not? They should also get the 1st overall draft pick for the next 2 or 3 years as a reward too!!!!

Terrible idea.

It eliminates the "parity" the NHL wants to enforce. The idea of having a cap is to ensure one team or a couple of teams don't dominate for long periods of time, and weaker teams have a level playing field to build for a championship.

Again, terrible idea.

[Broken 16]

So the great get better and everyone else stays the same. Forgive my ignorance if I'm not understanding right, but that seems really dumb to me.

[Broken 16]

Sure why not? They should also get the 1st overall draft pick for the next 2 or 3 years as a reward too!!!!

Terrible idea.

It eliminates the "parity" the NHL wants to enforce. The idea of having a cap is to ensure one team or a couple of teams don't dominate for long periods of time, and weaker teams have a level playing field to build for a championship.

Again, terrible idea.

I don't think it would completely negate it... just for teams that are good enough to make the Finals. Lol. The salary cap is more of a means to sew up deep pockets so every team has the same chance. I'm just not clear on why the league would want to give great teams a better chance next season.

Maybe this could work if everyone's contract was up at the end of each season, but it seems to me that if contracts fell a certain way, some teams would actually be granted a slush fund to improve their team after making a Finals appearance. It makes no sense to me. Maybe I'm missing something?

[2guns]

It's a terrible and lame idea.

[Bannedforlife]

So if a team wins the cup 3 years in a row they could potentially have a salary cap 9 million dollars higher than everyone else? I wonder what would happen the 4th year?

[soultrain]

why not just be able to tag 2 players as "franchise players" that don't count against the cap...unless you trade them or dump them.

[shoe]

So because chicago won the cup they get an extra 2 million to pay out for possible more talented people in the free market, giving them a lot better chance at winning the cup again the next year. It also means teams like florida, toronto, islanders who are getting good draft picks won't be able to make the finals due to a lower salary.

Interesting, but I have to say show me a good Toronto draft pick???????

Also your looking at this from a Chicago point of view this year look at it from a wings perspective 2 years ago we could have used this to retain our own guys like Sameulsson and not had to sign Williams.

keep in mind this is a few extra million to retain depth players going from 800 000 -1.2 million to maybe a raise in the high 1 mil low 2 mil range, not a 10 million dollar big name player to add to a potent roster.

[softshoes]

Something they have been talking about on the sports radio stations here in Toronto was that winning teams should get a salary cap increase reward for teams that make it to the finals. Its actually a Bob Goodenow idea.

As Glenn Heally talked about it: players that take their teams to the finals have completed the ultimate goal and should get a raise for doing a good job so for the next 2 or 3 years that winning team should get a cap raise of a few extra million.

I personally like the idea why should a team that has drafted and traded well have to loose its assets because of player inflation when younger kids with promising careers come out of heir entry level contracts. I think its good for player/employee - team/employer retention.

They talk about it here ( past the half way mark of the clip)

http://pmd.fan590.co...-(7am-hour).mp3

Can we fine them hard for tanking it to draft higher?

[rick zombo]

Also, funny this reward scheme didn't come up last summer when Detroit lost Hossa, Hudler, Samuelson. and Kopecky and Pittsburgh lost Scuderi and Gill.

The Hawks sold the farm to win a cup this year and now they have to clean up their own mess. No team should be rewarded for signing Campbell to a 7.5M contract.

The fact that this is even being talking about is borderline infuriating.

[softshoes]

Also, funny this reward scheme didn't come up last summer when Detroit lost Hossa, Hudler, Samuelson. and Kopecky and Pittsburgh lost Scuderi and Gill.

The Hawks sold the farm to win a cup this year and now they have to clean up their own mess. No team should be rewarded for signing Campbell to a 7.5M contract.

The fact that this is even being talking about is borderline infuriating.

You left out how much they are paying the backup goalie.

[hooon]

I was looking at the hawks cap situation yesterday... they are honestly more screwed than I could have ever hoped. Assuming no one buys out Campbell and Huet's contract, they literally have NO room to sign their remaining roster spots. It's gonna take a big trade or two just to clear enough room to fill out their roster.

Even though the Wings offseason is shaping up to be a boring one, we all know it'll still be really exciting to watch the Hawks dismantle.

[Drake_Marcus]

That goes so far against the idea of parity that you might as well just abolish the cap all together. The whole point of the salary cap was to give non-contenders the same level playing field as Cup winners.

I would've been so on board this train in the summer of 2008.

[Z and D for the C]

Must be a republican who thought of this idea.

[PrairieDawg]

The players on the team should get a bonus that doesn't reflect on the cap at all.

[jeff48109]

As Glenn Heally talked about it: players that take their teams to the finals have completed the ultimate goal and should get a raise for doing a good job so for the next 2 or 3 years that winning team should get a cap raise of a few extra million.

the players do get rewarded and get a raise by playing well to win the cup; they just get the raise from another club.

this isnt an idea that is easily to implement. so if they get a $2 million raise in the cap for the next year, and they don't win the next year, they will be over the cap and have to purge players?

[McAwesome]

I do not think this is a very good idea, the concept that teams who win get rewarded with a higher salary cap is the exact opposite of what the salary cap was intended to do, force competitive balance by limiting the amount a team can spend on player salaries, basically preventing teams from signing every available star player (i.e '01 Avs, '02 Red Wings, etc).

Some ideas I have heard that I agree with are as follows:

1) Allowing each team to designate a player whose contract does not count against the salary cap, like they do in the KHL.

2) Allowing for a reduced cap hit for contracts signed by players who were drafted within the organization.

Using #1 as an example, the Wings could designate Datsytuk's contract as cap-exempt for this season, since it is the highest cap hit, allowing them more cap space to attract a high-end free agent, say Kovalchuk @ 7 mil cap hit, then next season they designate Kovy's contract since it will be the highest. This is a rough sketch, any suggestions to particulars are welcomed, but you could put a restriction on only being able to designate contracts in force prior to July 1st, preventing teams from being able to offer a league-max salary and having it be cap-exempt right away.

Using #2 as an example, say they allow a reduced cap hit for players drafted by the team they are under contract to, i.e Zetterberg, they could allow a 15% reduced cap hit up to 2mil max, which would reduce his cap hit by about 900k. Using this system the Wings would have about 5.16mil more in cap space, not counting RFA's whose contracts have not been resigned.

[Adidarw]

I prefer a system where players you draft and develop don't count against the cap. Just set the cap really low. Players you sign later in their careers will be the only guys who count against the cap.

EDIT: similar to McAwesome's #2 idea. Sorry, I didn't fully read your post.

Edited by Adidarw, 12 June 2010 - 01:25 PM.

[HelmerFan]

YES, and the cup winner should get a 25 million dollar cap increase, and the ability to take any player off any team, and be awarded 50 point at the start of the season too!