• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
shoe

Salary Cap rewards for cup finalists

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

The salary cap thing in general bothers me. I would prefer a luxury tax system. If our owner Mike Illitch want's to spend more, let him. Why force teams to play down to a level?

On another note, I like the idea of a franchise tag. Designating one person that does not count against the cap.

As for winning the stanley cup, give the winner a compensatory pick at the end of the draft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Give the winners a bonus like, say... a day with the Cup.

Works for me.

If that's not enough, have each team pitch in to a kitty at the beginning of the year and let the winners get the pot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we're moving away from the current system, how about this:

Players who are under contract to the first NHL team to own their rights (via draft or free agency), who have not at any time been the property of any other team, count against the cap for only 50% of their average annual salary with a maximum reduction of 7.5% of the cap, or . The cap hit could not sink below the league minimum salary, however.

For example, Datsyuk's cap hit would be $3,350,000. Kindl, however, would have a cap hit of $500k this season and $525k next season.

This would encourage teams to draft and develop their own players rather than try and buy champions. It would result in teams working harder to make sure they properly scout players and drafting. Teams with strong scouting like Detroit would be able to keep good, strong teams together longer. Teams that drafted poorly would have to bring in more outside help and would likely be mediocre for the most part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we're moving away from the current system, how about this:

Players who are under contract to the first NHL team to own their rights (via draft or free agency), who have not at any time been the property of any other team, count against the cap for only 50% of their average annual salary with a maximum reduction of 7.5% of the cap, or . The cap hit could not sink below the league minimum salary, however.

For example, Datsyuk's cap hit would be $3,350,000. Kindl, however, would have a cap hit of $500k this season and $525k next season.

This would encourage teams to draft and develop their own players rather than try and buy champions. It would result in teams working harder to make sure they properly scout players and drafting. Teams with strong scouting like Detroit would be able to keep good, strong teams together longer. Teams that drafted poorly would have to bring in more outside help and would likely be mediocre for the most part.

I don't know if 50% is too high maybe but the general idea is pretty good. I would like something like this I think. I'm guessing players who started with a team then were traded then went back to their old team wouldn't count for cap relief?

Like Drake in 2008 wouldn't be cut in half because he left Detroit for most of his career.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we're moving away from the current system, how about this:

Players who are under contract to the first NHL team to own their rights (via draft or free agency),.....

Good idea, bad implementation of the idea.

It's like how the NBA does it in a way.

I think 50% is wayyyy too high. 20% seems more reasonable, maybe only 15%. The cap is fine, I don't mind it anymore. The Wings are one of the few teams that spend up to the cap anyways, so we still have an advantage in that sense. Even at 15-20%, the Wings would still save millions of cap space.

If you start doing 50%, teams like Pittsburgh and Chicago would develop into 20 year dynasties since they'd only have to pay so little.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The salary cap thing in general bothers me. I would prefer a luxury tax system. If our owner Mike Illitch want's to spend more, let him. Why force teams to play down to a level?

On another note, I like the idea of a franchise tag. Designating one person that does not count against the cap.

As for winning the stanley cup, give the winner a compensatory pick at the end of the draft.

I like this Idea, Said player should also have to wear the C.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good idea, bad implementation of the idea.

It's like how the NBA does it in a way.

I think 50% is wayyyy too high. 20% seems more reasonable, maybe only 15%. The cap is fine, I don't mind it anymore. The Wings are one of the few teams that spend up to the cap anyways, so we still have an advantage in that sense. Even at 15-20%, the Wings would still save millions of cap space.

If you start doing 50%, teams like Pittsburgh and Chicago would develop into 20 year dynasties since they'd only have to pay so little.

Chicago next season, for players currently signed who are expected to be on the roster barring trades or waiver activity, would save an astounding $12,256,731 if it were 50%, as they have twice that number committed to homegrown players. This is compared to Detroit saving $18,352,272. Pittsburgh would be saving 16,754,166.

So how exactly are Chicago and Pittsburgh becoming 20-year dynasties? Detroit is saving more in cap space than either of them under this potential rule, AND has the best roster among players currently signed. Pittsburgh would have about $4m more in cap space available than Detroit, while Detroit would have $16m more available than Chicago.

Detroit's "needs" are to add three solid two-way grinding forwards who are willing to fight, and a solid two-way physical defenseman who excels on the PK, blocks shots, throws punishing checks and will stand up for his teammates. With the savings listed above, and the rumored cap of $58.8m, the Wings would have around $18.9m to fill those spots.

Chicago's cap hit would still be $47.25m, and that is needing 4 forwards, 3 defensemen, and 1 goalie. Figure Niemi, Hjalmarsson, Hendry, and Brennan total around $6.75m to sign, so a cap hit of $3.375m. That leaves four forwards to sign with about $8m. Chicago's top two lines are signed, they just need to sign Ladd and three bottom six guys with that $8m. Perhaps it's Ladd, Madden, Eager, and Burish? Maybe Burish is dropped in favor of Jack Skille or Bryan Bickell? Who knows. But the Hawks would be able to put together a decent bottom six as well.

Regardless, this wouldn't lead to 20-year dynasties. It would lead to teams trying to keep their best home grown talent rather than just shuffling players around. It would reduce trading activity, but increase team scouting and the ability for teams to market players as they would be more likely to spend longer periods with the team. How can you market a star player if he's only going to be with the team for three weeks, and then market the new star who replaced him in the summer and is gone at the end of the season?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this