PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935 Report post Posted July 20, 2015 (edited) Pretty much. Just have a percentage of home grown talents contracts not count VS the cap. It would reward teams that build through the draft, instead of having them get blown up like the Blackhawks have had to do twice now. The cap does reward teams that build through draft. entry level deals and second RFA deals are usually significantly lower than comparable players who are UFAs. You just have to keep doing it so you have young cheap homegrown players coming up to take spots. Also, when players are UFAs, they often take the hometown discount (Toews and Kane didn't go that route despite what Frank thinks) I like that it's on the players to realize that being on a good team sort of inflates (or maybe 'maximizes' is a better word) their value. I don't feel the Blackhawks situation is very bad and doesn't warrant changes. They could have planned better for the cap crunch and got more of a return when they weren't desperate. But the went all in for the cup and it payed off. They also have a number of non-homegrown players on the team Hossa, Carcillo, Rozisival, Rundblad, (Versteeg might count now since they had to trade for him) The cap has made it so you can't bring in too many players like this without losing some homegrown talent. This can be seen as another way the cap rewards teams for building from within rather than without. Edited July 20, 2015 by PavelValerievichDatsyuk Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
toby91_ca 620 Report post Posted July 20, 2015 Players are making more money today than prior to the first lockout....there should be no debating that fact. Sure, there may have been the odd player (Lidstrom) making as much as the highest paid players today, but team payrolls from 2003-2004 to today have increased by about 50-55% Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
number9 3,297 Report post Posted July 20, 2015 I don't know what a N word is but whatever if you don't like the word midget don't use it instead of making a big deal out of it. And that's all I have to say to that irrelevant OT stuff. Hossa left the Penguins because he thought he had a better chance with the Wings to win the cup back then and that's why he signed on a 1 year contract and not taking Pittsburgh's 7x7 offer. Like I said spending is just one part, teams also need the right people in the front office a team that has chemistry and a strong development system. Being a big spender doesn't implicit being stupid with money, so even without a cap I don't see any of the current UFA players getting much more because the class simple wasn't that impressive. I agree the fans crawled back which was a mistake because it will mean there's going to be another one. What a pleasant bubble you live in. It's amazing how Chicago can retool constantly and Pittsburgh can't do anything. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rivalred 630 Report post Posted August 16, 2015 With the Kane situation going on and see how it will play out, Chicago may have a way out of his contract with a moral clause How interesting Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
frankgrimes 1,836 Report post Posted August 17, 2015 (edited) With the Kane situation going on and see how it will play out, Chicago may have a way out of his contract with a moral clause How interesting I'd wait till the dust is settled on this because it's far different from the Voynov situation but if he is guilty they'll might as well cancel his contract. Which would take the whole regret tomorrow idea to new dimensions...cause it would basically be a 84 million one night stand (probably the most expensive in the history lol). One thing to keep in mind, Seabrook is entering the last year of his contract and I'm sure he is looking at at least a Boychuck type of deal will Chicago be able to offer that ? Edited August 17, 2015 by frankgrimes Share this post Link to post Share on other sites