nyr34 said:
I doubt the PA would give up the guaranteed contracts, but here's something I'd rather see implemented: how about a contract totally based on incentives? I mean instead of negotitating what a player would make per year, how about per goal, point, etc.? I'm just throwing and idea out here...
It works only in bonuses, I don't think it could work as far as determining what that player actually makes per season. You have to remember this is their salary, this is how they make they're living. If I am Jan Hlavac and I can't put the puck in the net for most of the season and then I am continually a healthy scratch, what do I do? The players salaries they have to live on would vary too much from year to year. Imagine if you worked for a salary like that. It's just not reasonable.
It would also cause too many problems between players and coaches and the players themselves. A coach would have complete control over that players income, he could easily scratch a player for the majority of a season, and the player wouldn't make ****. On the other hand, would teammates really be teammates? If I were in the situation, I would want to win, but even more than that I would want to be the one to score the goals for my line. We might see more selfishness on the ice than ever before.
And what about the 3rd line player who doesn't score many goals but is vital to the success of the team? How do you pay him? Hockey is not an individual sport and many of the things a player does on the ice to help his team can't be quantified.
And, on top of all of that, the integrity of the game would be killed. Why wouldn't players let certain players score if it meant money for them? If my team is up 5-1 in the third, what's the harm of letting a friend if mine on the other team score a goal? What if that friend of mine said, if your up let me get some shots and if I score I'll give you half of that money.
Too many problems to come out of a system where players are paid only on performance.
