Strachan-A hard cap will make winning harder

[Lanny MacDonald*]

you mean how OTT was forced to trade Yashin for Spezza and Chara
or do you mean how VAN was forced to trade Pavel Bure for Ed Jovanvoski
or do you mean how CGY was forced to trade Fleury for Regehr and Niuwendyk for Iginla ?

or maybe you mean how EDM had to trade Hamrlik for Brewer or Carter for Dvorak.

oh wait, i think you mean the small market Tampa Lightining stole St Louis from CGY as a free agent ?

or maybe you mean how big market DAL signed Turgeon away from STL for 6m per season. How terrible for STL !

frankly, you probably meant how the big market Avalanche stole Rob Blake from small market LAK ? And they ONLY gave up Deadmarsh, Miller and a 1st rounder.

talk about bs ...

dr

You know, I really don't give a damn what the return was in each of those deals. The thing that urks me is that all of those deals were forced onto the teams and forced them to make deals they did not want to make. When you build your team around a certain asset and then are forced to trade that asset it hurts a helluva lot more than just in the lineup. It affects the whole organization. Bottom line is that none of those trades would have happened had the player's salary demands not been out of this world and been in a range that only three or four teams could afford them.

 

[arnie]

As a Leaf fan I hope there is a salary cap with NO revenue sharing. As the advertising and promotional prospects for players in Toronto are better than any other city (Montreal would be comparable) in Canada, Toronto will still have an advantage. Add to, it that the Canadian equalization thingy will surely be dropped under any hard cap, it will end up hurting the smaller market Canadian teams.

Then with the money saved the Leafs can boost thier scouting staff, add more money into the building (more equipment, personal trainers)

What will be funny is when the Calgary's and Edmonton's end up losing their stars under the hard cap because there is just not enough money in cities like Calgary and Edmonton to warrant signing a comparable contract there, as it would be to Toronto where they could double their salaries under endorsements. Then we will hear MORE whining about how not fair it is for them. And how if it doesn't change, bless their little hearts they will have to move because the big bad Toronto Maple Leafs or New York Rangers are stealing all of their players.

There will never be an equal playing field, under the old CBA with the right signings and the right corporate sponsership. All teams had a chance to be rich and wealthy.

Under a hard cap, smaller teams are going to be in FAR more trouble than they are in now. But you guys can dream how a hard cap will hurt the Toronto's, Dallas's, Detroit's and the New York's. Because frankly it won't, it will just make the division of have's and have not's even greater

What a pathetic rationalization. The Leafs have one of the worst organizations in hockey. If they can't bail themselves out with their checkbooks, they will be in big trouble.

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

how does the NHL have any jurisdction if the Cablevision hire's Jarome Iginla's wife to be the weather girl at one of their local news stations and pays her 5million per year to do so ?

for an example.

dr

They don't, but It might upset the cart at Cablevision itself. Also the businesses that compete against Cablevision might have a problem as that salary would throw their whole industry out of whack.

I would think that this type of thing would be extremely easy to fix by adding a cavet to the CBA that prohibited the hiring of the family or spouses of any active NHL player by a the team in which he is employed or any of its wholly or partially owned subsidiaries or parent companies. End of that assinine thought. Any others you would like to float out there?

 

[CREW99AW]

so ... NYY has stars .. big deal. And when Oakland fans buck up like Yankee fans, then they too will demand and get stars.

NYY get what their fans pay for.

DR

fans bucking up had little to do with it.It was the Yankees 10m yr/$500m cable deal from MSG that gave them sich a big spending advantage.

$50m a per yr,while most teams were probably lucky to be getting 1/3 maybe of that amount from their local sports network.

and Steinbrenner at the end of the 10 yrs walked away from MSG,causing MSG to threaten legal action.I could never figure out MSG's bluff.How do you make a team stay with a sports network after their contract expires?

anyway Steinbrenner wanted to start his own network,saying that's where the big bucks were and he has,giving him even more $ to throw around.

 

[ScottyBowman]

how does the NHL have any jurisdction if the Cablevision hire's Jarome Iginla's wife to be the weather girl at one of their local news stations and pays her 5million per year to do so ?

for an example.

dr

I asked a similiar type question to the NBA cap specialist back in the summer and he told me that its circumvention.

20. Can a team circumvent the salary cap by paying a player less but arranging for an affiliated company to also pay him, perhaps by way of an endorsement contract?

I suppose it could happen, but the NBA will investigate if it suspects that an outside person or organization is paying a player on behalf or at the request of a team. If they find out that such an event has occurred, they will penalize the team. For the first offense by a team, the fine can be up to $2,500,000, forfeiture of a first round draft pick, and/or voiding the player's contract. The penalties increase for subsequent violations.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

fans bucking up had little to do with it.It was the Yankees 10m yr/$500m cable deal from MSG that gave them sich a big spending advantage.

$50m a per yr,while most teams were probably lucky to be getting 1/3 maybe of that amount from their local sports network.

and Steinbrenner at the end of the 10 yrs walked away from MSG,causing MSG to threaten legal action.I could never figure out MSG's bluff.How do you make a team stay with a sports network after their contract expires?

anyway Steinbrenner wanted to start his own network,saying that's where the big bucks were and he has,giving him even more $ to throw around.

one question ... if not for NYY fans and their consumer power, MSG wouldnt have given that contract. Its still the fans bucking up, even if its indirectly.

and Steinbrenner recognized the power of his fan base and thats why he knew there was big bucks in owning the network.

dr

 

[FlyersFan10*]

Strachan is right about a hard salary cap making winning harder and it has a lot to do with being a good drafting team. If you ask the Dallas Cowboys and the Pittsburgh Steelers, I'm sure they'll tell you that free agency ripped apart their teams. Fact of the matter is this. If you draft well, you're always going to have good players. And good players deserve to make good money. I think we're all in agreement with that.

The problem with the cap is that if you draft exceptionally well (Ottawa, Philadelphia, New Jersey, Colorado, Detroit, etc.....) there's going to be a time when you have to choose between which players you can keep and which players you have to let go because of salary cap purposes. And that's the problem. That essentially allows bad teams who've drafted and developed poorly an opportunity to sign good players to a huge amount of money. That essentially strengthens the weaker teams and punishes the better teams.

The problem is that salary caps reward crappy teams and punishes good teams. For instance, in the NFL, the Washington Redskins (of which I'm a fan) have practically bought at least one high end free agent that the team who originally had said player couldn't sign due to salary restraints. As well, Washington has had several high picks in the draft for the past few years. What does the other team get for the free agent who left? Nothing. And that will always be my issue. Good teams get screwed by the salary cap, bad teams will always reap the rewards. And until something is done competitive balance wise (and the salary cap doesn't adjust that), then it's still going to be the same old system.

 

[djhn579]

The problem with the cap is that if you draft exceptionally well (Ottawa, Philadelphia, New Jersey, Colorado, Detroit, etc.....) there's going to be a time when you have to choose between which players you can keep and which players you have to let go because of salary cap purposes. And that's the problem. That essentially allows bad teams who've drafted and developed poorly an opportunity to sign good players to a huge amount of money. That essentially strengthens the weaker teams and punishes the better teams.

The problem with the current system is, if you draft just as well as anybody else, but you are not in a market area that has a huge corporate persence, there's going to be a time when you have to choose between which players you can keep and which players you have to let go because of the markets with the large corporate presence inflating salaries to the point where you can't hold on to your players. And that's the problem. That essentially allows teams who've drafted and developed about the same as everyone else, but have larger budgets an opportunity to sign good players to a huge amount of money. That essentially strengthens the weaker teams and punishes the better teams.

A larger problem is that this only benefits 5 to 10 of the larger market teams, and hurts everyone else...

 

[FlyersFan10*]

There's only one way to correct this mess then. As per the old NFL system, Plan B free agency. That means, as a team, you can have an unlimited payroll, but you cannot sign any free agents other than your own. The only time you can sign a free agent is if they are put on the Plan B free agency plan. Players get their money, owners make their money, and there isn't competition for player's services. No one can complain of collusion and no one can complain that they aren't making money.

 

[NYIsles1*]

fans bucking up had little to do with it.It was the Yankees 10m yr/$500m cable deal from MSG that gave them sich a big spending advantage.

$50m a per yr,while most teams were probably lucky to be getting 1/3 maybe of that amount from their local sports network.

and Steinbrenner at the end of the 10 yrs walked away from MSG,causing MSG to threaten legal action.I could never figure out MSG's bluff.How do you make a team stay with a sports network after their contract expires?

anyway Steinbrenner wanted to start his own network,saying that's where the big bucks were and he has,giving him even more $ to throw around.

The same bad bluff is in place now with the Mets. Msg accepted the Mets 54 million to buyout their contract yet have threatened legal action if the Mets actually do go with Comcast and Time Warner to form their own baseball network.

Wilpon must have loved Msg pulling their games off tv last August because of the dispute with TW. It's likely to happen again.

Between all this, the year Cablevision kept the Yankees off their network and the ongoing battles with the city and the Jets, the Garden may have some serious troubles ahead if Bloomberg is re-elected. The Post publisher ripped Dolan in a recent editorial, the Garden looks weak with their ugly campaign against a West Side Stadium which will break their monopoly on events. Also city politicians are lobbying to take away Dolan's tax exemptions on the garden. This does not even bring into play Ratner bringing his team to Brooklyn.

Baseball controls the advertising money and the marketing, when this is over Steinbrenner and Wilpon may only agree on one thing. They want no part of Msg and may ask their sponsors and advertisers to do likewise.

 

[grego]

These teams you allege hitting a cap are also stealing players from others.

oh Detroit is so good in drafting, and how many older free agents are they signing from other teams every year. If they would keep their own team and not be signing old guys on all those teams that want a few years to try and win the Cup. They would have more money and roster spot for new players.

The best teams if they are really the best have good coaching and management also. So that will still give them some advantage over the cellar dwellars.

Also there is nothing in the CBA saying you include coaches and GMs in the cap.

If a team thinks they have lost a competitve edge by losing a player do to a cap restriction. Try to win the old fashioned way. Remember coaches, GMs and scouts don't count to the cap.

Pay a ton of money and get the best. The it won't matter if you lose the occasional player and the elite teams will be the elite.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

These teams you allege hitting a cap are also stealing players from others.

i object strongly to this. no players have ever been stolen.

did MIN steal Rolston from BOS ?

are all UFA signings stealing or just the ones where the "big" markets make the signing ?

dr

 

[grego]

I am not the one arguing that hockey will be harder due to a cap.

I feel that it will be the same as before. So to talk about whether anyone really steals an UFA is off the subject I believe.

My only point on the topic, is that it will not hurt teams that much to have a salary cap, and they will rarely loose a good player. And if they do lose a player a decade that doesn't matter that much. It is when teams are losing a player every year or 2 because due to over priced players they can't afford to keep their solid 2nd or 3rd line players. Because they want a 2 to 4 million dollar contract.

 

[CREW99AW]

one question ... if not for NYY fans and their consumer power, MSG wouldnt have given that contract. Its still the fans bucking up, even if its indirectly.

and Steinbrenner recognized the power of his fan base and thats why he knew there was big bucks in owning the network.

dr

in 2003 NYC had a population of more then 8 million people.The largest city in the country.Oakland was ranked 43rd largest city in the country with 398,844 people living there.No surprise that NYC with a much larger population,would give the NYY a much larger consumer fanbase.Doesn't mean fans in Oakland aren't supporting their team or that NYC fans somehow go above and beyond in support of the Yankees.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0763098.html

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

in 2003 NYC had a population of more then 8 million people.The largest city in the country.Oakland was ranked 43rd largest city in the country with 398,844 people living there.No surprise that NYC with a much larger population,would give the NYY a much larger consumer fanbase.Doesn't mean fans in Oakland aren't supporting their team or that NYC fans somehow go above and beyond in support of the Yankees.

[url="http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0763098.html"]http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0763098.html[/url]

right, on a per capita basis, im sure lots of markets support their team in high levels. but on sheer volume, NYY has what other markets dont in terms of fan support.

dr

 

[Malefic74]

Hard caps make winning harder? Please.

I give you exhibit A: The New England Patriots.

News flash people; no system is absolutely perfect or ever will be. The best you can hope for is a system that restores some balance. Will a hard cap or equivalent system magically make all 30 teams competitive? Of course not. What it should do though is allow more that 5 or 6 teams to be at contender status. Bump that number up to 10 or 12 is all I'm looking for. Sports is cyclical cap or no cap. Teams will spend one cycle at the top and another near the bottom.

As for the Oakland A's I have a few friends who are A's fans, they have had to give up Giambi, Tejeda and now two of their big 3 (Mulder, Hudson, and Zito) or the would lose them to free agency for nothing. That's the threat that forces teams to make trades. To see all your hard work in development walk out the door because you know in a bidding war you lose must be the hardest thing for a GM to contemplate.

 

[MarkZackKarl]

CREW:

do you know the concept of "metro Population"? Because the metro population of Oakland is surely not 400,000.

 

[BrickRed]

Congratulations Al! You just described what every small market team in the NHL has been going through for the past 8 years. You just reminded the majority of NHL owners why they are doing this.

Guess ole Al doesn't like the prospect that the Leafs will have to actually be successful at drafting and training prospects, instead of buying players.

That's right!!! All the complaints regarding a salary cap from the rich team's perspective. Right now very few teams can go out a just buy other players to make up for mistakes or injury. The privileged few teams do and they don't want to give up that advantage. Either do the Yankees but there day is comming as well.

 

[MarkZackKarl]

hmmm

Ottawa is a rich team?

 

[gerbilanium]

No, Ottawa just recently got a moneybags owner type and now you won;t be able to enjoy him go out and Toronto it up for a few years.

The cap will come and now when a team sucks they will not be able to use the 'if we had more money' excuse. Now 'the Cap is hindering our ability to ice a competitive team' will be the excuse and boy do I look forward to that one.

 

[Morbo]

Hard caps make winning harder? Please.

I give you exhibit A: The New England Patriots.

Clearly an exception.

 

[Cawz]

Clearly an exception.

An exception to what, the other leagues with hard caps?

 

[Malefic74]

Clearly an exception.

Don't like that one?

How about the Philadelphia Eagles who have made the Conference Final 4 consecutive years?

How about the winningnest team in the NFC over the last decade; the Green Bay Packers?

How about the Denver Broncos who won back to back Super Bowls in the hard cap system?

The hard cap or equivalent system simply removes unfair advantages based on size of fan base or stadium, while rewarding good mangement and coaching practices. That's all I'm looking for. I don't expect that any system is going to solve all problems for once and for all. But the most obvious difference between perpetually successful teams and teams that only have a flash-in-the-pan chance is money.

It's small market teams who catch lightning in a bottle to make the Finals who are the exceptions. All your young guys mature at the same time; you go nearly injury-free for a whole season; etc... Florida gets there, next season crash back to earth. Washington, ditto; Carolina, ditto; Anaheim, ditto. Time will tell if that happens to Tampa Bay or Calgary. But the track record is not pretty.

 

[RangerBoy]

Hard caps make winning harder? Please.

I give you exhibit A: The New England Patriots.

News flash people; no system is absolutely perfect or ever will be. The best you can hope for is a system that restores some balance. Will a hard cap or equivalent system magically make all 30 teams competitive? Of course not. What it should do though is allow more that 5 or 6 teams to be at contender status. Bump that number up to 10 or 12 is all I'm looking for. Sports is cyclical cap or no cap. Teams will spend one cycle at the top and another near the bottom.

As for the Oakland A's I have a few friends who are A's fans, they have had to give up Giambi, Tejeda and now two of their big 3 (Mulder, Hudson, and Zito) or the would lose them to free agency for nothing. That's the threat that forces teams to make trades. To see all your hard work in development walk out the door because you know in a bidding war you lose must be the hardest thing for a GM to contemplate.

Philadelphia Eagles-four straight NFC championship games

 

[CREW99AW]

CREW:

do you know the concept of "metro Population"? Because the metro population of Oakland is surely not 400,000.

and the metro area population of NYC isn't 8 million.My point was that the Yankees have the advantage of a much larger population to draw from then Oakland does,that it's not a matter of Yankee fans bucking up and Oakland fans not supporting their team.

http://www.demographia.com/db-metro2003.pdf