Franchise Player Cap Exemption in the NHL

[Miri]

Just rise the cap?

Rising the cap does nothing, if player salaries rise alongside it. You dont end up with more star players on your team, just the same, but paid more than now.

Not sure if this cap exempt idea would help.

 

[tellermine]

Rising the cap does nothing, if player salaries rise alongside it. You dont end up with more star players on your team, just the same, but paid more than now.

Not sure if this cap exempt idea would help.

Well the whole point of cap is to give every team same position to have players.
If you want star players to one team, god knows why, you should have no cap.

 

[SotasicA]

I may have a better idea. How about a drafted player that you can keep that makes under 5% of the salary cap? Let's you keep a key role player around as long as you like and in no way would a "star" player accept that kind of offer. Obviously this would only be for a bottom 6 forward or 4-6 type of dman.

How about an exemption where you can sign one player under CBA minimum?

 

[cowboy82nd]

How about an exemption where you can sign one player under CBA minimum?

I don't see the union going for this.

 

[Uncle Scrooge]

I don't know about a franchise player, seems like an unfair advantage and contradictory to the cap as teams with the money would throw ridiculous cash. Encourages star players to get out of Arizona etc. as fast as possible.

How about goalies though? Do we really need goalies to count against the cap? They're voodoo anyway, and every team can only have 1 guy in the net at once, 2 on the whole team and i don't think solid starting goalies want to play backup just because someone is willing to throw in some extra cash to ice a monster tandem. Unless they're older and want a cup, which to me is fine, let them have that chance and a better salary than league minimum.

I think it's dumb that goalie can take 10%+ of the cap. Building your team around a netminder isn't really a recipe for success anyway, but you still need someone reliable. On the other hand, a random backup goalie can outplay an NHL starter on any given night.

I don't think anyone would mind if Toronto pays 15M to a goalie. Like who cares? Teams could just focus on spending their cap on the skaters which makes this much more simple.

I know Montreal and Florida would be on board with this

 

[Miri]

Well the whole point of cap is to give every team same position to have players.
If you want star players to one team, god knows why, you should have no cap.

I fail to see where i said i want star players on one team. My whole point was, that it would be nice, if a team with a bunch of good players, that they either drafted, traded for or developed to be those good players, did not have to lose them because of the cap, because they cant fit all of them....and that cap rising does not help in preventing this at all.

 

[Sniperberg]

How about "Lockerrom-presence-player/good-teammate/Vital-to-our-team-grinder" forced cap instead?
The way it works is that each team needs to have atleast one 3rd/4th-liner signed to a league-max contract.

 

[Jmo89]

I don't think it would work for franchise players, for reasons mentioned in the thread. I could see smaller exceptions working though. Something similar to an MLE in Basketball.

According to my in depth research (my two second google search,) the average NHL salary is just under 3M (2.98). I wouldn't mind teams having a 3M exception they could use every year or two. A rookie exception could be another option.

 

[kmart]

Well the whole point of cap is to give every team same position to have players.
If you want star players to one team, god knows why, you should have no cap.

the cap got created when the owners asked themselves, "how much can we lower the player salaries without forcing the players to bolt to other leagues" that is the real reason behind the cap, to distribute a larger income for owners without breaking the "wheel/system".

 

[StreetHawk]

Always wondered about doing something like this. I’d actually go the other way. Each team can reduce 1 players cap hit by 50% if:

The player was drafted by the team and is picked in the 2/3 round or later.

Actually something to reward teams for good drafting

And the business side, where does that money come from?

Owners are not paying for that gap from their split. Do the other 700 players want higher escrow to accommodate a franchise player? Unlikely.

 

[mouser]

Do buyouts count against the cap?

Yes, but the amount depends on how much the buyout is plus other factors like whether the contract was front-loaded or not.

 

[William Hylander]

I never understood why catering at least a little bit to the rich teams was such a bad idea.

NBA has grown much faster than the NHL, and they seem to cater some rules to these rich teams a bit but doesn't mean teams like The Bucks don't compete year to year. And the ability to keep one franchise player would help in multiple situations and not just for rich teams.

Keep in mind this shouldn't mean that the leafs for example get Tavares for no cap, there should be limitations I.E. player must be playing for this team for 5 years, drafted by said team etc.

The only people this does not help is the owners who would have to fork over more money to the best players.

 

[PettersonHughes]

1 get out of jail free card for awful contracts given

Had Covid not happened, this would've probably taken place.
Can only imagine how much a team like Tampa could add if one of Kucherov/ Hedman/ Vasilievskiy's salary didn't count, esp. seeing how they've already worked the LTIR to fit all their guys.

 

[Habs10025]

What are your thoughts?

Viable? Fair?

It's a fantasy Bettman isn't letting this happen .

 

[Stealth1616]

And the business side, where does that money come from?

Owners are not paying for that gap from their split. Do the other 700 players want higher escrow to accommodate a franchise player? Unlikely.

The money paid would be the exact same. I mentioned it applying to players drafted in the 2/3 round or higher so that it wouldn’t apply to franchise type players. Can put even more restrictions like a team can only use 1 year of a players contract for that exemption and then having it expire

 

[JianYang]

Horrible idea.
Basically guarantees that the best players in the league play for Toronto or the Rangers after they turn 27...

Or does anyone believe Toronto wouldn't offer McDavid an 80-100m/ year deal if they don't have to worry about his caphit?

Also doesn't even work if you consider escrow...

No thank you...

Before the cap, there were only a few teams that were getting the lion's share of marquee free agents. I think it was mostly the Rangers, Colorado, and Detroit.

There is a part of me that misses the super teams. I'm not saying the Rangers were one, but they had the resources to make it happen.

However, if you want 32 nhl franchises, you just cant go back to that system. The nhl has hard enough time keeping all teams viable as it is.

 

[GordonGraham]

Would be great, anything going againts this so called parity would be a positive.
The rich team generate a lot more money , bail the same poor teams out year after year and get absolutey no benefit for doing so.

 

[Machinehead]

Franchise tags exist in other leagues and it tends to be good for everyone.

The knee-jerk reaction that any change to the cap at all would result in a three-team league of the Leafs, Habs, and Rangers is ridiculous and unfounded.

Small-market teams had plenty of success before the cap even existed.

The six richest teams in the NHL -- NYR, TOR, MTL, CHI, BOS, and LA all did absolutely f*** all in the years leading up to the lockout.

 

[CanadienShark]

I don't know about a franchise player, seems like an unfair advantage and contradictory to the cap as teams with the money would throw ridiculous cash. Encourages star players to get out of Arizona etc. as fast as possible.

How about goalies though? Do we really need goalies to count against the cap? They're voodoo anyway, and every team can only have 1 guy in the net at once, 2 on the whole team and i don't think solid starting goalies want to play backup just because someone is willing to throw in some extra cash to ice a monster tandem. Unless they're older and want a cup, which to me is fine, let them have that chance and a better salary than league minimum.

I think it's dumb that goalie can take 10%+ of the cap. Building your team around a netminder isn't really a recipe for success anyway, but you still need someone reliable. On the other hand, a random backup goalie can outplay an NHL starter on any given night.

I don't think anyone would mind if Toronto pays 15M to a goalie. Like who cares? Teams could just focus on spending their cap on the skaters which makes this much more simple.

I know Montreal and Florida would be on board with this

Add San Jose to that list.