Idea: Teams are allowed to terminate one contract a year. No payout, no cap-hit.

[ThreeOfAPerfectPair]

What's the fallout and who opposes it, the league or players union.

Click to read more...

 

[The Moose is Loose]

The players union will absolutely oppose it.

I don't think its a bad idea though. One contract every year is way too frequent. But once every 4 years or something like that could make sense

 

[Claypool]

Just get rid of the cap. Simple.

 

[Phillybean]

If the player gets paid whatever is remaining on the contract, I'm sure that the union would be on board (say Lucic get's contract terminated, gets paid whatever he is left owing, then resigns somewhere for 2 million a year, it is a net gain for him), but the league might not be. I agree every year might get heavy, but if they allow 1 every 3 years (team has 3 years to use it) it would work.

 

[These Are The Days]

Christ you had me going thinking this was a thing that was gonna be happening by the off-season

 

[easton117]

Ya don’t like it. Not sure some of the low income teams would be on board either.

Just stop handing out big ass contracts to guys in their 30s and a lot of teams cap problems will go away.

 

[ThreeOfAPerfectPair]

The players union will absolutely oppose it.

I don't think its a bad idea though. One contract every year is way too frequent. But once every 4 years or something like that could make sense

I'd vote in favor of it if I was a player. Opens up money from washed up players who already got "theirs" to new guys. Biggest drawback would be added anxiety, stress, in-fighting among shit players.

 

[kingsholygrail]

Player's Union would oppose anything that threatens player contract security. While you'd only be able to eliminate one contract for free a year, it still effectively renders contracts as not guaranteed.

 

[LOFIN]

I'd vote in favor of it if I was a player. Opens up money from washed up players who already got "theirs" to new guys. Biggest drawback would be added anxiety, stress, in-fighting among **** players.

You would be in favour of you were a young player. But not when you are +30 with one of those contracts.

 

[TheAngryHank]

Players like Mac in Colorado could demand termination to get a bigger check, double edge sword.

 

[1dreamof1cup]

The player union would never allow a no payout contract termination imo.

What I think could work for both sides is a no cap hit buyout once a year.

Don't see why both sides wouldn't agree to this. It allows the player to find another team at a less expensive price while still getting paid by their ex team and it allows teams to get rid of their bad contracts.

 

[Ciao]

Players would rightfully refuse to accept contract terminations without payouts.

Owners would absolutely refuse payouts with no cap hit.

How on Earth would this be fair to the terminated players anyway?

 

[ThreeOfAPerfectPair]

How on Earth would this be fair to the terminated players anyway?

It's not, but they're in the small minority. Voted out in favor of money that's being spread to new, more deserving players.

Slippery slope though I guess.

 

[Machinehead]

That's some bourgeois bullshit.

 

[Newusername]

This is how non-guaranteed contracts would make its way to the NHL, over time of course. with options and everything. Can’t see the players union being open to it. If you don’t like the contracts you have maybe it’s more of a GM / owner issue.

 

[FissionFire]

Too dangerous for the players to ever accept as this slides the bar slowly towards non-guaranteed contract territory. Only way I could see the players giving the OK is if it was allowed both ways. Like players would be allowed to Terminate their contract after say 3 years as well. This would just be chaos for owners and they’d never go for it. The guaranteed contracts were the concession owners gave to eliminate the ability for players to hold out for a renegotiated contract. Players aren’t giving owners a free contract cancel without getting their own leverage back.

Plus this would be disastrous on the cap. Does cancelling a contract force a team to suddenly carry a huge recapture the next season? Does it act like a buyout on the cap? That issue alone might make it nearly impossible to cancel most contracts without teams caps going to hell. Now consider a player like Shea Weber. If Montreal cancels his contract tomorrow does Nashville suddenly get totally screwed by the recapture? Imagine Montreal cancelling Weber’s contract in the final year and sticking the Preds with a whopping 24.57M recapture penalty. Good luck dealing with that nuclear cap bomb. Imagine Montreal basically extorting Nashville our of a kings ransom to give them Weber back instead of cancelling the contract on them. I just can’t see teams going with this since you run into situations like this where your own teams cap fate could be in another teams hands.

 

[Hire Sather]

Who do you think would oppose it?

 

[boredmale]

Maybe not terminate contract but how about bringing back option years where both the player or team has the right to terminate a contract say after the 5th year of a deal

 

[JT Kreider]

Who do you think would oppose it?

It would get shot down unanimously by every member of the PA

 

[Hire Sather]

It would get shot down unanimously by every member of the PA

Of course it would. The OP asking "Who would oppose it, the league or the PA?" is just an absurd question lol

 

[ThreeOfAPerfectPair]

Of course it would. The OP asking "Who would oppose it, the league or the PA?" is just an absurd question lol

Hmm, yes I guess you're right. Now what if contracts we're to be paid out but no cap-hit upon termination?

 

[Hivemind]

95% of the PA and 50% of the board of governors would oppose it.

 

[Mr Tadakichi]

Hmm, yes I guess you're right. Now what if contracts we're to be paid out but no cap-hit upon termination?

There would have to be some heavy penalty to counter that as well, kind of like a deterrent from people abusing it.

 

[Hire Sather]

Hmm, yes I guess you're right. Now what if contracts we're to be paid out but no cap-hit upon termination?

too much of an advantage to big market teams.

doing the rule as simple as this would almost make the cap not matter to teams like NYR and Toronto

 

[JungleBeat]

Just shorten the length of contracts to 6 years, 8 is way too long.