Salary Cap DISparity Era?

[DitchMarner]

Are we coming to a point where most teams are either trying to win the Cup or rebuilding/building long-term with the goal of eventually being good enough to do so? In other words, are teams that do whatever they can trying to just squeak into the playoffs even though they would be long shots to go all the way if they were to qualify mostly a thing of the past?

If we use the following arbitrary thresh holds, the majority of Western Conference teams this season can be classified as either "good" or "bad." Only two teams can be put in the "average" category. This would explain why it seems harder to predict a Cup winner this year than normal.


Below 82 points (bad): SJ, CHI, ANA, ARI, SEA, CGY - six teams

82 to 96 points (average): MIN, STL - two teams

97 or more points (good): DAL, WPG, COL, VAN, EDM, LA, NSH, VGK - eight teams


If you look at goal differentials, it seems the top teams are relishing beating up on the bottom-feeders. The situation isn't quite as pronounced in the Eastern Conference. At least there was a playoff race. But the Capitals sold at the deadline and managed to make the playoffs anyway and the Penguins traded one of their best players and were in the hunt for a spot until the last week.

Click to read more...

 

[SnowblindNYR]

This has Islanders written all over it.

 

[Stealth1616]

I would think this is the case every year.. every year there will be an even distribution of good and bad teams

 

[WarriorofTime]

Needs a bit more statistics across time to make any conclusions.

 

[DitchMarner]

I would think this is the case every year.. every year there will be an even distribution of good and bad teams

Are the differences between strong and weak teams usually so significant, though?

To use a random recent year as an example:

In 2019 three teams in the NHL had a goal differential better than +40 (TB, CGY, BOS). This year 11 do.

In 2019 eight teams had a goal differential worse than -40. This year five teams do.

Overall, in 2019 11 teams in the League had a goal differential of -40 or worse or +40 or better. This year half the teams in the League (16) have a goal differential of -40 or worse or +40 or better.

 

[Canadienna]

If one were so inclined they could plot all the data and see the distribution over time, and how much of an outlier this year is, if at all.

I kind of agree intuitively, but it's hard to say if anything has really changed without seeing all the previous years and doing some analysis.

The game feels very min maxed. Managers don't want to be stuck in the murky middle any more than fans do.

 

[DitchMarner]

Needs a bit more statistics across time to make any conclusions.

Let's go back to 2012.

There were 11 teams with a Goal Differential of -40 or worse or +40 or better.

In 2015 there were eight.

In 2019 there were 11 again.


In 2022 there were 19.

Last year (2023) there were 16.

This year there are 16 again.


Not sure all this means any more than there seems to be more parity between the teams that make the playoffs (which I guess is a good thing) and less parity between good and bad teams. It seems teams have largely concluded that loading up and trying to squeak into the playoffs when you're mediocre probably isn't worthwhile.

 

[NVious]

Tanking is the winning formula;

Pittsburgh tanked
Chicago tanked
Tampa tanked
Colorado tanked
Washington tanked

Tanking works, you're not going to retool your team to the top nor are you going to somehow get there drafting 8-15, you need quite a few top 5 talents and the only way to get them is to tank

 

[ijuka]

The salary cap is pretty meaningless currently. Right now, the meta is to bypass it any way possible. LTIR abuse is common, but also the retainment thing is pretty ridiculous. Double retainment trades where a 8mil salary player becomes a 2mil salary player just go against the spirit of the salary cap as far as I'm concerned.

This indeed means that, because the top teams probably have around 50% higher a cap than others, no one except those willing to go fully all in can really compete.

 

[wetcoast]

I would think this is the case every year.. every year there will be an even distribution of good and bad teams

That's kind of what happens every year some teams are just better than other ones despite Bettmans best efforts for every team to finish within 10 points of each other.

 

[Romang67]

If we use the following arbitrary thresh holds, the majority of Western Conference teams this season can be classified as either "good" or "bad." Only two teams can be put in the "average" category .

 

[KeydGV21]

The salary cap is pretty meaningless currently. Right now, the meta is to bypass it any way possible. LTIR abuse is common, but also the retainment thing is pretty ridiculous. Double retainment trades where a 8mil salary player becomes a 2mil salary player just go against the spirit of the salary cap as far as I'm concerned.

This indeed means that, because the top teams probably have around 50% higher a cap than others, no one except those willing to go fully all in can really compete.

The “spirit” of the salary cap was never about parity but to limit how much the players are making…

How that money is doled out is irrelevant…

 

[KingsFan7824]

Are we coming to a point where most teams are either trying to win the Cup or rebuilding/building long-term with the goal of eventually being good enough to do so? In other words, are teams that do whatever they can trying to just squeak into the playoffs even though they would be long shots to go all the way if they were to qualify mostly a thing of the past?

That depends on how you define it. What does trying to win the Cup mean? There aren't 16 real contenders, but there are 16 playoff spots. Is Nashville a real, flat out, no doubt contender? No. Are they building long term? No. Their best players are in their very late 20's to mid-30's. Last year, they're selling at the deadline, this year they're a sexy underdog pick.

Tanking is the winning formula;

Pittsburgh tanked
Chicago tanked
Tampa tanked
Colorado tanked
Washington tanked

Tanking works, you're not going to retool your team to the top nor are you going to somehow get there drafting 8-15, you need quite a few top 5 talents and the only way to get them is to tank

Now list the team's that tanked and haven't won. The Caps, eventually, won, and did it in a year they weren't supposed to really "contend" anyway. That was a step back year, because of a cap crunch.

And Colorado is weird. You look at what's called their tank years, and they were up and down every year. They'd suck, then be good, then suck, then be ok, then suck, then got lucky with Ottawa's draft pick.

The salary cap is pretty meaningless currently. Right now, the meta is to bypass it any way possible. LTIR abuse is common, but also the retainment thing is pretty ridiculous. Double retainment trades where a 8mil salary player becomes a 2mil salary player just go against the spirit of the salary cap as far as I'm concerned.

This indeed means that, because the top teams probably have around 50% higher a cap than others, no one except those willing to go fully all in can really compete.

Once again, it's about how you define things. What is the spirit of the cap? Is it parity, or is it cost control? Does the league care if a franchise manages to win 10 Cups in a row? I don't think so. They just want a control on player salaries. If the $8m guy becomes a $2m guy on a top team through various player transactions, the cash going to the player remains the same.

If the cap was too draconian, there wouldn't be any player transactions, even less then there is now, which wouldn't add to the entertainment level for what is supposed to be an entertainment product.

 

[RandV]

As mentioned depends on what you consider 'parity'. Prior to the salary cap and with the old seeding rules, the only match up that would really be 'even' was the 4/5 match up. 3/6 could be closer but still slanted, and 2/7 & 1/8 while you occasionally got a Cinderella upset we're heavily slanted.

So looking at the West right now with 4 matches that look like coin flips, wouldn't that be considered a high level of parity?

 

[DitchMarner]

As mentioned depends on what you consider 'parity'. Prior to the salary cap and with the old seeding rules, the only match up that would really be 'even' was the 4/5 match up. 3/6 could be closer but still slanted, and 2/7 & 1/8 while you occasionally got a Cinderella upset we're heavily slanted.

So looking at the West right now with 4 matches that look like coin flips, wouldn't that be considered a high level of parity?

Yes.

The trend seems to be toward greater parity between the teams in the playoffs and less parity between teams you can generally consider "good" and "bad."

Everything is, after all, relative.

It seems sensible to postulate that if there are more truly strong teams, you can expect more very bad teams at the expense of thoroughly mediocre ones.

 

[JaegerDice]

If you think this is crazy, you should check out baseball in any given season.

There is no upside to being middle of the pack unless it's a stop on the way to point A or point B.

The only leagues where tanking is not much of a factor are leagues with relegation rules.

 

[Miri]

Tanking is the winning formula;

Pittsburgh tanked
Chicago tanked
Tampa tanked
Colorado tanked
Washington tanked

Tanking works, you're not going to retool your team to the top nor are you going to somehow get there drafting 8-15, you need quite a few top 5 talents and the only way to get them is to tank

Agreed. The only team to win the Cup as long as i remember, that werent first utter bottom-feeders raking high draft picks, later turning into stars leading them to Cup, is Saint Louis.

 

[flying squirrel]

Usually takes NHL super stars to win "Cup" or have sustained playoff success.

• There not many ways to get NHL super stars, they don't grow on trees.
• Team can attempt to draft star at top of draft.
• Trading for star player.
• Hit draft hidden star gem later in draft (Lightning's Point & Kucherov)
• Or farm system helps player, with the goods, to develop into their start self.
• Easiest is tanking for star player: it takes less knowledge, less effort, and I'd say in today's..... "We want it all, want it now, and want it easy as possible" society. That's the route fans, management, and team media will lean towards.

Lightning drafting Stamkos and Hedman after tanking badly

• Drafting Stamkos and Hedman was huge, and it increase odds.
• But having roster with players like Marty St. Louis, Lecavalier, and others helped also.
• So did other factors.
• Gave and OK team some juice, drafting Stamkos & Hedman.
• Wasn't long after Lightning made ECF's in 2011.
• That playoff run for Stamkos/Hedman was huge for confidence/experience.
• So tanking helped Lightning hit on Stamkos and Hedman, which still are having impacts.
• Lightning having right mix gave whole situation better chance of succeeding.
• Stats, numbers, and draft position tell story but there's other intangibles involved than just tanking to get playoff glory. I'll leave the stats & numbers to the stat experts and try to find other angles.
• Many draft bust tell part of .... "Tanking doesn't garnettee nothing" story.
• Still, tanking to get super stars is quick way,. To get a possible super star to win "Cup"or have playoff successes with.

Interesting thoughts OP, lots to chew on here. Thanks.......

 

[hangman005]

Agreed. The only team to win the Cup as long as i remember, that werent first utter bottom-feeders raking high draft picks, later turning into stars leading them to Cup, is Saint Louis.

There is one other team I can think of.

 

[Miri]

There is one other team I can think of.

Who? Boston in 2011? I dont quite remember their roster, aside of Zdeno Chara.

 

[hangman005]

Who? Boston in 2011? I dont quite remember their roster, aside of Zdeno Chara.

Can't remember Boston... but Vegas fit the defination.

"that werent first utter bottom-feeders raking high draft picks, later turning into stars leading them to Cup"

 

[Chan790]

Is this an artifact of the salary cap or is it an artifact of a point system designed to create a false sense of parity? Seems more the second than the first, but I'd attribute more of it to front offices just being better at their jobs.

Taking the points out of it and considering only team quality (How good are the top seeds? How good are the #4s, #8#s? What are their respective actual chances to win the Cup?), I don't think it's more true now than in past 40ish years.

If anything has made an actual difference, front offices seem to have gotten smarter about the absence of value of being in the squishy middle...but I don't think that has anything to do with the cap. The quantity and quality of information available to front offices has made a difference and led to more strategic approachs to the job.

I remember a lot of breaking-down old vet superstar with name recognition for young phenom trades from my youth that would get a GM fired today before they could complete the trade call with the NHL offices. I remember when the NHL draft was a essentially "throwing darts" past the first 4 or 5 picks and high draft picks basically had little value over lower ones...more darts was better than higher darts. Picks were moved all the time for marginal NHLers and non-elite prospects. It's a different NHL than it used to be.

 

[Miri]

Can't remember Boston... but Vegas fit the defination.

"that werent first utter bottom-feeders raking high draft picks, later turning into stars leading them to Cup"

Well yeah, i guess Vegas would fit under that us well, but they are sort of exception, given the circumstances, them being expansion team.

 

[cowboy82nd]

The salary cap is pretty meaningless currently. Right now, the meta is to bypass it any way possible. LTIR abuse is common, but also the retainment thing is pretty ridiculous. Double retainment trades where a 8mil salary player becomes a 2mil salary player just go against the spirit of the salary cap as far as I'm concerned.

This indeed means that, because the top teams probably have around 50% higher a cap than others, no one except those willing to go fully all in can really compete.

The salary cap is for cost certainly for the owners. That’s it.