Salary cap good or bad?

[Crazy_Ike]

The cap is popular because it offers a simplistic solution. Implement a cap and every team has a chance to win every year or so the argument goes.

Close, but more accurately the cap is there to stop teams from throwing the expense curve out of whack during their attempts to buy a cup, since the centrally managed NHLPA, especially under Goodenow, would negotiate player salaries based on the richest (or at least spendiest) teams, not the average.

The cap forces player expenses to follow the average instead. Now it's up to the league to flatten that average out so the top isn't so far removed from the bottom.

That is the core of the cap, and why it is necessary. You can get rid of the cap no problem, as long as you also get rid of free agency and trades and force players to only play in one place their entire careers... but as long as the ability of players to change teams exists, the cap system will always be more stable and better for the most amount of people.

 

[CC Chiefs*]

Close, but more accurately the cap is there to stop teams from throwing the expense curve out of whack during their attempts to buy a cup, since the centrally managed NHLPA, especially under Goodenow, would negotiate player salaries based on the richest (or at least spendiest) teams, not the average.

The cap forces player expenses to follow the average instead. Now it's up to the league to flatten that average out so the top isn't so far removed from the bottom.

That is the core of the cap, and why it is necessary. You can get rid of the cap no problem, as long as you also get rid of free agency and trades and force players to only play in one place their entire careers... but as long as the ability of players to change teams exists, the cap system will always be more stable and better for the most amount of people.

So with all that you have written here you'd agree burying 5.6m in KHL/AHL without a doubt goes against the spirit of the cap and gives teams that can afford to do it an advantage over teams that can't afford to do it?

 

[Crazy_Ike]

Does 2 + 3 = potato? Zero connection at all with what I posted.

I'm not really interested in discussing this - or anything else - with someone who just ignores inconvenient posts/facts and just repeats already demolished arguments later. In the meantime, one thing you might want to try working out is how a team could afford to pay a player on its roster but not afford to pay him somewhere else, without resorting to invoking the salary floor or the unbearable weight of a minimum salary replacement. Probably should have worked that out before you posted it, though.

 

[CC Chiefs*]

Does 2 + 3 = potato? Zero connection at all with what I posted.

I'm not really interested in discussing this - or anything else - with someone who just ignores inconvenient posts/facts and just repeats already demolished arguments later. In the meantime, one thing you might want to try working out is how a team could afford to pay a player on its roster but not afford to pay him somewhere else, without resorting to invoking the salary floor or the unbearable weight of a minimum salary replacement. Probably should have worked that out before you posted it, though.

So do you think if a team like the NYR can afford to burying a guy in the AHL isn't a clear advantage that say a Nashville can't do? You seem to want things to be fair, but yet those salaries that hidden aren't figured into the equation when figuring player expenses as far as the CBA goes. That is huge advantage to the big market teams. But you can ignore that if you want to.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I might be out to lunch with this, but it's just a trend I've noticed on this board.

It seems like the most-cap-opposed fanbase is Wings fans. That makes some sense considering the Wings are a high-spending franchise who have lost some players recently due to the cap. But you don't see nearly the level of complaining from, say, Flames fans or even Blackhawks fans.

Stepping outside the hockey box for a moment, Michigan in general and Detroit specifically has been hit hard by the economy and has become rather prominent as a hotbed of conservatism in the past couple decades.

It makes me wonder if some of the anti-cap sentiment has a more general cultural basis... if Detroiters see it as just another way that centralized planning and income distribution has screwed them over. Any basis for that theory?

 

[CC Chiefs*]

I might be out to lunch with this, but it's just a trend I've noticed on this board.

It seems like the most-cap-opposed fanbase is Wings fans. That makes some sense considering the Wings are a high-spending franchise who have lost some players recently due to the cap. But you don't see nearly the level of complaining from, say, Flames fans or even Blackhawks fans.

Stepping outside the hockey box for a moment, Michigan in general and Detroit specifically has been hit hard by the economy and has become rather prominent as a hotbed of conservatism in the past couple decades.

It makes me wonder if some of the anti-cap sentiment has a more general cultural basis... if Detroiters see it as just another way that centralized planning and income distribution has screwed them over. Any basis for that theory?

I hate the cap for reasons that have well documented. But what I hate even more is the fact the Dumb owners that needed a cap have found ways around the stinking cap they needed. If a player makes 7m this year that's his cap hit! Stop the circumventing.

 

[The Saw Is the Law]

Salary Cap is good. But I think it need some litte fix like making ELC bonus system better etc.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I hate the cap for reasons that have well documented. But what I hate even more is the fact the Dumb owners that needed a cap have found ways around the stinking cap they needed. If a player makes 7m this year that's his cap hit! Stop the circumventing.

Would you say that you are generally opposed to a system which handicaps the wealthier teams in order to assist the others?

 

[NewEnglandSportsFan*]

More freedoms with the salary cap would be nice; it's not the big market teams' fault that teams like NYI just have no clue how to spend money.

The salary cap itself is silly in essence but is a necessary evil unfortunately.

 

[CC Chiefs*]

Would you say that you are generally opposed to a system which handicaps the wealthier teams in order to assist the others?

I'm opposed to a system that was needed and it only took 3-4 years for the owners to find a way to eat each other again. Question for you? Do you think it's ok for 6-7m to be buried in the AHL/KHL? Is that not an advantage to the richer teams?

 

[NewEnglandSportsFan*]

I'm opposed to a system that was needed and it only took 3-4 years for the owners to find a way to eat each other again. Question for you? Do you think it's ok for 6-7m to be buried in the AHL/KHL? Is that not an advantage to the richer teams?

It's fine; just as it is fine for NYI to essentially ice a team that doesn't even reach the salary cap minimum.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Question for you? Do you think it's ok for 6-7m to be buried in the AHL/KHL? Is that not an advantage to the richer teams?

I think that needs to be addressed in the next CBA because not only is it an advantage for the teams, it's also bad for the careers of guys like Souray and Nylander. IMO, the GM who signs a stupid contract should be stuck with that decision... would help rein in some of the salary inflation and get rid of nimrods like Sather.

 

[CC Chiefs*]

I think that needs to be addressed in the next CBA because not only is it an advantage for the teams, it's also bad for the careers of guys like Souray and Nylander. IMO, the GM who signs a stupid contract should be stuck with that decision... would help rein in some of the salary inflation and get rid of nimrods like Sather.

Agreed! Get rid of ALL frontloaded contracts also. IMO the spirit of the CBA/cap is gone if you allow the frontloaded contracts to go on.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Absolutely, and I think the league's response to Kovalchuk was their first notice to the NHLPA that those contracts won't be around much longer.

 

[CC Chiefs*]

Absolutely, and I think the league's response to Kovalchuk was their first notice to the NHLPA that those contracts won't be around much longer.

You're missing the point. NHLPA doesn't care about the circumventing contracts. Again those contracts were designed to help the GM's the players just want the money.

 

[CupfortheSharks]

The cap is a good thing. It levels the playing field. I would make the following adjustments to the system:

-Eliminate front loaded contracts
-Eliminate the ability to bury contracts in the AHL(or anywhere else)
-Allow teams to trade a player and keep part of his cap hit
-Allow teams to resign their own UFAs at a discounted cap hit

 

[NewEnglandSportsFan*]

The cap is a good thing. It levels the playing field. I would make the following adjustments to the system:

-Eliminate front loaded contracts
-Eliminate the ability to bury contracts in the AHL(or anywhere else)
-Allow teams to trade a player and keep part of his cap hit
-Allow teams to resign their own UFAs at a discounted cap hit

since when are teams forced to give their UFAs a raise? And if you mean the player just has a lesser Cap hit than actual salary... that just even more blatantly goes against the spirit of the cap than any circumvention that has occurred so far.

 

[tarheelhockey]

You're missing the point. NHLPA doesn't care about the circumventing contracts. Again those contracts were designed to help the GM's the players just want the money.

Nevertheless it will be a fight to put rules in place to prevent front-loading. Nothing can be had for free in CBA negotiations.

 

[CC Chiefs*]

Nevertheless it will be a fight to put rules in place to prevent front-loading. Nothing can be had for free in CBA negotiations.

The players don't care about how just how much! And many GM's don't care how much just how can we circumvent the cap!

 

[tarheelhockey]

The players don't care about how just how much! And many GM's don't care how much just how can we circumvent the cap!

The point, though, is that the BoG will almost certainly take a position of trying to rein in frontloading by establishing preventative rules. And the NHLPA will, at least ostensibly, attempt to roadblock those rules unless they are "paid off" through other concessions. Typical of the bargaining process.

 

[Crazy_Ike]

I think that needs to be addressed in the next CBA because not only is it an advantage for the teams

Except it's not.

Can you find me a single example of a have-not team wanting to bury a contract but not being able to?

Surely, if it's such an advantage, it would have been an issue at least... once... right?

No?

Maybe it's not an advantage then, is it?

Fact is there isn't a single team in the league who wants to bury a contract who for some reason "can't". Having Redden in the minors doesn't give the Rangers any competitive advantage whatsoever over a team simply not signing players to bad deals. You're being led by the nose by anti-ownership BS that has no basis in reality.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Except it's not.

Can you find me a single example of a have-not team wanting to bury a contract but not being able to?

Surely, if it's such an advantage, it would have been an issue at least... once... right?

No?

Maybe it's not an advantage then, is it?

Fact is there isn't a single team in the league who wants to bury a contract who for some reason "can't". Having Redden in the minors doesn't give the Rangers any competitive advantage whatsoever over a team simply not signing players to bad deals. You're being led by the nose by anti-ownership BS that has no basis in reality.

When the Capitals buried Nylander they freed $4.8M, allowing them to pursue a player like Scott Hannan ($4.5M) and increase their odds of winning a Cup.

How is that not a competitive advantage over the teams who are simply forced to live with their mistakes?

 

[Actual Thought*]

Personally I think the cap has reduced quality in a huge way. The 95 Devils for example would have destroyed the Cup winning Blackhawks. The hockey was much better. I also agree that it is the fans that get punished. "Thanks for the support now it's some crappy franchises' turn". I think the cap cheapens the cup and winning it will never be the same. Being the least bad team isn't my idea of being a Stanley Cup Champion. In the 90s the Rangers had the highest payroll most years and yet failed to make the playoffs most years. The "buying the cup" argument doesn't hold water. This isn't sour grapes from me either as the Wings have won the cup under the cap system and continue to compete.

 

[Actual Thought*]

Since when is a level playing field good in competition? If you are a failure as a franchise we will change the rules to accommodate your incompetence? Maybe we should just let the good teams put together their rosters and then have a "special draft" where all the failing teams take their players.

The cap is a good thing. It levels the playing field. I would make the following adjustments to the system:

-Eliminate front loaded contracts
-Eliminate the ability to bury contracts in the AHL(or anywhere else)
-Allow teams to trade a player and keep part of his cap hit
-Allow teams to resign their own UFAs at a discounted cap hit

 

[AllByDesign]

When the Capitals buried Nylander they freed $4.8M, allowing them to pursue a player like Scott Hannan ($4.5M) and increase their odds of winning a Cup.

How is that not a competitive advantage over the teams who are simply forced to live with their mistakes?

You're premise is correct. The cap and the CBA were created with an assumptive result. They have not only found that the net result was quite different from what theu had intended, and of course have found loopholes to exploit. If the league had negotiated outright release into the CBA this wouldn't be an issue. You sign someone predicated on past experience and expect them to meet or exceed those results. The currect contract allows players to underperform and keep their jobs. The only resolution available is to place the player on Waivers and have them play in the AHL or Europe. This does give a small advatage to the high revenue teams because they can afford to pay a player not to play with their intended team. A team on a shoestring budget can't afford to make the same mistakes, but they do have the option.

The NHL should be fighting to have the same deal that NFL teams have. Outright release.