Salary cap ideas on reforms

[dekelikekocur]

10% isn't a meaningful amount and the bottom feeders can cry me a river, oh no there is a slight bit of an advantage for teams that actually have fans, how crazy!

Working how? Because bottom feeders get unnaturally lifted while the teams doing the heavy lifting have zero benefits? No cap is as bad as the current cap system which is extreme on it's own.

Ohnoes, big cap teams don't get special treatment. No one cares.

Current cap situation is fine, 50%/50%. There shouldn't be a "rules for thee but not for me" approach to this and anyone advocating for said setup isn't interested in the league but only whining about their team not getting special treatment.

 

[NVious]

Ohnoes, big cap teams don't get special treatment. No one cares.

Current cap situation is fine, 50%/50%. There shouldn't be a "rules for thee but not for me" approach to this and anyone advocating for said setup isn't interested in the league but only whining about their team not getting special treatment.

This is the special treatment buddy, cry me a river poverty teams will actually have to attract fans.

 

[Qwijibo]

10% isn't a meaningful amount and the bottom feeders can cry me a river, oh no there is a slight bit of an advantage for teams that actually have fans, how crazy!

Working how? Because bottom feeders get unnaturally lifted while the teams doing the heavy lifting have zero benefits? No cap is as bad as the current cap system which is extreme on it's own.

You call an $8.77m advantage meaningless? Lol.

And it's working in the sense that there's never been more parity in the league. Any team can build up to be a cup contender. It's also instilled financial stability to small market teams. Teams folding and moving in today's NHL are a rarity. Look back at the 70's and 80s when some teams literally only lasted a year or 2 before having to move.

The league has grown leaps and bounds since implementing rhe salary cap. Do you remember when the league was so inconsequential in the US that games were broadcast on the OLN network (2004-5)? How about when the Penguins were close to having to relocate?

Having an equitable system where all teams can thrive is vital to the health of the league. So boo hoo if the biggest revenue earners don't get to ignore the rules.

 

[dekelikekocur]

This is the special treatment buddy, cry me a river poverty teams will actually have to attract fans.

Every team having the same hard cap is not special treatment.

Those teams drawing in more revenue? Any idea how much that drops if bad teams disappear? It's why all revenue is treated as "one" for HRR. Games are comprised of 2 teams, both teams play a part, all teams lead to revenue for all teams.

Don't like it? Go watch some other sport, stop whining because your team isn't getting favoritism and your GM sucks.

 

[tsujimoto74]

The only salary cap change I'd like to see is some sort of implementation for the playoffs. Perhaps something similar to the off-season, where you can go over the standard cap by a %.

I don't want it to be too strict, and restrict trades - but I think we can all agree the Kucherov/Stone stuff is a little too convenient.

Otherwise, it works fine.

Yup, the league really needs to do something to address this issue in the next CBA. I've seen a lot of Vegas fans try to claim their playoff roster would've beep cap compliant, but that's only if you ignore the ~$10mm of healthy scratches they had sitting in the press box, and that is not how the cap works.

 

[Qwijibo]

Yup, the league really needs to do something to address this issue in the next CBA. I've seen a lot of Vegas fans try to claim their playoff roster would've beep cap compliant, but that's only if you ignore the ~$10mm of healthy scratches they had sitting in the press box, and that is not how the cap works.

Agreed. They need to address the playoff (lack of) cap issue. But the salary cap on a whole is working exactly as intended.

 

[Tap on the Ankle]

Purely from a fan/hype perspective I wouldn't mind seeing NMCs limited in some way, maybe slots per team or a max NMC term of 2-3 years, maybe no NMC and just the 10 team no-trade lists. Just anything to loosen things up and make player movement a little easier.

 

[Kobe Armstrong]

No, lack of a draft and relegation are not the same thing. Same result, but not the same things.

Do you feel smart? Do you know of any major professional sports league that use relegation and have a draft?

For this conversation, it is the same thing.

It can safely be implied that if there is a league with relegation, that league has no draft.

 

[Gaud]

10% isn't a meaningful amount and the bottom feeders can cry me a river, oh no there is a slight bit of an advantage for teams that actually have fans, how crazy!

Working how? Because bottom feeders get unnaturally lifted while the teams doing the heavy lifting have zero benefits? No cap is as bad as the current cap system which is extreme on it's own.

Id say it’s significant. 8 M gets you a solid player. Add to that some teams have better tax breaks than others

 

[NVious]

Id say it’s significant. 8 M gets you a solid player. Add to that some teams have better tax breaks than others

It's just as significant as the tax differences between higher and lower taxed cities.

Every team having the same hard cap is not special treatment.

Those teams drawing in more revenue? Any idea how much that drops if bad teams disappear? It's why all revenue is treated as "one" for HRR. Games are comprised of 2 teams, both teams play a part, all teams lead to revenue for all teams.

Don't like it? Go watch some other sport, stop whining because your team isn't getting favoritism and your GM sucks.

It is 100% special treatment considering teams can spend way more, but they don't due to the poverty teams needing protection.

Did you go watch other sports when there was no cap or were you whining for a cap?

 

[Nikishin Go Boom]

Soccer doesn't have tanking because they don't have a draft.

Relegation is a heck of a financial blow. It isn’t the draft as you say

year one a relegated EPL team loses in the neighborhood of 100 million pounds in revenue and they lose even more money in the 2nd and 3rd years as their parachute payments dissolve.

 

[Perfect_Drug]

As an Edmonton fan, who has recent history on both sides of this debate, I am 100% in favor of the hard cap.

That said, there's a LOT of space to iterate, and make things more dynamic without shaking the spirit of what the cap brings (parity, cost certainty).

 

[Golden_Jet]

same thing

Since when is relegation and no draft, the same thing.

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

Leagues with relegation don't have North American style playoffs

 

[innitfam]

Personally, I think that a team should be allowed an unlimited number of buyouts.
It is hard to understand why you would not want to allow this.
I think this would solve the problem. If a player is signed to a big contract, and he is not performing, he should be allowed to be bought out.
If the NHLPA has a problem with this, then the specifics of the buyout can be negotiated. Maybe even allow the player to be paid in full if bought out as an option but without any cap repercussions.

For example, Tavares is owed 11M next season. The Leafs should be allowed to fully buy out that contract if they want. Tavares gets 11M and is instantly a UFA and the Leafs should not be penalized for it.

There definitely would be a lot more movement in the league and as a fan, it would be more fun to see how things play out.

Teams are allowed an unlimited number of regular buyouts as far as I know. It's just not usually prudent to have more than 1 or 2.

 

[Gaud]

It's just as significant as the tax differences between higher and lower taxed cities.


It is 100% special treatment considering teams can spend way more, but they don't due to the poverty teams needing protection.

Did you go watch other sports when there was no cap or were you whining for a cap?

exactly - which is another point i brought up earlier. Mtl, Tor and Ottawa have some of the biggest income tax rates in the NHL (I say some because the order changes as the salary increases), some times as much as 12% compared to the teams at the other end of the spectrum. Teams who would both be a "low tax" and a "big market" in a situation in which they are able to go over the cap for a fee) could have the advantage of being able to give 20%+ to their player more than those other teams.

I'm a habs fan, but i'd rather see sportsmanlike competition between teams on the same footing than rich teams winning on advantages not available to all.

 

[Qwijibo]

I think ultimately we’ll see some kind of cap/contract reform. In some respects the PA loves contracts like Huberdeau’s because it means big, guaranteed salaries for the players.

But the flipside is players are stuck with a team if their play doesn’t warrant their contract. Huberdeau is miserable in Calgary. But because of that contract he’ll never be able to leave. It’s great for him financially, but I think he’d negate it and sign for less elsewhere if he could. At the moment that’s not an option.

It actually is an option. If a olsuer is willing to forfeit west they're owed they could agree to a mutual contract termination. But who in thier right mind would walk away from that kind of guaranteed money when it's unlikely they'd be able to get even a fraction of it elsewhere.

 

[Howboutthempanthers]

The salary cap is great for the league.

 

[dekelikekocur]

It's just as significant as the tax differences between higher and lower taxed cities.


It is 100% special treatment considering teams can spend way more, but they don't due to the poverty teams needing protection.

Did you go watch other sports when there was no cap or were you whining for a cap?

I've been a wings fan since birth pretty much, I have no issue with the hard cap because I understand the reason behind it and have no issue with a balanced play field for all teams as a side effect of said hard cap.

 

[Bust]

I've been a wings fan since birth pretty much, I have no issue with the hard cap because I understand the reason behind it and have no issue with a balanced play field for all teams as a side effect of said hard cap.

There wouldn't be much issue with the cap overall if it was actually an even playing field. Problem is, its not.

 

[dekelikekocur]

There wouldn't be much issue with the cap overall if it was actually an even playing field. Problem is, its not.

While the cap was implemented for HRR and the 50/50 aspect, it does create a more balanced field. Look back to what teams were spending on player payroll during the 90s and early 00s. Huge disparity in the top and bottom. What's worse, most of the top spenders really weren't contenders.

 

[Bust]

While the cap was implemented for HRR and the 50/50 aspect, it does create a more balanced field. Look back to what teams were spending on player payroll during the 90s and early 00s. Huge disparity in the top and bottom. What's worse, most of the top spenders really weren't contenders.

You're not wrong. It has created more balance than the pre cap days.

My issue I guess is in the definition - its either balanced or its not. i don't believe its balanced. i understand that's not the reason for the cap being there - I just made a point that fans' issues with the cap is that it didn't fix the imbalances, just shifted them to other teams.

Fans of the supposed "rich" teams spend crazy money on ticket prices and have tax disadvantages (as well as others). That's where the animosity lies IMO. Complete balance would be impossible to achieve considering the game is played in 2 different countries, but that doesn't mean work couldn't be done to mitigate some of these disadvantages/advantages.

 

[Qwijibo]

Imagine the player eliminating his team knowing he's coming back to them next season.



Buyout without cap penalty.

Stamkos (34) wants 15 mil/year

Sign Stamkos 8 years at 7.5 mil/year. Buy him out after 4.


My suggestion, Franchise player doesn't count on the cap. One per team

Doesn't work when you factor in the fsct thst buyout are included in the player portion of the HRR split. So the players who didn't get bought out essentially foot the bill for all the buyout in the form of escrow. Also. Owners aren't fans of throwing millions of dollars away because their gm's made a mistake.

 

[dekelikekocur]

You're not wrong. It has created more balance than the pre cap days.

My issue I guess is in the definition - its either balanced or its not. i don't believe its balanced. i understand that's not the reason for the cap being there - I just made a point that fans' issues with the cap is that it didn't fix the imbalances, just shifted them to other teams.

Fans of the supposed "rich" teams spend crazy money on ticket prices and have tax disadvantages (as well as others). That's where the animosity lies IMO. Complete balance would be impossible to achieve considering the game is played in 2 different countries, but that doesn't mean work couldn't be done to mitigate some of these disadvantages/advantages.

It didn't shift anything to other teams, all teams have to abide by the hard cap. It doesn't create any imbalance, it forces all teams to the same salary limitations.

Fan spending has no bearing on league balance.

The tax thing is literally fans of shitty teams whining about why their teams sucks without looking at the real reasons. If the tax thing was such a huge advantage, the only teams that would be winning the cup would be Dallas, Tampa, Florida, Vegas and Seattle in the cap era, and as has been shown, that really isn't the case. Dallas up until the past couple years has mostly been irrelevant, Tampa had a run then fell to obscurity till a few years ago and are already trending back into bubble team, Florida is just starting to show up, Vegas had what has to have been one of the oddest inception drafts/player build ups I've ever seen.

Two countries is meaningless, players all paid in USD. It's not like Canadian teams take a 36% hit because their players are paid in CAD. If anything, the disparity in USD to CAD benefits Canadian team players.

Players have tax accountants and money managers that put them in the best tax advantaged situation possible. But again, fan spending has no bearing on balance. The real imbalances occur where coaching, scouting and non ice related costs are. Big market teams can spend significantly more to lure coaches, GMs, scouts, and analytics people than small market teams and despite that disparity, those same big market teams are still mostly non factors.

 

[Kobe Armstrong]

Since when is relegation and no draft, the same thing.

You know any relegation leagues that have drafts?

Would be a great strategy to banish the top prospect to the 2nd division every year