Too bad Stich's idea isn't going to be in.

Discussion in 'Fugu's Business of Hockey Forum' started by Coffey77, Dec 16, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
View Users: View Users
  1. Coffey77

    Coffey77 Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2002
    Messages:
    3,340
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    I don't mind a luxury tax, especially one that's reasonable and that has some bite to the tax level. But one thing I really would have liked was Stich's idea of having a team rewarded by keeping a player on their team with a percentage discount on their contract. For example, Yzerman has been a Wing since 1983 so only say 75% of his contract is actually counted towards a cap. I think Stich's idea was to have any player with the same team over the last 7 years only have 75% of his contract counted and declines for less years.

    The one fear I have of a cap or tax system is the rapid player turnover. One thing I like about following a team is following certain players that have been there for a while. With this rule in place, teams are rewarded for keeping players on their team. And players have an incentive to stay with their respective team (if they have been there a while) because they know that team can probably afford to pay them the most money since not all of it is counted towards a cap.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"