Which franchises would have benefited the most of a salary cap pre-2005?

[De Montreal]

I was wondering the impact the salary cap and the new CBA had on parity in the league and I came across the question, which franchises suffered the most from a lack of salary cap / similar devices before it was induced in the league after 2005 lockout?

Any team that had a very solid core of young players in the early 2000s, but because of lack of money, couldnt afford to keep them?

Click to read more...

 

[I Hate Blake Coleman]

The Rangers because they would have had to put actual thought into the contracts they handed out.

 

[Shakey Rustie]

North Stars, Nordiques, Jets, and Whalers.

 

[HoseEmDown]

Tampa had management issues that hurt more then the salary cap but the cap did prevent us from keeping both Lecavalier and Richards.

 

[Legionnaire]

All of the rebuilding teams. Multiple expansions really screwed them as well.

 

[Machinehead]

The Rangers because they would have had to put actual thought into the contracts they handed out.

This.

Sather is actually really good when he has imposed limits to his madness. Our record pre-lockout and post-lockout speaks for itself.

 

[deckercky]

I think the WCE era Canucks could have done better, if only because they weren't a big salary team yet, and other teams would have been hindered.

 

[MoreOrr]

North Stars, Nordiques, Jets, and Whalers.

Came to post that.