View Single Post
Old
09-04-2004, 05:05 PM
  #14
Trottier
Very Random
 
Trottier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 27,667
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by littleHossa
This [luxury tax] doesn't lower the player salaries, it doesn't regulate them either, as any owner who wants to sign a player isn't going to stop because of a luxury tax.
Hard evidence to the contrary: it's working in Major League Baseball. Look it up. Salaries overall have decreased 3% since the luxury tax was implemented in the 2002 CBA. With one notable exception - the team in NY that hasn't won anything since 2000 - not one team has ventured over the luxury tax threshold.

Of course, that may not impress those wishing draconian steps, with the fantasy of turning back salaries to yesteryear.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyersProspect2
a salery cap is the only way to achieve ulitmate competitiveness...
The NHL is lacking competiveness? Wonder if they are saying that in Anaheim, Carolina, Calgary, TB, etc. Let me guess: fan of a non-contender?

There are valid reasons for clamoring for changes to the CBA (though a hardcap is the worse thing that could happen to the NHL and its fans). But the idea that the league needs more competitivness (parity ) is without merit. All one needs to do is check the tightness of regular season standings, check the closeness of individual games on a nightly basis. Then, check the varied results of recent playoff seasons. The NHL is as competitive as any sports league can be without being watered down with medicority, er, parity.


Last edited by Trottier: 09-04-2004 at 05:11 PM.
Trottier is offline