It says here Players talking of $60 million luxury tax threshold
View Single Post
09-07-2004, 11:28 AM
Join Date: Feb 2003
A lot of this talk just reminds me back to the homegrown cap idea I had before. I won't go into it again, but I think it's best to give the advantage to the teams who develop their players the best, not penalize them. As the above examples with OTT and CHI, a homegrown cap would allow OTT to keep those players, and it would make a team like CHI struggle to ice a team that is competitive if they rely too much on signing players. At the same time, it limits CHI from altering the market and inflating the salaries of the players they might have to overspend for.
It's my belief that the teams who develop their players and are able to make wise moves should be rewarded, and the teams who have to sign players to remain competitive should not be rewarded. Simple as that. And if you think about the teams that would rather sign players like the Rangers of the past, they have enough money they could invest in a state of the art scouting and minor league system, but do they? They are getting better I would suggest, but it's lazy team management overall in the past that makes these mistakes.
The Coyotes are a good current example of this, they had neglected the farm for so long and when the new management came in they saw it as a weakness. They have slowly started to acquire younger players, although the quality is not there, that is why they are still signing free agents to supply the NHL team. In the future they will be a better team than before if they continue to develop players and work through the draft.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Guest