View Single Post
Old
09-24-2004, 12:29 PM
  #3
Guest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,269
vCash: 500
Thanks to Demented Reality for the support.

I've been touting what I call the Homegrown Cap for the past 4-6 months now.

It's pretty basic, there is a hard cap with two exemptions, the franchise player rule which would say any player that has played X number of years on the same team is exempt, players who are drafted or developed by a team are exempt.

For the franchise player rule, I would say anywhere from 7-10 years of service, otherwise the rule wouldn't do too much. It should be for the Pronger's, Steven's, Naslund's, Sundin's of the league, not the lesser tenured players like Shanahan or Turgeon by example.

For the developmental rule, I would say that as long as the player played their first game in the NHL for that team, they would be exempt. That would count the same if they were a free agent signing out of college, or a draft pick, or even a traded for prospect who broke into the league with that team.

The things that you are capping then are the players who are traded and the players who are signed as free agents. I believe if you set the cap to even $31 million like the NHL is proposing for the ENTIRE ROSTER, it would make a difference.

In millions of dollars, this is how the NHL stacked up as of current rosters for non-homegrown payrolls at the end of the season. These numbers are without franchise player exemptions, so figure accordingly in several cases.

1 TOR $70.6
2 PHI $66.7
3 STL $59.2
4 DET $55.2
5 DAL $54.0
6 LA $45.2
7 NYR $44.7
8 NYI $40.0
9 VAN $38.0
10 ANA $38.0
11 COL $34.8
12 BOS $34.4
13 TB $27.4
14 CAR $25.6
15 BUF $25.2
16 EDM $24.8
17 OTT $24.7
18 NJD $24.0
19 PHO $23.1
20 MTL $23.1
21 CGY $22.8
22 CBJ $20.3
23 ATL $20.3
24 FLA $19.2
25 SJ $18.2
26 NSH $17.1
27 MIN $16.6
28 CHI $10.6
29 WAS $8.2
30 PIT $7.6

Again, these are the numbers at the end of the season, which has changed since then for sure. If you take the franchise player exemption, there are still several teams over $31 million. It's no surprise that many of the big spenders of the past were at the top of the list, as they are the ones who were driving the free agency market. It's no surprise that many of the teams at the bottom are the one's having a hard time to stay in the game and are not the big free agent spenders. Many of the teams at the bottom had to give up their players to the teams at the top for salary concerns. Maybe all things would be more equal if that wasn't required at the time. It also shows how much some teams who can still contend can compete with homegrown talent. Cup finalists Calgary & Tampa Bay being among the middle ground.

Guest is online now