Would you support eliminating the salary cap and revenue sharing?
View Single Post
07-03-2012, 11:06 PM
Join Date: Oct 2011
Originally Posted by
Because winning the cup 'means more' in a dynasty dominated league.
Here's what i mean.
In a cap world, the idea is to get every team to be on 'equal footing' for lack of a better term. That means, the league is trying to make the sport equivalent to putting 30 names in a hat and picking out the winner. One year its your turn, the next year its the other guy's turn. In a perfect world, the league would see all 30 teams win 1 cup in the next 30 seasons.
It seems that with 30 "equal teams" in the sport, winning the cup is more of a random occurance, a coin flip, than you actually winning it because you were good and were the 'best team'.
As fans of cup winning teams, we all like to believe we won because we were the best....but the way the league is structured, its more like there were 30 ping pong balls spinning and your number just happened to get called.
Give me the dynasty...in sports where there are dynasties, you know you have to be GOOD to win a title and not just having it be 'your turn'.
Turns? Edmonton has had three number one picks in a row. Pittsburgh had four picks in the top 2 from 03-06. The Leafs haven't made the playoffs in 8 years. On the oposite end of the spectrum, when was the last time Detroit missed the playoffs?
With a cap, teams need to draft wisely, pick their players wisely, and develop them wisely. Imagine if Toronto just signed Parise, Suter, Semin, and Jagr on 20 million/per deals, and then offer sheeted Weber and Karlsson 25 million each, etc, etc. Obviously that's going to be the most talented team, they had their rich owner spend his fortune on winning.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by dan1el