View Single Post
07-20-2012, 11:47 AM
Coo coo ca cha!
brs03's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 12,216
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Ridley Simon View Post
How? it'll be as arbitrary as Shanaban's punishment decisions. That simply wont work and will reek of favouritism anytime a Flyer, Rangers, Penguins team gets the benefits of that.

That will never happen, so it needs to be addressed up front, not "when the guy retires at 38 in their first year of 1m salary, and at year 11 of the contract".

Hell, any contract over 5 years in length should count towards the cap even if a player retires. If the player HAS to retire for medical reasons, then the team can lobby the league for a bogey. And "old age" is not a medical reason
That's actually what I was thinking. Put a rule in place that "any contract over x years will count y% toward the cap if the player retires," for example. Maybe make an exemption for the final year of the deal or something like that. Maybe only make it to deals that take a player past 35 (since that's a cutoff everyone's familiar with), and maybe work out some sort of health exemption (although if the nature of LTIR doesn't change that wouldn't really be needed, because the guy's not going to want to retire and give up whatever he's owed).

Make the rules very clear from the get-go, so you know as soon as the deal is signed what to expect in the out years. Don't leave it up to the league or an arbitrator to decide. Let the team and player find a deal that they like, and let them take the risk in how they want to structure it.

brs03 is offline   Reply With Quote