Quote:
Originally Posted by HatTricK09
I dont like this idea.
Cap space is supposed to stop richer teams from getting stacked too much, with this, poorer teams would be trading cap space every year and this will be abused.
|
I think this is a good point, but there are some ways that this could be mitigated.
First of all, it's on the poorer teams to trade wisely. I think cap space would be a pretty highly valued commodity, so they'd definitely be in the driver's seat as far as negotiations went. The system is the system, and the smart guys will always find ways to game the system.
Some markets will never be money makers, regardless of the quality of the product on the ice. For the other 24 or so teams, winning effects the bottom line. So if you're a poor team, trade for picks and futures. These are cost controlled assets that are going to make you better for a while before they cost you money. This can help you win. Winning makes money. Further winning on the cheap enables poorer teams to stay competitive, even if they never do start making lots of money.
Second, you could place a limit to the amount of cap a team could trade for. Maybe limit the amount they can have extra in a three year window. With the league taking all sorts of measures to ensure parity, the cyclical nature of success is pretty much guaranteed. By that I mean, you suck, you draft high, your players get good, you win a bit, and then start losing none-core guys to free agency. If you were to allow buying of cap space, teams that draft well could then probably use some of that money they were making before everyone needed contracts to extend their window by acquiring cap space. Another idea is if you sold space at one point, that could then be added to the amount you're allowed to purchase in the rest of the three year window after that. This could exacerbate the cyclical nature of success though, which is likely not what the league wants.