Proposed "Redden" rule
View Single Post
10-17-2012, 01:16 PM
Join Date: Jan 2009
Originally Posted by
You and goose need to take your heads out of the sand. The cap did not reduce wild spending like everyone claimed it would. Far from it. Now you use that same ludicrous "logic" here. After it's already been proven to be ********. Sorry, but that argument won't fly.
So you think Holik would have gotten the same contract post lockout?
Before the CBA there were contracts in place that you never would have seen after the first lockout. Now there are contracts in place that you likely won't see after this lockout.
Columbus and Dallas don't spend to the cap and were able to afford to take Redden on, and arguably could still be paying him and have him on their roster without many cap implications. The Rangers have spent to the cap, and were still able to outbid both of these teams because they had more money and could stash their problem so they could take the risk. Columbus and Dallas didn't have that kind of security, and couldn't go over the top and outbid a team that didn't have to pay any repercussions for their actions regardless of how the player performed.
This rule is fantastic.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by t3hg00se