View Single Post
11-28-2012, 12:00 PM
Global Moderator
Mess's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 63,504
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Kirkpatrick View Post
As I said, the ability of some teams to offer large, uninsured contracts "could easily affect parity just like cap-circumventing deals". It would be like the backdiving contract situation all over again.

Whether it's worth holding out for or not, it's certainly an understandable position for the league to aim for in terms of trying to create a somewhat level playing field for free agency.
If contract terms is designed to create parity among teams, then why are the Leafs a financial powerhouse that spend to the cap ceiling finishing at the bottom of the league standings, while the Phoenix Coyotes on life support, needing revenue sharing money (to pay its players) and playing at the cap floor, playing in the final 4 of the Stanley Cup playoffs?.

If parity is designed at creating a level playing surface, how do we explain how contract terms and amounts don't effect on ice success in the NHL. ie spending more does not equal >> success or competitive advantage and the actual results in fact show the opposite occurring.

Signature: There is no greater demonstration of Fan patience then to suggest to "Play the Kids " and be willing to accept the consequences of those actions..
Mess is offline