View Single Post
Old
12-12-2012, 10:44 AM
  #343
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,365
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canucker View Post
I think a solid revenue sharing policy or luxury tax penalty for teams that overspend should be more apt rather than trying to take it out on the players by limiting their rights. Players shouldn't be penalized for owners who can't be fiscally responsible. The onus should be on owners, and their GM's to act responsibly. Obviously there should be some rules in place (variance), but limiting term to 5 years is a bit extreme and unnecessary.
I think there should also be solid revenue sharing to supplement a cap, and like I said earlier I'd prefer a luxury tax (as obviously all the regulars on this board are fans of a big money franchise - by NHL standards anyways).

I also think that limiting term to 5 years is extreme, that's why I said something like 7 (without the home town advantage) would be better.

Honestly we've not been able to see one of these backdiving contracts through to their completion yet so I'm not convinced they are bad for the league, but I can see why they'd want to cut down on them. They are huge liabilities - it's absurd that the Minnesota Wild owe two players 90% of their estimated franchise value.

I recognize that this is not the players problem per se, but like I said it's time for each side to make some major concessions and if contract term limits is what the league wants to achieve then they'd better be ready to move on other areas (such as fluctuations from year to year.. thereby still allowing teams to circumvent the cap ceiling to some extent) to make it palatable for the players.

Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
Free agency will never be stable with teams needing to hit the cap floor, hence why the Florida Panthers overpaid and NMC'd players that should never otherwise recieve 3-4 year deals north of $3m/per year.
You picked a poor example IMO. Sure Jovanovski and Upshall are overpaid (by no more than $1m each) but guys like Fleishman and Kopecky were more or less full value for their contracts - by UFA standards - and more importantly the Panthers jumpstarted their ascent towards (hopefully) being a perennial playoff team.

Nobody who looked at that team on June 30 2011 would have thought they'd be in the playoffs next season, but a handful of "bad" contracts got them there. And no one deal is big enough to blow up in their faces.

Anyway there is always going to be inflation and there are always going to be bad contracts. However if a certain type of contract is identified as a hazard to the health of most teams then it makes sense to look at eliminating those.

dave babych returns is offline