View Single Post
10-13-2006, 09:57 AM
Registered User
znk's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,074
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Hackett View Post
Well, its like picking the lesser of 2 evils. There is no perfect system that I am aware of.

the salary cap has alot of flaws too. I think it punishes good organizations. (Teams that draft well and trade well and then lose thier own developed talent a few years later strictly for cap reasons)

On the other hand, the pre lockout CBA gave a huge advantage to larger market teams.

But even under the old system, small market or large market, teams didn't have to "cheat". It was simply their choice to cheat because the refs were letting them and most teams tried to model themselves like the devils. There were exceptions, Edmonton was one of the fastest teams in the league those years and relied on their up tempo style to win games despite their budget.

And I think teams can win championships even if their budget does not compare to other markets. They just have to do a better job at developing talent.

Baseball has whacky disparity in terms of team budgets but championship wise, there has been alot of parity since 2000

2000 - New York Yankees

2001 - Arizona Diamondbacks

2002 - Anaheim Angles?

2003 - Florida Marlins ?

2004 - Boston Red Sox

2005 - Chicago White Sox

2006 - will have a new champion (mets, cards, A's or Tigers)

Case in point, I dont know which system is better
Look at what happend to the marlins after they won.

znk is offline   Reply With Quote