Well, if it leads to increased safety on the ice they might. Many players are pushing for tougher suspensions for hits to the head.
When you are talking about a monetary punishment, this logic fails. The punishment is meant to discourage future transgressions, and to impose hardship onto the offender that is reflective of his actions.
If Spezza pays $2500, he won't even notice it come off his paycheck. No deterrent for him, and no hardship incurred. For a player at the league minimum, playing as a call-up, that would represent about a quarter of that games paycheck. Now if you were to change the fine to say 0.6% of his annual salary (roughly half a games salary, if you want to punish further financially, suspend him), he might take note of it. That would bring the amount fined up almost double for players at the league minimum, so you could drop it down to 0.3% to keep it in line with the current fine if you like, however a better method would be to not always fine the full amount possible and make the amount a case by case judgement.
This methodology would bring fines in line with suspensions as far as monetary punishment goes for all players. By your logic, why is Spezza punished more financially then Condra when he is suspended? Shouldn't Spezza only lose a games salary at the league minimums rate, instead of 7 times that?
Good point here. I just feel the reason of a fine isn't really the monetary fine, but more to the fact that if the incident occured again the player would be a repeat offender giving Shanny the option to now suspend. I think the league realizes the money isn't a deterrent, but becoming a repeat offender is.