Not only that, but we are doing it without any cap circumvention.
This right here.
If you look at the other top ranked teams, like detroit, vancouver, new jersey, nashville, etc.
What do those teams have in common? cap circumventing contracts and awful long term contracts.
nashville recently joined the ranks, but san jose has stood firm on not running the team like that.
If you look at the other top ranked teams, like detroit, vancouver, new jersey, nashville, etc.
What do those teams have in common? cap circumventing contracts and awful long term contracts.
nashville recently joined the ranks, but san jose has stood firm on not running the team like that.
I assume Forbes was using actual payroll, not cap hit to calculate these though, right? So I don't know if cap-circumvention makes a difference in their calcs. Not that I don't think we're better than them, though.
I assume Forbes was using actual payroll, not cap hit to calculate these though, right? So I don't know if cap-circumvention makes a difference in their calcs. Not that I don't think we're better than them, though.
Actual payroll. Circumvention makes a difference as the teams haven't yet reached the end of those circumventing deals. And most of those teams that use them will retire or trade the those players when they hit the low numbers.
The Sharks benefited from the years before they were bumping the cap as well. A very low budget team in the WCF before the last lockout and the early JT years.
