HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

Tweak to Salary Cap

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-19-2012, 10:41 PM
  #1
PAZ
.
 
PAZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,665
vCash: 500
Tweak to Salary Cap

Just a small change to further increase incentive of drafting and developing well, and gives team a little bit of an edge.

New Rule: Players that are drafted and developed by a team can go 10% higher than the current cap IF they meet the following requirements.

a) All Free Agents/Trades only make up 20% of the team's cap.
b) The players signing were originally drafted and developed by the organization

Example: If the current salary cap is $66 million, only 13 million or less of the current teams cap can come from free agents. During this timeframe, the team would have a 10% higher cap to resign/sign their player/prospects they drafted which would give them a $72 million salary cap.

If a team above the salary cap decides to go this route and then decide they want to make a trade/signing in the future that would put them above the 20% free agent/trade cap, they would have to meet the current salary cap of 66 million before the trade/signing was approved.

After re-reading it actually sounds pretty horrid, but I already typed it so might as well see what HFBoards thinks.

PAZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 10:55 PM
  #2
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14,743
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PAZ View Post
Just a small change to further increase incentive of drafting and developing well, and gives team a little bit of an edge.

New Rule: Players that are drafted and developed by a team can go 10% higher than the current cap IF they meet the following requirements.

a) All Free Agents/Trades only make up 20% of the team's cap.
b) The players signing were originally drafted and developed by the organization

Example: If the current salary cap is $66 million, only 13 million or less of the current teams cap can come from free agents. During this timeframe, the team would have a 10% higher cap to resign/sign their player/prospects they drafted which would give them a $72 million salary cap.

If a team above the salary cap decides to go this route and then decide they want to make a trade/signing in the future that would put them above the 20% free agent/trade cap, they would have to meet the current salary cap of 66 million before the trade/signing was approved.

After re-reading it actually sounds pretty horrid, but I already typed it so might as well see what HFBoards thinks.
Possible issues.

1) If a draft pick is traded to a team, who then uses it and develops that player, is he considered a "traded player"? If he is drafted, but his rights are traded before he signs a contract, is he a 'traded player"? If he signs a contract but is traded before ever playing an NHL game, is he considered a "traded player"?

Actually, that's all I'm focusing on right now. The NBA has a ton of loopholes that relate to all sorts of incentives, and it basically has made the market a complete cluster.

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 11:18 PM
  #3
DL44
Registered User
 
DL44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Left Coast
Posts: 5,844
vCash: 105
i proposed something in the same ballpark early on.. i called it a Loyalty Clause.

A lot more basic...
You get into cap limits within the cap and get pretty complicated, and we know both sides like it simple..

the Loyalty Clause...
- All home drafted players with the home club for more than 5 yrs get a 5% discount on their cap charge.

- All players not with their original club, but with the same club for 7 yrs - 5% discounted cap hit.

And then you could take it to other steps... like... same drafted club additional 1% cap hit discount per yr with the same team after 5 yrs.... so... 1-4 yrs - 0%, 5 yrs - 5%, 6 yrs 6%, etc...

So players with a different drafted club - same system, but 2 yrs later... 7 yrs 5% discount, 8 yrs 6%, etc...

Just another thing 'outside the cap' however..

Daly would likely die on hill before it would be accepted.


Last edited by DL44: 12-19-2012 at 11:23 PM.
DL44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 11:18 PM
  #4
PAZ
.
 
PAZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,665
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
Possible issues.

1) If a draft pick is traded to a team, who then uses it and develops that player, is he considered a "traded player"? If he is drafted, but his rights are traded before he signs a contract, is he a 'traded player"? If he signs a contract but is traded before ever playing an NHL game, is he considered a "traded player"?

Actually, that's all I'm focusing on right now. The NBA has a ton of loopholes that relate to all sorts of incentives, and it basically has made the market a complete cluster.
Ya I realize that, which is why I realize it was pretty idiotic. But for the hell of it, it would be the team that drafts and develops, prospects that are traded for aren't included in that.

PAZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 11:29 PM
  #5
DL44
Registered User
 
DL44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Left Coast
Posts: 5,844
vCash: 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by DL44 View Post
i proposed something in the same ballpark early on.. i called it a Loyalty Clause.

A lot more basic...
You get into cap limits within the cap and get pretty complicated, and we know both sides like it simple..

the Loyalty Clause...
- All home drafted players with the home club for more than 5 yrs get a 5% discount on their cap charge.

- All players not with their original club, but with the same club for 7 yrs - 5% discounted cap hit.

And then you could take it to other steps... like... same drafted club additional 1% cap hit discount per yr with the same team after 5 yrs.... so... 1-4 yrs - 0%, 5 yrs - 5%, 6 yrs 6%, etc...

So players with a different drafted club - same system, but 2 yrs later... 7 yrs 5% discount, 8 yrs 6%, etc...

Just another thing 'outside the cap' however..

Daly would likely die on hill before it would be accepted.
Also if you were curious... you could run this model with any team and figure out how much cushion each team gains from this clause if it were to happen Right Now.

The numbers aren't significant, but its something... a little reward or breathing room if you will...

DL44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 11:52 PM
  #6
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 11,870
vCash: 500
I always have to ask: What problem does a proposal like this solve?

Aren't teams already rewarded for drafting and developing players well?

mouser is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 12:12 AM
  #7
PAZ
.
 
PAZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,665
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mouser View Post
I always have to ask: What problem does a proposal like this solve?

Aren't teams already rewarded for drafting and developing players well?
They are, but while people will tend to disagree with me on this subject, I personally think the league almost has too much parity. I'm 100% for the salary cap and the parity it comes with, but I also miss having that team that is the 'team to beat'. Sure theres always a team like that in todays game, but it's not the same as when there was no cap. I was thinking this might help teams longetivity, prime example would be when the Hawks won. If there was something like this, they'd be able to keep one or two more key components like Ladd and Byfuglien.

PAZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 01:11 AM
  #8
craigcaulks*
Registered Luser.
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: East Van!
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
Possible issues.

1) If a draft pick is traded to a team, who then uses it and develops that player, is he considered a "traded player"? If he is drafted, but his rights are traded before he signs a contract, is he a 'traded player"? If he signs a contract but is traded before ever playing an NHL game, is he considered a "traded player"?
That would be a remarkably easy issue to deal with.

craigcaulks* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 01:32 AM
  #9
Sanderson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 4,789
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PAZ View Post
They are, but while people will tend to disagree with me on this subject, I personally think the league almost has too much parity. I'm 100% for the salary cap and the parity it comes with, but I also miss having that team that is the 'team to beat'. Sure theres always a team like that in todays game, but it's not the same as when there was no cap. I was thinking this might help teams longetivity, prime example would be when the Hawks won. If there was something like this, they'd be able to keep one or two more key components like Ladd and Byfuglien.
The Blackhawks weren't able to keep these players because they signed expensive UFAs. They are not a good example.

No team should be allowed to go above the cap no matter what. It simply isn't necessary.

The draft grants you talent, the cap might limit it, that's the way it goes. Draft and cap belong to the same system, don't seperate them. The system is the same for everyone and those who lose players through the cap are usually teams that benefited by getting high draftpicks that now cost a lot. In the case of Chicago, the system allowed them to get Kane and Toews, why should they get any further advantage?

If players want to play together they can make it work, most of the time they don't really care about that though.

Sanderson is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2012, 08:53 AM
  #10
cheswick
Non-registered User
 
cheswick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Peg City
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,090
vCash: 500
The purpose of the cap is to maintain competitive balance. Baisically this allows teams with money to spend over the cap. Any system that favours the rich over the poor wouldn't fly in this era of the NHL.

cheswick is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:11 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.