rikster wrote: ↑Sun Jun 30, 2019 8:08 am
Mëds wrote: ↑Sun Jun 30, 2019 6:12 am
Rikster the buyout rules that penalize cap space are there not to protect owners and GM’s from themselves as Diehard suggests, but rather to level the playing field and prevent deep pocket teams from exploiting the market and just pumping and dumping every year. It keeps budget teams in the mix and has created this parity we see league-wide.
The PA wouldn’t give two shits if the next CBA allowed for buyouts that didn’t count against the cap. So long as the player still gets his due, It’s just more money in the unions’s coffers and the player’s wallet because the hour after a guy is bought out he can sign somewhere else.
I do think there should be provisions to allow for situations where a player just goes off a cliff like Eriksson has. But there also needs to be penalties for GM’s who over pay aging stars and just want out from under their mistake. It would have to be weighed factoring in players age when signing, year-to-year performance compared to previous performance, etc.....
The system needs a way to cleanse itself regardless of whose to blame...
BTW, the notion that 31 Managers with give or take $80 Million to spend in an "as compared to" salary system in an ultra competitive league where the stakes are so high should be expected to never make a mistake is silly and irrational....
lol story, years ago a friend of mine asked me to join him at the Auto Auction... he and his management team were there not to buy, but to dump inventory...
The night before the auction we all gathered for dinner and confirmed that we were there to sell, not buy...
The morning of the auction we all gathered for breakfast and confirmed that we were there to sell, not buy....
So the first car the auction ran was an off colour Ford Contour with a hit over $2,000 and who had his hand up to buy it....My friend....
As soon as he purchased it his managers who had been spread out came over and asked him what the heck he was doing?? He had got caught up in the excitement and couldn't resist overpaying for a lemon car which he didn't need...
As for league parity, the NFL allows teams to cut players before the season begins and his salary is neither paid or counted against the cap...
As for protecting smaller market teams, a look at the current salary position of all teams finds the likes of Arizona at the top and the Rangers and the Canucks at the bottom...
This protection for small market teams is less of an issue as the league wide revenues have grown and been shared and expansion has taken place and a new TV deal on the horizon...
And the players took less of the revenue cut in the last CBA...
Anyways, my two cents for the next CBA is;
Allow a franchise player tag whose salary is outside the cap to allow the McDavids and Crosbys and hopefully Pettersson's of the league to earn a salary that takes into consideration their on ice ability and their off ice ability to generate revenues for the league...
Work out a system where buyouts can be made and aren't counted against the cap...
Take care...
For starters I have never understood how the NFL Player's Union signed on a the dotted line permitting their members to simply get axed without compensation. But the NFL is cutthroat.
The cap penalizing protection needs to be built in because teams like the Rangers, Maple leaves, Kings, and to a lesser extent Vancouver, Boston, and Chicago, could wade into free agency, and throw crazy money and max term around and gobble up all of the big name free agents, and they could sign their stars to stupid ass extensions at the same time, then when a player is past his best before date and still has 5 years remaining they just buy the player out. So the talent would get monopolized, and teams like Winnipeg, Arizona, Anaheim, Edmonton, Carolina, etc., would all find themselves picking up the scraps and never capable of retaining their best players, or even having a shot at signing a marquis free agent, because the rich teams could always overpay and simply buy their success. That was the reason for going to a cap system in the first place.
I agree. Work out a system where buyouts can be made that aren't counted against the cap. But there would have to be some regulations on it. Like say Toronto comes in and buys Tavares at $11M at max term, and he goes from being a 80 point first line centerman to being a 50 point second line slug the next season, and say 3 years later is still a 50 point guy, then yes, there should be a way to buy him out and have no penalty because you paid for an asset based on X performances past, and at 27, there should be no reason for an immediate decline.
There should be a penalty applied to a team for a buyout when a GM (with full permission from the owners) blows his own brains out with an asinine contract offer that nobody else could match. Like say if someone offered Malkin $12M in 3 years and gave him say 5 years when he's already 36 years old at that point.