wprager
Administrator
Number of posts : 52830
Age : 62
Location : Kanata
Favorite Team : Ottawa
Registration date : 2008-08-05
sandysensfan wrote:
The difference is 5M. How about they split it in the middle -- or do it at 63M? The issue is the floor. If the Cap ceiling is 65M then the floor is 49M.. which the NHL thinks is too high. Why don't they have a $20M or $25M flat difference between the high and the low? It's always been the floor causing the problems... not the high.
There has also been reports (Eklund again) that the NHL may consider a 30% salary variance within the contracts. Now that's more than the NHLPA requested... so what does the NHL want back? At least... if that is indeed the truth...
That's it in a nutshell. Spread the ceiling and floor, getting rid of stupid contracts, and, sure, the parity in the league takes a tumble, but that's what the draft is for -- the bad teams get better via higher picks. Aren't they also increasing the UFA age? That would allow those teams to hang on to their young stars a little longer.
30%? I'm really wondering -- and slightly worried -- about that. Unless they mean 30% year-over-year. The current 20% would be either on the average cap hit or the first year's salary. So if the player got $10M in year one, it could drop $2M in any subsequent year.
_________________
Hey, I don't have all the answers. In life, to be honest, I've failed as much as I have succeeded. But I love my wife. I love my life. And I wish you my kind of success.
- Dicky Fox