Bettmen removes the cap

So you want to make it like MLB, where the yankees, dodgers and teams with the biggest fanbase get to buy the best players.

In this case, Toronto may become the Yankees of this year.

We all know the luxury tax system in MLB is just as flawed as the hard cap in the NHL.

But when the Dodgers and Yankees (I will throw on Boston as well) far and away are the cash cows of MLB, paying the tax for insane rosters is something they will do. Winning makes more money.......

I am not saying that system is right either.

The real answer is my opinion is moving to the NFL's unguarenteed contract. Here is why:

A player and a team agree upon a contract with certain expectations of performance. Let's use Seattle's Chris Dreidger as an example.

The Kraken sign him with the expectation he would put up similar numbers as he did with the Panthers. He has did not, and last year was buried. Why should the Kraken be paying him $3.5 million when they are not getting the performance they signed on for? At this point, terminate the contract, and move on.

Now, this has to work both ways, where the player also has the right to terminate (which is the hill the NHLPA would stand on). If a player signs a deal seeing they are capable of a certain level of production and a role on a team, it would be contractually fair that the organization uphold that deal. (Noting in terms.of role, this usually leads to a trade or trade request). But in terms.of production..... the player just may have the right to renegotiate the contract to that they are paid market value. If the team.says no, the player can walk away from the deal. Again.... this is something the NHLPA would want, but getting to what constistutes "underpaid" is difficult.

The whole idea of guaranteed contracts is crazy imo. Both sides have obligations under the contract. In the NHL system, the only obligation is the player gets paid. This would end cap recaptured.... free up money in the systems. Move to ensure the best product is on the ice. In the real world, you underperform at a job, you are let go. Or you leave for a better opportunity. Not in the NHL.

There are two league models:
1/ NFL - total league parity; hard cap, revenue sharing, etc. works because of overwhelming popularity of football; fans will watch even if not their favourite team
2/ MLB, NBA, EPL - different versions, but essentially a soft cap (luxury tax or FFP). Structure benefits marquee teams (most popular, generate more revenue); all teams have a shot but more popular teams can spend more (which is how it should be). These leagues are all thriving even though half the teams have no chance of winning at start of season. Half the teams in nhl have no chance of winning but cap is flat because revenue is flat.

I think the nhl made a mistake following NFL model - parity is overrated. no one cares about the hurricanes, panthers, etc outside small local markets; hence the dreadful tv ratings for Stanley cup finals. Fans want to see marquee teams: Leafs / Bruins / Habs vs Avs / Hawks / Oilers finals. Time to take the handcuffs off Bettman.

Tell me you’re a Maple Leafs fan without telling me you’re a Maple Leafs fan.



- I understand the desire for that, but you’re never getting the NHLPA to agree to non-guaranteed contracts. Even in the NFL, there is a reason why guarantees in contracts are rising and becoming more common. Not to mention, in the NFL, shelf-life is much shorter, and serious injuries are more common.

- The main issue with the NHL salary cap isn’t that it’s a hard cap, it’s that the NHL has long been criticized for its growth, or lack there-of, even during pre-COVID. The NHL may want to cry poor when compared as part of the Big 4, but it’s by no means doing poorly.. And that’s before we get into the escrow issue.