Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root
Well it did, you just aren't using any context.
The cap added to parity, no question.
But the draft was the first line of parity.
Imagine one round of a draft. and then after that, everyone else becomes a free agent... how many of the best free agents do you think sign with Winnipeg or Edmonton or whatever?
|
I would need to see some tangible proof that the draft contributes to parity. Can draft position advantages make bad teams good? Sure. But that is not what parity is.
Eventually, prospects would have to go to Winnipeg, Edmonton, etc..., because the more desirable locations would fill up and with the proper cap measures in place, they would be SOL the following year.
Just imagine if in order to add Matthews or Laine under the ELC max, Edmonton had to dump McDavid or Draisaitl. If anything, such a system would force a more equitable distribution of talent around the league.
It would also help with player development IMO. For example, if the Flames wanted to add RWs to their prospect pool, they could target them specifically and perhaps offer more money than a team that would have simply drafted them because they were the BPA but already had oodles of RW depth and therefore couldn't give them the same opportunities to develop.