I know that NHL contracts typically reward performance by way of bonuses at the end of the year (points, goals, games played, whatever..).
Why are contracts not structured so that a player that a team identifies as a "keeper", but who may have difficult specs to determine, has performance-based raises built in?
So (using Johnny G. as an example), after 3 years of pay at a given amount - let's use $7M for a number, he shows that he has averaged more than x points, with y% in "away games". That entitles him to a 20% pay bump for the next 3 years, so his next portion is at $8.4M per year.
This would give the player the time to prove himself, the team the time to understand that he has, and other annual performance bonuses could be used to enhance the contracts if desired. If the player doesn't measure up, the team is protected. If he does, the player is protected.
Is this not permitted or am I missing something (possibly something obvious
)?