Quote:
Originally Posted by gvitaly
I just see it as a loophole because you can get a player like Giroux at the deadline who's an $8M player for a project cap spending of $848k. Now the 50% retention would only double that amount, so it's not that much of a difference.
I guess I just really enjoyed the idea that all the teams are on an even playing field after the lockout. Right now it seems as though there are a lot of ways for rich teams to get better rosters, despite giving away future assets. |
Personally, I like that teams can acquire players at the deadline - if you think you're a contender and you want to trade futures for a run, go for it.
As long as all teams are able to do it when they want to.
And that's where I don't agree with your post. The cap makes for a level playing field, which is what it was designed for. Are there a few teams that are still tight to a budget, yes. But that's their fault.
For at least 25, and probably more like 30 of the teams, they are able to 'go for it' in years where they want to. So for me, this rule is working.