Rollover complete

[Da_Chief]

Is it difficult to keep the records on the site?

[devo22]

no it's last year's, I'm 100 per cent sure. Florida and me finished bottom three, then we both traded our 1sts to Anaheim who chose Ekblad and Bennett with those picks.

[Hanna Sniper]

It follows the 2014 Draft selection order, it's last years

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthr...ght=CPHL+draft

[Da_Chief]

Originally Posted by Hesla

It is two years ago. FLA is in last

Lol, isn't that the case all time except this year? So you can't go Florida's position.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by Da_Chief

Is it difficult to keep the records on the site?

Short answer: yes

[JiriHrdina]

OK here are the cap amounts that I've calculated:

Florida Panthers $ 4,200,000.0
Dallas Stars $ 2,100,000.0
New Jersey Devils $ 2,100,000.0
Nashville Predators $ 1,900,000.0
L.A. Kings $ 1,700,000.0
Chicago Blackhawks $ 1,500,000.0
Toronto Maple Leafs $ 1,400,000.0
Pittsburgh Penguins $ 1,200,000.0
Tampa Bay Lightning $ 900,000.0
Colorado Avalanche $ 700,000.0
Montreal Canadiens $ 600,000.0
Phoenix Coyotes $ 400,000.0
Winnipeg Jets $ 400,000.0
Minnesota Wild $ 100,000.0

[JiriHrdina]

If anyone sees mistakes let me know otherwise I'll add the cap this weekend.

[Slava]

Colorado improved?! That's hilarious.

[Swayze11]

This is a really cool new rule.

[Drury18]

The Sharks will be swimming in Cap in 2017. We can't do worse then 2014-15.

[Da_Chief]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

OK here are the cap amounts that I've calculated:

Florida Panthers $ 4,200,000.0
Dallas Stars $ 2,100,000.0
New Jersey Devils $ 2,100,000.0
Nashville Predators $ 1,900,000.0
L.A. Kings $ 1,700,000.0
Chicago Blackhawks $ 1,500,000.0
Toronto Maple Leafs $ 1,400,000.0
Pittsburgh Penguins $ 1,200,000.0
Tampa Bay Lightning $ 900,000.0
Colorado Avalanche $ 700,000.0
Montreal Canadiens $ 600,000.0
Phoenix Coyotes $ 400,000.0
Winnipeg Jets $ 400,000.0
Minnesota Wild $ 100,000.0

Outside couple of teams I see rich getting richer. I don't think that was the point of this rule.

Seeing the rule in play now it looks like a terrible rule. A team like mine can really take advantage of something like this next year, while not really "needing" it.

[Swayze11]

It will be a rollar coaster every year with this though. If you make an effort to improve or get sim luck, you should be rewarded. If you don't go above expectations or meet expectations, you should not be rewarded anything. Exact same thing in the NHL.

[I wanna be like Miikka]

Originally Posted by Da_Chief

Outside couple of teams I see rich getting richer. I don't think that was the point of this rule.

Looks like a terrible rule. A team like mine can really take advantage of something like this next year, while not really "needing" it.

Yeah I think seeing teams like the Pens, Stars, Kings, and Wild on that list doesn't make much sense. The only way you could limit teams like that from benefiting is to exclude teams who made the playoffs. So you only get paid for point improvement if you miss the playoffs (and that would still allow some teams to take advantage but would limit the 3rd place team finishing 1st place and getting 2 million).

[dsavillian]

Originally Posted by I wanna be like Miikka

Yeah I think seeing teams like the Pens, Stars, Kings, and Wild on that list doesn't make much sense. The only way you could limit teams like that from benefiting is to exclude teams who made the playoffs. So you only get paid for point improvement if you miss the playoffs (and that would still allow some teams to take advantage but would limit the 3rd place team finishing 1st place and getting 2 million).

If we learned anything from the currency argument, it's that the rich will always be rich - no matter the rules!

[JiriHrdina]

I guess - but I also don't think the rule needs to be complicated. It rewards improvement, and the best teams have a less opportunity to improve.
No rule will be perfect.

[Drury18]

Originally Posted by I wanna be like Miikka

Yeah I think seeing teams like the Pens, Stars, Kings, and Wild on that list doesn't make much sense. The only way you could limit teams like that from benefiting is to exclude teams who made the playoffs.So you only get paid for point improvement if you miss the playoffs (and that would still allow some teams to take advantage but would limit the 3rd place team finishing 1st place and getting 2 million).

I disagree.

What happens if a team like the Sharks or similar who was in the bottom 30 does some heavy rebuilding in the off season and just squeaks into a playoff spot? It could be a good 30 point improvement, but it's negated because they just beat out the next guy for 8th place. That would probably be more unfair then giving teams who are a little better a few 100K because they improved slightly.

[Da_Chief]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

I guess - but I also don't think the rule needs to be complicated. It rewards improvement, and the best teams have a less opportunity to improve.
No rule will be perfect.

Sure, but most of the teams getting the money are elite to good teams. Doesn't benefit the bottom feeders here. If I remember correctly, that was the point of this rule.

[Goffie]

The point is that after a really good season the best teams won't improve the following season. For example the chance of me out pointing my total this season next year is slim. So I won't see a cent. A lot of teams will start being in that position as well

[Knut]

I expect 4.2 M next season.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by Da_Chief

Sure, but most of the teams getting the money are elite to good teams. Doesn't benefit the bottom feeders here. If I remember correctly, that was the point of this rule.

Not true.
The average conference seed of teams receiving this award was 9.8.
8/15 that received awards missed the playoffs 2 years ago

When we look at the top 4 cap awards, 3 of them missed
When we look at the top 7, 5 of them missed
Of the entire cap awarded in this program 71% of it went to teams that missed the playoffs two years ago.

Plus the point was never to award bottom feeding teams - that point was to motivate and reward improvement.

The other point was to narrow the gap significantly between cap awarded to teams that excel and those that don't. We've handed out well over 10M in cap at times to some teams - which gave some teams FAR better ability to keep the talent pool spread out. This rule gives all teams a chance to earn something - even if they don't win a championship or individual player awards. And the total possible cap is far less.

Show improvement. Get cap. Pretty simple.