Jump to content

Changes you would like to see made to the next CBA


Brawndo

Recommended Posts

I don’t think that CHL players going to the NCAA will be that much of an issue. The majority that will do that will wind up being the older guys who were either never drafted or went unsigned and then back into the draft already, or even aged out already. 
 

They will need to put something in place though for the rare cases that do pop up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And, forgot about a big one.  Would allow teams in the playoffs to exceed the cap by 5% (but no more than that) with their top 23 guys (maybe even only 21 or 22 if they'd still be using IR to get guys that are up on the big team but not in the lineup into the lineup).  

Why let a team exceed the cap in the playoffs at all?  Primarily because if a team is banking cap throughout the season they can "exceed" the cap at the trade deadline with their top 23 and still remain cap compliant even without any BF-LTIR shenanigans during the regular season.  (It's the way a team $4MM under the cap 1/2 way through the season could add a $8MM player and remain compliant.)  People wanting to force teams to be cap compliant in the playoffs forget that teams can be (and have been) compliant throughout the regular season without using BF-LTIR but still have a roster that technically wouldn't be cap compliant were the cap still a thing in the playoffs.

And, no, don't expect them to do anything about the Knights or Bolts stashing players until the playoffs start with the POSSIBLE exception that they might go back to the unofficial interpretation of the cap that they used against the Sabres back in '07 - if the Sabres wanted to use Connolly (and IIRC Afinogenov too) in the playoffs they needed to play at the end of the regular season.  But expect that's not likely to get reimplemented.

Edited by Taro T
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PromoTheRobot said:

How about a shot clock or chaser player starting at the far goal line on OT shootouts? No more of this taking 2 minutes to shoot.

Why would that be a part of the CBA?

Couldn't it simply be a modification to the rule governing shootouts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Frankly I didn't know where that would he decided. Don't players get some say on the rules?

Yes, they have representation on the rules making committee.

But modifications to playing rules in large part have nothing to do with the CBA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/27/2024 at 9:17 AM, Darryl Shannon's +/- said:

Limit the max term of contracts and maybe only two no move clauses per team.  Trades and turnover are good.

Allow cap room to be traded.

CAP room to be traded would be terrible for us... anything that give a GM more control of the assets of the operation would be a disaster for the Sabres... I can see it now... 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, JP51 said:

CAP room to be traded would be terrible for us... anything that give a GM more control of the assets of the operation would be a disaster for the Sabres... I can see it now... 

At least they could get something for cap space, unlike letting millions sit every single year.

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...