|
|
Post by BruinsGM on Feb 17, 2012 9:45:45 GMT -5
This is from the rulebook
"Salary Cap Awards
• $1M for each playoff series won
• $3M for each Stanley Cup Championship
These awards stay with your franchise forever, to mimic real life inflation."
This is a really dumb idea. Rewarding the top teams with cap space will make it nearly impossible to gain ground in future years. The cap should be increased every year at a certain amount decided by the comissioners
|
|
|
|
Post by CapitalsGM(Co-Commish) on Feb 17, 2012 9:51:54 GMT -5
i disagree and agree because that give teams potential to win 6M cap space which is almost 10% of our cap space... i think this is too much to give out but i think the idea is still good because it give people motivation to win... I think weneed to change the numbers though
|
|
|
|
Post by chocolatemuffin on Feb 17, 2012 10:05:27 GMT -5
You must be scared then that you won't win if you want to change this rule.
|
|
|
|
Post by CapitalsGM(Co-Commish) on Feb 17, 2012 10:05:43 GMT -5
no but 6m is just too much to win maybe make it a bit less
|
|
|
|
Post by BlueJacketsGM on Feb 17, 2012 10:40:11 GMT -5
What about an additional restricted tag for the upcoming offseason instead of capspace ?
Seems more realistic since players are more likely to resign to a winning team.
In the NHL teams don't get additional caproom for winning
|
|
|
|
Post by DevilsGM on Feb 17, 2012 11:18:39 GMT -5
If the point is to mimic inflation then every team in the league should get the extra cap....why not base the cap increase on the NHL or is that happening already?
|
|
|
|
Post by BlackhawksGM(Co-Commish) on Feb 17, 2012 11:42:48 GMT -5
I made the rules and even I agree with Bruins. I was trying it out from another league I am in but I think they shouldn't happen.
|
|
|
|
Post by BruinsGM on Feb 17, 2012 12:28:54 GMT -5
I'm confident that I will go far next year, but I'm trying to be impartial here. It's just a stupid rule. If the top teams keep getting millions of dollars extra each year, its going to be very hard for the lower teams to catch up. I see what your'r tying to do with an incentive, but I don't think this would work.
|
|
|
|
Post by BruinsGM on Feb 17, 2012 12:30:33 GMT -5
I like the blue's suggestion. There should be some form of incentive, no matter how small.
|
|
|
|
Post by RangersGM on Feb 17, 2012 12:33:56 GMT -5
I think there should just be an increase in Cap Space to match the NHLs real life increase in Cap Space. If winning isnt enough incentive for you your in the wrong biz.
|
|
BluesGM
AHL
Trade Council Member
Posts: 144
|
Post by BluesGM on Feb 17, 2012 14:03:34 GMT -5
I like the Rule but how about.. Each Conference winner gets a 1M and then these 2 teams battle it out in the Cup for the extra 1M.. So guy who wins cup 2 M , the losing conference winner 1M.. I think this would be good and a little incentive...
So cancel winning 1 M every playoff round u win either win your conference for more cap and obviously win the big prize for the extra 1 M
|
|
|
|
Post by CanucksGM(Commissioner) on Feb 18, 2012 14:25:00 GMT -5
After thinking about it I agree with Boston on this one we should not do this. I do think that the winning team should get some sort of award like a extra tag for the year. If anyone has an idea please state it here.
|
|
