I know I'm getting ahead of myself here, but there's trouble on the horizon.http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/news;_ylt=AkWblpi58__N3xKTcvLLyhk5nYcB?slug=nc-cotsonika-nhlpa_boss_don_fehr_on_cba_091511
This quote from Donal Fehr scares me:
“The debate at the table is hopefully going to be driven by numbers and it’s not going to be driven by philosophy,” Fehr said. “Having said that, the league with far and away the most stability and the least problems is baseball, and that’s true since ’94. It’s the only one with no cap.”
If his goal is to make hockey look like baseball, then we're in for some trouble. Sure, baseball might be great from a stability perspective, but who wants a league with 30 teams and only 6 or so that can really compete? Maybe fans in Detroit, Chicago, NY, Philly, Boston, and perhaps Toronto would like something like that. But what about the smaller market teams or teams without owners with deep pockets? And what about the new Winnpeg team? That would suck for them to get a team back for a year only to see the system change and that team have to pack up and leave again. I see the complete removal of the salary cap as very unlikely, but would an extreme widening (lowering the floor significantly to satisfy the weak teams and raising the ceiling a bunch to satisfy Detroit and other strong teams) result in essentially the same thing as the elimination of the cap?
If the salary cap goes away (or a new system with a weak salary cap comes along), it's only a matter of time before the Pens lose Crosby, Malkin, Fleury, Staal, etc. to deeper pockets and again run the risk of moving elsewhere.