RSS - Posts
I figured the hard salary cap in today’s National Hockey League would be a stinker of a development. Now, that feeling is confirmed, as the Stanley Cup champion Lightning slumps while knowing that personnel moves are cap-constrained.
Basically, a team is stuck with its opening-night roster all season, with few options for correction during the year. Tampa Bay tied up so much money in holding together the Cup team (except for, significantly, their goalie, now playing in Chicago) that they have no flexibility to make adjustments. Other teams, notably the Blues, are in a similar pickle. It robs teams of winning options, and artificially freezes competition.
Why is this a big deal? After all, NFL teams operate under the same rules. Football fans have gotten accustomed to suffering through a season or two of cap-induced losing, knowing that an upturn will follow once cap space has been cleared and the roster can be restocked. The cycle takes care of everything (except in Arizona).
There’s a key difference, though. In the NFL, fans have to endure only 16 games of misery. In the NHL, it’s 82 games — five times the pain. Yes, the actual length of the seasons are more comparable. But for hockey fans, having to watch that many more actual sub-par performances is more trying, and makes it harder to keep the faith until next season.
Plus, it’s not like the available talent pool is going to be as overflowing in hockey as it is in football. The NHL still has guaranteed contracts, so it’s not as feasible to just buy out players wholesale every year. Chances of quick turnarounds aren’t as likely in a capped league; misfires in roster formation can cause suffering for years.
Worst of all, the limitation of a cap serves as a ready-made excuse for teams to deny accountability for lousy results. Team flailing through a mediocre season? Sorry, says the GM; cap keeps us from shipping anyone out or bringing anyone better in. We’ll just have to tough it out, because the rules don’t let us do anything else.
Oh well. It’ll only be a few more years before this cap gets popped. Until then, get used to hearing the cap invoked early and often.
I don’t think what you’re seeing from the Lightning is caused by the salary cap. They’re just underachieving. Last night’s game against the Flyers, a team that had won six straight games, showed what this team is capable of.
And I think keeping everyone but Khabibulin was a good call. With the new rules going into effect I think going with offense over defense was a good call. There’s no telling which goalies were going to adjust to the smaller pads and scoring-minded changes. Take a look at the stats of last year’s best goalies this year. Heck, take a look at our goalie last year. Grahame’s GAA and SA% are both better than Khabibulin’s.
It’s frustrating right now, but I think we’ll be fine. I’m not sure if anyone can beat Ottawa in a playoff series (more proof that in the new NHL, offense will probably win championships), but we should at least get there.
Comment by Joel — 11/15/2005 @ 2:34 PM
My complaint isn’t so much about how the Lightning decided upon this roster coming into the season, but what it can do about it now under the cap. I wasn’t crazy about Feaster insisting on keeping most of last year’s players all in the name of chemistry, when there were plenty of upgrade options out there; but that’s the way they wanted to go, and there was solid logic behind it.
My gripe’s no so much about the Bolts as it is about how the cap limits teams in general. The St. Louis Blues are an even better example: They had to gut their defense by trading Chris Pronger for very little, because most of their cash is tied up in Doug Weight and Keith Tkachuk — two former offensive powerhouses. Now, it’s hard to see them make the moves they need to make on the blueline and in goal to get back to respectability, because a trade would likely have to match up dollar-wise for cap balance.
Of course, just after I write all this, the Ducks manage to dump Sergei Fedorov’s contract on the Blue Jackets. So the cap doesn’t totally squelch trades. But it does make them harder to pull off. And we’ll see if it affects the usual deadline deals that tune up playoff-bound teams.
I’m not at all sold on Grahame. Stats notwithstanding, he lacks the requisite intensity. Khabby was a money goalie because he came up with the critical saves; Grahame doesn’t. Without the two of them on the same team, pushing each other, they’ve both suffered this year. (Khabibulin’s also had to play behind a weaker defense this year.)
Comment by CT — 11/15/2005 @ 8:19 PM
Grahame is not a number one goalie…
Comment by tommy — 11/18/2005 @ 9:03 AM
TRADING IN CAP COUNTRY
It figures: Just when I bitch about how the National Hockey League’s new salary cap environment dampens trade possibilities and dooms teams to subpar seasons, the league’s GMs managed to find their trade-trigger fingers.
And, in the proc…
Trackback by Population Statistic — 12/04/2005 @ 2:34 PM