The NHL is going to argue half of the teams lost money because player costs are too high, cap circumvention is occuring, and small market teams are struggling to retain players because larger market teams have more money to lure them away.

Aaaaaand the players are going to argue that the league generated record revenues and that in a free market system players should have plenty of flexibility to shop their services because NHL careers have no guarentees.

Yada yada yada…..etc…etc.

Let’s eliminate the obvious issues.

1.) Teams shouldn’t be able to circumvent the cap. Term limits are trivial. If a player wants to play for less than the market will bear, that’s his choice. But, disparity from year to year in salary over the life of a contract shouldn’t vary more than 25%.

2.) Arbitration is neccessary if RFA exists. If teams don’t want to deal with arbitration then eliminate RFA. At the end of any deal (entry level included) guys become UFA.

3.) Extend entry level deals. Small market teams need to be able to hold onto elite talent. But pay players better in their entry level years if they produce. No player should feel used by the system because he is too good.

4.) Just split the Revenues 50/50 and lets move on. Under the current system with the mid point being 8 million dollars under the cap as usual, it brings the salary cap to 62.6 million. Only 7 teams need to get under that and only 2 teams need to get to the floor of 46.6.

If I can understand how to create a reasonable cap from going here: http://m.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/nhl-salary-cap-to-be-temporarily-set-at-703-million/article2449267/?service=mobile
YOU SHOULD TOO!

Spend the next two months arguing over the specifics all you want but don’t deprive me or anyone else of the sport we love come October because both sides are trying to milk a system THAT’S MAKING EVERYONE MONEY DURING A RECESSION!