- New Scotland
- Last Active
Evan said:My results unfortunately came back positive. I feel okay so far, but it's early days. With an existing heart condition, I have cause for concern.
Wish me luck.
Stay safe, stay indoors.
If you feel up to it, be sure to drop by every day or two, or three, just to let us know how you're doing.
I preferred how it was in the 90s. You got 10 outs (any swing that didn't result in a HR was an out). I think there was only 1 round too, so whoever had the most Homer's won. Easy peasy Japanese.If they'd introduce fielding and pitching competitions as well, that'd be awesome. At least until a pitcher fucked up their arm or shoulder during one.
I don't really mind expansion but the salary cap is garbage.The way the salary cap is constructed, I agree with you there.
The Blackhawks have been penalised every year for having a great front office that knows how to manage and identify talent. Wouldn't be surprised if the Hawks had 4 or 5 cups instead of 3 if they didn't need to gut their team multiple times. Having to trade guys like Saad and TT just to make room is bullshit.Don't forget right around the time they won their first Cup (I'm thinking the summer before) when Dave Tallon was GM and Stan Bowman was assistant GM. Stan Bowman was a couple hours (or maybe merely minutes) late extending qualifying offers to a few players (Byfuglien, Versteeg, Barker etc. I believe) making them UFAs. That forced the team to rush to sign them to deals worth far more then the qualifying offers would have been. Had there been no cap then a big market Original Six team likely could have absorbed most, if not all of that error long term, an error by Bowman that ended up costing Tallon his job and got Bowman promoted to his job!
Even if you say a cap is needed then it should have a 5-10% increase every year. Or at least be a soft cap like the NBA with a luxury tax. Hawks have basically subisidized shitty teams who don't spend money and take advantage of teams against the cap that have to trade good assets to get under the cap.Having a cap is fine, and having an individual player cap is fine also. One of my biggest problems is that the individual cap is set at 20% of the cap. That's potentially 1/5 of your cap space going to one player in a hard cap system. If that was at 10% (maybe even 15%) it would be a help. I know not many players make that 20% (probably none), but it would have effect the early big contracts like Ovechkin's ($124M/13 year) which set the standards going forward (not to mention the insane contracts accepted by Scott Gomez and Daniel Bierre).Also not a fan of how they restricted the term of contracts to only 8 years. While some of the contracts being signed around that time were obviously circumventing the cap rules (one or two of Ilya Kovalchuk early contracts with NJ that were denied were ludicrous, when it was around an 11-13 year deal, but the last 5 years were all less than $1M/year just to lower the AAV), but they didn't need to completely eliminate contracts longer than 4 years. Instead institute rules were you couldn't have too steep of a drop off (especially a bunch of cheap years added on where the player most likely would have retired from the NHL and were never planning to play those years).Also, just get rid of the "loser point" already.