The owners want Cost Certainty- a Salary Cap
The players don't

Myself I think some of these Players make WAY to much money While others seem to be worth there weight in GOLD!

To please both sides of this arguement(keep in mind some teams are willing to pay the high payroll to win!) is to set up a modest base salary and offer big incentives for the big performers. This way the owners dont get the shaft when they pay piles of cash for some one who doesn't perform, yet the players can still make the Big Buck$ if they are worthy of it!

Do you think this is fair?

What changes would you make?

Not quite fair.

It's kind of what happens now, but with one small difference. There is a base salary, and then high performers are given more money on top of that. The fact that the money comes after the performance doesn't make much difference in these terms. Even if the player had a good season while making the minimum, he'll still get the bump up at the end of the contract period. But it does matter when you look at the team as a whole: the big picture.

OK, someone signs you to a contract worth half your current salary and says that you'll get the other half and maybe more if you meet certain performance goals. That's supposed to be motivation, right? But the fact is, your job entails much more than just the goals in the contract. Not only do you have to score 25 goals and record 35 assists, you've got to tie up guys in the corner, skate deke routes, get into fights when necessary, and take good penalties. Additionally, you should be expected to make your team better, not just increase its stats. Some of these things can't be quantified in an incentive contract. Instead, the worth of the player is determined by his attitude and his willingness to do what it takes to win, as well as compile aggregate stats. Any player will tell you that it's better to win 1-0 and get no points than to lose 8-10 and get 5 points. But in an incentive system, you'll get paid more for the loss.

That guys like Paul Coffey and Igor Larionov were around for as long as they were wasn't a testament to their point gathering (although they were good there), it was that they brought winning attitudes where they went. They made their teams better, and that's worth more than stats.

I've got no problem with owners shelling out way too much money for mediocre talent -- that's part of the nature of the game as far as I'm concerned, measuring talent. I only have a problem with a salary system like baseball, where there are teams that have the resources and the ability to spend more on their players than other teams.

Perhaps you have misunderstood me I did'nt mean that they all earn the same base salary. Just that there should be a cap on that base salary and performance incentives could be added so that those obsurd paychecks some of these guys (Jagr) are earned. The leadership players and sacrificerscould still be paid more for there services than others and be given incentives for games played or overall wins that they played in making their team better.

They dont need a flat base salary just a cap on that Base salary. It can work both ways they just have to compromise and work together.

Go WINGS!!!

Wow. I did misunderstand you.

The incentives are done now on a contract by contract basis. Some NHL teams even take out incentive insurance on their players, in case they reach their goals.

So everyone makes their individual salary up to the cap, and the incentives are kicked in when reached? This would be different from how the caps work in the NFL, where it's the team that has to stay under the cap.

I don't know that the PA would go for this thing just because there's a limit on individual salary. But I have to admit, it would be interesting to have an incentive bidding war between teams, offering who knows what for someone like Iginla, who had a monster year and followed it up with an ordinary one. He would be a cap guy for sure.

Just imagine that the Leafs (assuming they could afford it) offer him a package that had incentive tiers, like 35 goals, 40 goals, 45 etc (with fixed assist ratios). Now imagine that the Wings offer him a different type of package: 40 assists, 45 assists, 50 etc (with fixed goal ratios). If you're Iginla, where do you go? You really have to know your own game to try and predict what kind of package would net you the most cash. And you know that the media would be all over this: "I'd he'd signed with the 'urricanes, he'd be making $1.2 mil more by now." There might even be $ per-goal negotiations.

It would certainly be amusing to see guys get offered "goon" contracts and be insulted because they thought they were incentive material.

The incentive process would be interesting to watch unfold, talk about offseason action! but what kind of incentives would there be for D-men? Sure some of them like Gonchar and Lidstrom could be given Goal incentives but what about other "stay at home" Dmen Like Scott Stevens, would they get offers based on how many guys they flatten? Goalies? What Shut outs Wins Save %?

The sky is the limit!