I knew the Northwest division was weak this year but i was curious as to how it compared to other divisions and previous years:

Average Points Per Division (Division of the Cup winners in blue, Pres. Trophy italics)

While this isn't a perfect measure of a division's strength, it is interesting that in a year when every division averaged above 90 points, the Northwest finished way behind.

Not that any of this means anything for the hawks but I seem to remember a President's Cup Trophy winner from a weak division last year...

I was just thinking how over the next couple years it is going to suck to have to lose some of our young guns like a Bolland, Versteeg or Keith (which I can’t believe Barker makes almost twice as much as Dunc, I mean, I know he was 3rd overall , but damn) when we have to re-sign Toews and Kane.  Coupling this with my hatred of losing players I like to free agency, I was thinking of a way to modify the salary cap system to allow players stay with franchises yet, not allowing any one franchise to become too powerful.  The best idea I’ve been able come up with is to lower the cap but have only players acquired through free-agency count towards it.  In essence, a player’s salary would not count towards the cap payroll if they remain with the team that drafted them.  It would be kind of similar to the system the NHL had in place many years ago, where franchises got exclusive rights to players that lived in their area, except done with draftees.

I think this would achieve a few things.  From the players’ standpoint, most would support this because it would allow role players/non-superstar players access to higher salaries as opposed to the current system which compresses the bottom and top salary levels.  Leagues with salary caps tend to have a few high priced players and many low priced players, with little in between.  For instance, in 2 years you will have Huet, Campbell, Toews, Havlat, and Kane all presumably making more than $5 million.  The only way this can happen is if the remaining players become ultra cheap (or if the cap is raised, which appears unlikely right now).  However, I think even superstars could support it because it would allow their salary ceiling to rise if they stay with the team that drafted them.  If they don’t feel they are getting enough money, they can go be part of the cap eligible market.  The owners would probably like this arrangement because it would give them a privileged negotiating position with those marquee star players that create the franchise identity.  It would also give fledgling franchises assistance in building a base of good players because they would not constantly be competing against larger market teams for high profile players.  Certainly, scouting would become even more important than it is now and it would take longer to turn a franchise around, since everyone would have to build through the draft. 

From my (a fan’s) perspective, I would like this because the players that I have come to associate with the Blackhawks (or any particular team) would be more likely to spend most, if not all of their career here.  I’m one of those sappy dorks that likes it when players stick around for awhile, unlike the NBA where there are 6 player trades.

I think the way it could work is that perhaps there would be either no cap or a soft cap (luxury tax) on players salaries that are with their original team.  Then for those free agents, there would be a greatly reduced cap of, say, $25 million.

I know there are several shortcomings with my idea but, again, I’m just one of those fans that likes it when players stay with one franchise for their whole career.

Thoughts?