Exactly. The SEL might get pretty interesting this year...
Per - do you have a feel for the business side of the SEL - ie., what are they and the KHL doing differently (or are they facing a completely different economic scenario)?
(Some) of the owners (or GMs with a long leash) are entirely at fault for accelerating the post-lockout just-expired CBA's obsolescence. It's definitely about small market teams and teams who have only a temporary cash reserve versus cap ceiling teams with deep pockets, its too bad that a lot of the temporary cash reserve teams blow it on over-priced contracts and they not only screw themselves but all of the other non-cap ceiling teams. But the lower-end of the high-end players (or middling players with one good year) have benefited.
I wonder if having a "superstar" clause where only one player per team can have a contract that is, say, more than 2.5 times the average league salary (which would be about 6M for this past year, 2x max would be about 4.8M - or make it some percentage of the revenue share for players). You'd end up with a lot of 5.99M salaries and there'd be problems with bonuses and whatnot unless you implement a "tax" for multiple players over this limit that has team cap as well as revenue sharing. Maybe learn something from how the NBA implements this (?).
I think this might be a more league-wide-entertaining way of "leveling the playing field" than the stupid 3 point games that let mediocre teams appear to compete and get into the playoffs.
This way, the granularity of player salary gets refined a little and instead of paying a middling player 5/6M+ per and then having all the other comparable players want that number or more; but this might be too much "protecting team owners/GMs for their own good" for lots of people to stomach and the players would object because more would "have" to take "market" salaries because teams aren't allowed to pay them more unless they (the players) want to be one of two or three good players on a team full of scrubs.
Also, the top "mercenary" players would be willing to go to small market teams in order to get their "superstar" salary instead of all joining the NYR, and you wouldn't end up with (old) superstar loaded teams. Also, while this doesn't reward perennial bottom feeders, it doesn't punish them; they can keep more of their homegrown high draft pick talent instead of not being able to afford them and losing them for very little to deep-pocketed teams.
Hmm, how often is "rich" or "affluent" used to describe certain team owners versus an euphemism in the media? Sure, all team owners are "rich" and/or "affluent" but...