I missed this news story because of other pressing matters at the time… However it is getting covered a week late and a dollar short, thankyouverymuch…

It would seem the Pensacola Ice Pilots of the ECHL are no longer the ECHL affiliate of the Tampa Bay Lightning, being replaced by the Johnstown Chiefs.

The Ice Pilots gave the Lightning mroe advertising, of sorts, in the state by being the Lightning’s sole full affiliate hockey team the last few years. This move seems related to the Springfield Falcons becoming the Lightning’s AHL Affiliate. It’s logistics and things like that which make a ECHL team closer to Springfield more effective than having one in Pensacola.

Then again, I could very much be wrong and speaking out of my ass on that one.

Joe at Tasca’s take has an article up with regards to the latest fruitless session between the NHLPA and the Owners… This lead me to try to comment on the idea but a 1000 character reply field really stopped me dead.

My comment wasn’t goign to be on being anti-union and pro-league, it wasn’t going to be pro-cap to anti-free market (both stances I do support). It was another means of adding salary limitations on the players directly and not on teams directly. I don’t know if this is anything like what has been proposed by either side..

Baseball has a very flawed tax system that gets teams money from big payroll clubs like the Yankees and the Red Sox… It’s not directly limiting payroll but it’s supposed to be an influence. It’s a failure because it charges the teams and not the players specifically. Why not have a tax system on salaries themselves? If, say, a player agrees to a deal for a million dollar contract (one year, one million dolars), why not tax it something like 10 percent? (Ten percent of that million dollars — 100 grand — goes to the league) It’s like an income tax…

Players can still get their huge windfall contracts BUT they have to put some of that money towards the league. If someone signs a contract worth 11 million a year over 5 years (55 Mil contract), a portion of that moolah should be going into a income tax pool. It would be a higher tax bracket than the players only making a few hundred thousand a year…

Is it a failed idea or does it have some merit? I hate the idea of teams having to police themselves with their spending on an open market, and yet I also hate there not being restrictions on pay that is just exploding. Having an income tax might influence players to take smaller contracts in order to get around taxation and even out payrolls.

But then again - the players don’t want any salary limitations period, and that is why the league is in trouble in the first place as salaries escalate and income faulters.

From Spectors Hockey:

MSG NETWORK: Stan Fischler reports the re-signing of defenceman Janne Niinimaa by the NY Islanders “virtually guarantees” blueliner Roman Hamrlik won’t be back with the club. Fischler notes the Tampa Bay Lightning have wanted to re-acquire Hamrlik for some time.

Spector’s Note: Given the fact the Bolts are focussing attention on re-signing Martin St. Louis and the fact they walked away from Cory Stillman’s arbitration award to bring back the more affordable Vaclav Prospal, I doubt they have the money available to bring back Hamrlik unless he agrees to a pay cut. Given his Group II free agent status, Hamrlik likely won’t be moved until after a new CBA is in place.

Interesting thought… But as the piece says, the number one priority right now is Martin St. Louis’ resigning. That si going to eat up money as well as time. If the Lightning were still set on acquriing a vet D-man and had their sights set squarely on Roman Hamrlik, the cost will surely go beyond draft picks. Of course, the Lightning also has Nikita Alexeev to trade (there is no guarantee he will make the roster and he cannot be sent down without going through waivers).