That's an unrealistic directive and a poor way to manage a team in general.
With the cap shooting up in 2yrs to 90m, that will not be the benchmark you want it to be
Unrealistic? Perhaps. A poor way to manage. Not necessarily. Every team has internal cap standards. Some are just more obvious than others. (Edmonton? No one makes more than McDavid.) Sure, things can change as the cap goes up. But that's also what long-term cap management is about. You don't necessarily sign those contracts now with the assumption of the cap being $90M in two years.
As an aside, I'd be curious what the history is of Cup-winning teams and the largest % of cap any one player's contract has. Is there any precedent of a team winning the Cup with one player taking up the max cap percentage. I've seen articles with a breakdown of percentage based on position players (e.g. 68% of cap spent on forwards). But I haven't seen one with a breakdown of individual players.
IIRC, Toews and Kane got their $10.5M contracts after the 2014-15 Cup. I'm guessing of all the cap-era teams, Ovechkin had the largest contract and cap % at $9,538,462 (12.72% of the cap). Otherwise, no team with a single player making more than that particular percentage has won a Cup.
My point being: unless a team finds a way to keep contracts within reason, they will not win. You simply cannot build a long-term contender with no internal plan for player salary limits. Hence, for example, "No one makes more than Miro."
Thanks for the comment.
