Originally Posted by DanH
This would have been a player request - if the owners were limiting the ability of teams to spend over the cap with a harder luxury tax, the players wanted some guarantee that owners would not be spending much less than the cap.
Also, putting this in was another way for the owners to sell the idea that they wanted to improve parity, which was an argument they needed to reduce exceptions and increase the tax.
I'm honestly surprised that the owners OK'd that then.
Seems as though it'd be in their best interest NOT to have their hands forced if there aren't any decent players out there to be had.
Not buying the parity argument at all.