The Business of HockeyDiscuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Franchise sales, valuations, TV contracts, ratings, expansion, relocation, the CBA and work stoppage discussion goes here.
Players and Owners reach an agreement (MOD: circa 5am ET 1/6/13)
- Waivers one way or two-way?
- Roster limits? (just to confirm)
- Bonus structure
re-entry waivers fully expected to disappear.
I'm interested as well in the roster limits.
This is what we had under the expired CBA:
Quote:
ARTICLE 1
DEFINITIONS
......
.........
"Reserve List" means the list of all Players to whom a Club has rights
including all Unsigned Draft Choices, all Players signed to an SPC (whether or not currently playing in the NHL), and all Players who have signed an SPC but who have subsequently been returned to Juniors.
.......
"Standard Player Contract" or "SPC" means the standard form contract
.........
"A Club may have on its Reserve List, at any one time, not more than 90 Players, which shall include the following:
(a) Not more than 50 Players signed to an SPC and not less than 24 Players
and 3 goalkeepers under an SPC.
Age 18 and age 19 Players who were returned to Juniors, and who have not played 11 NHL Games in one season, shall be exempt from inclusion in the 50 Player limit.
Any Club violating this provision shall be liable to loss of draft choices as determined by the Commissioner.
(b) Unsigned Draft Choices.
i guess it can considered safe the max number of 90 players won't go down?
any word on that?
Chances it was increased instead?
What are the rules for the draft lottery? Assuming its weighted, how?
Are there restrictions on payment of revenue sharing?
What are the qualifiers and restrictions for receiving revenue sharing?
I hope they don't re-align until a couple more teams are added. The last re-alignment plan was a disaster. And if they expand I hope they do it to markets that are money makers (Canadian markets for example). The last thing the league needs is more franchises dragging down the financials
Early on in negotiations someone reported the NHL had proposed they get sole discretion on re-alignment. Curious to know if this was contained in the final deal.
Really can't see them keeping Winnipeg in the East for another 2 seasons. But you never know. As A Winnipegger I prefer being in the east. Better start times and more interesting opponents imo.
Forgive me if this has already been mentioned, but what happens to all the contracts that are in clear violation of this new CBA? Are they voided or are they restructured?
Forgive me if this has already been mentioned, but what happens to all the contracts that are in clear violation of this new CBA? Are they voided or are they restructured?
Neither. They are kept as is.
Unclear if the cap penalty formula bandied about is contained in the final CBA. Assuming it is, if a player retires early under such a deal, the team that signed him to the contract would have a cap hit equivalent to the amount they "saved" on the cap by frontloading it, for the remainder of the contract length.
Does the salary retention for $5m for each trade or $3m for a play mean that a team could trade a high salary player and eat $3m of his salary per year but the team receiving the player still takes the full cap hit? That's the way I understood it but who knows?
What are the rules for the draft lottery? Assuming its weighted, how?
Are there restrictions on payment of revenue sharing?
What are the qualifiers and restrictions for receiving revenue sharing?
From the confirmed links thread.
Salary Retention in Trades
Teams permitted to retain up to $5M in a trade
Max retention of $3M for a single player
__________________ "It’s not as if Donald Fehr was lying to us, several players said. Rather, it’s as if he has been economical with information, these players believe, not sharing facts these players consider to be vital."
I hope they don't re-align until a couple more teams are added. The last re-alignment plan was a disaster. And if they expand I hope they do it to markets that are money makers (Canadian markets for example). The last thing the league needs is more franchises dragging down the financials
They at least need to get Winnipeg out of the SE division. Switch it with Columbus or something.
Does the salary retention for $5m for each trade or $3m for a play mean that a team could trade a high salary player and eat $3m of his salary per year but the team receiving the player still takes the full cap hit? That's the way I understood it but who knows?
I think it's too unclear at this point. We'll likely have a lot more details over the coming days/weeks.
Unclear if the cap penalty formula bandied about is contained in the final CBA. Assuming it is, if a player retires early under such a deal, the team that signed him to the contract would have a cap hit equivalent to the amount they "saved" on the cap by frontloading it, for the remainder of the contract length.
I thought the old CBA said all contracts are subjected to its terms and the terms of future CBAs... That's dumb.
I thought the old CBA said all contracts are subjected to its terms and the terms of future CBAs... That's dumb.
They do. But that still doesn't mean they can void contracts with every CBA. The players (and likely the teams) would never agree to that. They grandfather them in, and continue on. The main thing was putting something in place for those that have retirement contracts should they retire early. They've talked about doing that for a while, so I'll assume something like that is in there.
The main things they wanted out of this was contract limits, lowering the split and tightening the variance. They've accomplished all of that.
Does the salary retention for $5m for each trade or $3m for a play mean that a team could trade a high salary player and eat $3m of his salary per year but the team receiving the player still takes the full cap hit? That's the way I understood it but who knows?
If the salary retention clause follows that of which the owners proposed in the October offer, then the team trading the player away will be on hook for the same proportion of cap hit as they are for actual salary paid.
In other words, if the Rangers trade Brad Richards to Phoenix and agree to retain 30% of his salary per year, the Rangers will take a cap hit per year equal to 30% of Brad Richards AAV and reimburse Phoenix for 30% of Brad Richards remaining actual compensation.
I have no idea what the answer to this is, but what percentage of players actually will benefit financially from the lockout?
-they lost money by not playing;
-if they just signed a lucrative contract they lost presumably the most $/game salary by not playing;
-older guys who are on their last or next to last contract will never have first half 2012-13 earning power again;
-older guys could have potentially lost a half step not just due to age but by not playing competitively further reducing their career;
-new contracts or players entering 'elite' status will presumably make less
I have no idea what the answer to this is, but what percentage of players actually will benefit financially from the lockout?
-they lost money by not playing;
-if they just signed a lucrative contract they lost presumably the most $/game salary by not playing;
-older guys who are on their last or next to last contract will never have first half 2012-13 earning power again;
-older guys could have potentially lost a half step not just due to age but by not playing competitively further reducing their career;
-new contracts or players entering 'elite' status will presumably make less
Will players actually make this up elsewhere?
Your question is a bit unclear. What do you mean benefit from the lockout? This CBA vs the last one? The leagues initial offer vs the one they settled on? The leagues offer to play a whole season vs the final cba?
