HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

Confirmed Details of 2013 CBA & CBA Questions (Merged)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-18-2013, 04:12 PM
  #176
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 11,246
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
In the quote of my first post, on capgeek it says the league confirmed to them that was the case.
To be fair the quote says "Teams do not receive a credit for seasons with negative cap benefit (where cap hit exceeds salary), the league confirmed to CapGeek.com." That's not the same as saying the league confirmed all aspects of the FAQ cap advantage recapture interpretation are correct. But again, as I said, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt, as he seems to have good connections on certain league info.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
But to me this makes no sense logically(why should teams be punished more the further a player plays out his retirement contract) or practically(how can a team be expected to remain below the cap with a 27 m cap penalty, using the extreme Kovalchuk example) The rule according to this is quite literally absurd.
I would agree it doesn't make sense--if a team knew their player was going to retire before the end of the contract they'd be better off encouraging the player to retire earlier so the penalty could be spread across more seasons.

Heck, who knows, we might even have yet another new CBA before Luongo and most of the circumvention contracts retire.

mouser is offline  
Old
05-23-2013, 11:28 AM
  #177
The Fuhr
Registered User
 
The Fuhr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hamilton,Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 35,493
vCash: 500
Amnesty Buyouts

When the lockout was ending I read the players conceded that the Amnesty buyouts would come out of the players share of revenue... but I have not read anything conforming that since.

So I was wondering the rule on where the money comes from for the buyouts.

The Fuhr is online now  
Old
05-23-2013, 12:05 PM
  #178
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,354
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Great Below View Post
When the lockout was ending I read the players conceded that the Amnesty buyouts would come out of the players share of revenue... but I have not read anything conforming that since.

So I was wondering the rule on where the money comes from for the buyouts.
The Compliance Buy-Outs do not count against the cap, but do count against the 50% Players Share.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NHL/NHLPA CBA MOU
6. Payroll Range, Transition and Compliance Buy-Outs

During the Ordinary Course “Buy-Out” periods following the 2012/13 season and 2013/14 season, in addition to any other Ordinary Course “Buy-Outs” a Club may elect to effectuate pursuant to Paragraph 13 of the SPC, Clubs may elect to terminate and “buy-out” the already existing SPCs of up to two (2) additional Players (in the aggregate over the two (2) years) on a Compliance basis (a “Compliance Buy-Out”). Such Compliance Buy-Out(s) would be effectuated on the same terms as are set forth in Paragraph 13 of the SPC, except that the amounts paid under such “buy-out(s)” will not be charged against the Club’s Cap in any of the years in which the payments are made to the Player. Amounts paid under such Compliance Buy-Out(s) will, however, be counted against the Players’ Share during any League Year in which the “buy-out” payments are made. A Player that has been bought out under these Compliance Buy-Out provisions shall be prohibited from re-joining the Club that bought him out (via re-signing, Assignment, Waiver claim or otherwise) for the duration of the 2013/14 League Year (if the Player was bought out in 2013) and the 2014/15 League Year (if the Player was bought out in 2014).

kdb209 is offline  
Old
05-23-2013, 01:13 PM
  #179
The Fuhr
Registered User
 
The Fuhr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hamilton,Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 35,493
vCash: 500
Thank you... So since it comes out of the players share, NHL teams don't have to worry about how the buy out effects the owners pocket.

Any under preforming player could be bought out.

The Fuhr is online now  
Old
05-24-2013, 12:07 AM
  #180
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 28,973
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Great Below View Post
Thank you... So since it comes out of the players share, NHL teams don't have to worry about how the buy out effects the owners pocket.

Any under preforming player could be bought out.

Don't forget about the $300 MM in "Make Whole" however:

Quote:
It had previously been agreed upon that the owners and players would split hockey related revenue 50-50, with players also receiving $300 million in "make whole" repayments to honor existing contracts, which would not count against the players' share. Furthermore, each team will be allowed two compliance buyouts in order to help ease some of the burdens of regrettable contracts under the $64.3 million cap. The floor is reportedly set at $44 million.

Fugu is offline  
Old
05-24-2013, 11:00 AM
  #181
rojac
HFBoards Sponsor
 
rojac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Waterloo, ON
Posts: 6,232
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Great Below View Post
Thank you... So since it comes out of the players share, NHL teams don't have to worry about how the buy out effects the owners pocket.

Any under preforming player could be bought out.
Not really. Teams as a whole won't be paying any more because of the buyout. But the individual team (assuming they don't lower their own payroll spending) that buys out a player is still paying more.

rojac is offline  
Old
05-24-2013, 06:38 PM
  #182
doubledown99
Registered User
 
doubledown99's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,968
vCash: 500
Question: can a team keep half the salary of a player but not the cap hit?

So say player x had salary and cap hit of $5 mil....Oilers decide to pay half the salary to move player x....can they pay half the salary but do they have to keep half the cap hit as well? Can a team choose between cap hit and actual salary?Or are they linked? Thanks for any help in advance

doubledown99 is offline  
Old
05-24-2013, 11:36 PM
  #183
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,354
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by doubledown99 View Post
Question: can a team keep half the salary of a player but not the cap hit?

So say player x had salary and cap hit of $5 mil....Oilers decide to pay half the salary to move player x....can they pay half the salary but do they have to keep half the cap hit as well? Can a team choose between cap hit and actual salary?Or are they linked? Thanks for any help in advance
No. The Salary and cap hit are always split at the same percentages.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NHL/NHLPA CBA MOU
11. Retained Salary Transactions

In the context of Player Trades, participating Clubs will be permitted to allocate the AA and related Salary and Bonus payment obligations between them, subject to specified parameters (“Retained Salary Transaction”). Specifically, the Club trading a Player may agree to retain a percentage of the SPC’s AA and related Salary and Bonus obligations for each of the remaining years of the Player’s SPC, up to 50% of the SPC’s AA. In each Retained Salary Transaction, the percentage allocation of the retained AA and retained Salary and Bonuses must be the same (i.e., the Salary and Bonus obligations as between Clubs would be allocated on the same percentage basis as the AA being allocated) and cannot be altered from year to year. So, for instance, if an assigning Club agrees to retain 30% of an SPC’s AA over the balance of its term, it will also retain an obligation to reimburse the acquiring Club 30% of the Player’s contractual compensation (Salary and Bonuses) in each of the remaining years of the contract. A Club may have up to a maximum of three (3) SPCs on its Cap per League Year as to which a portion of the AA and Salary have been retained in a Player Trade, provided, however, that the aggregate amount of AA retained by a Club does not exceed 15% of the Upper Limit (e.g., 15% of $70.2 million or $10.53 million in Year 1; 15% of $64.3 million or $9.645 million in Year 2; or $12 million if the Upper Limit equals $80.0 million) in the aggregate for all such contracts in any one year. An SPC can be subject to a Retained Salary Transaction up to a maximum of two (2) times.

The NHL shall promptly disclose the amount of Retained Salary and Bonus obligations in every Retained Salary Transaction to the NHLPA.

In the case of one or more Retained Salary Transactions, and a subsequent SPC “buy-out” or termination such that the SPC is no longer in force, the resulting cash and cap consequences will be divided as between the Club parties to the prior transaction(s) on the same basis they originally agreed upon. In the case of one or more Retained Salary Transactions, and a subsequent Loan of the SPC, the prior Club(s) shall retain their portion of the SPC’s NHL cap charge that they agreed to retain for the balance of the Player’s contract (regardless of whether the Player is ever recalled), but will get the benefit of any reduced cash obligations to the Player during the time he is playing outside the League.

The Player shall be paid by the Club for which he currently plays (or most recently played for).

kdb209 is offline  
Old
05-24-2013, 11:47 PM
  #184
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 11,246
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by doubledown99 View Post
Question: can a team keep half the salary of a player but not the cap hit?

So say player x had salary and cap hit of $5 mil....Oilers decide to pay half the salary to move player x....can they pay half the salary but do they have to keep half the cap hit as well? Can a team choose between cap hit and actual salary?Or are they linked? Thanks for any help in advance
They're linked. Any trade where a team retains salary/cap has to have a identical percentage of both salary and cap retained for every remaining year of the contract. That percentage can't vary from year to year either.

mouser is offline  
Old
05-25-2013, 04:08 PM
  #185
doubledown99
Registered User
 
doubledown99's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,968
vCash: 500
Thanks guys for the help and clarification.

This is a great section with some great posters

doubledown99 is offline  
Old
05-25-2013, 08:47 PM
  #186
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Wing or Retire!
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Alexandria
Country: Liberia
Posts: 36,273
vCash: 156
Sorry if it's already been asked and answered, but has any more info come out regarding revenue sharing?

__________________
Down in the basement, I've got a Craftsman lathe. Show it to the children when they misbehave.
Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
05-26-2013, 09:13 AM
  #187
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 55,227
vCash: 500
http://kuklaskorner.com/hockey/comme...rks-as-a-franc
http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/more_...DeRrV2GCHu1uCO

NY Post's Brooks calls the cap recapture feature a potential franchise killer.

LadyStanley is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 09:32 AM
  #188
JLewyB
Registered User
 
JLewyB's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Perry, NY
Posts: 599
vCash: 500
Question on salary retaining 50% of salary/cap hit:
I know the rules don't really address this but how likely is it that the NHL will void any of the following trade scenarios(as a Sabres fan I'm looking to utilize this in our rebuild):

1. Player X, let's call him Thomas Vanek, has 1y/7.14m left. Team A wants Vanek for a longer term. To get Vanek to resign, we offer 2yr/18-20mil year(3yr/25-27mil total) with average cap hit of 8.33 to 9m a year. Sabres then trade him to Team A and retain half of his salary/cap hit. Team A is then only on the hook for 4.17 to 4.5m cap hit a year for 3 years(a steal). Offering Thomas Vanek at 4.5m a year should get us a much bigger return and we should be nowhere near the upper limit for the next two years so the cap/salary hit is not a big deal.

2. Free agency-I like to use Alexander Semin from last year. Under the new CBA, the Sabres could have acted as bridge for a team to sign Semin. Here's how, Semin wants 1y/7m. Team B, again, doesn't have the cap room. Sabres then agree to sign Semin to the deal and then trade him while retaining half of his salary to Team D for something in return.

3. The Trade and Trade Back-Marian Gaborik has 1yr/7.5m left. CBJ wants more cap room to sign free agents. So the Sabres agree to trade for Gaborik for a 7th round conditional, then trade Gaborik back to CBJ while retaining half of his salary for the 7th and something more. CBJ gets 3.75m more in cap room and we get more assets.

The last 2 are total abuses of the system I know. I don't think there is much they can about scenario 1 though. Is is it something the NHL will look to void? It does help teams rebuild quicker by gaining more assets but at the expense of the 28 teams not involved in the trade.

JLewyB is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 11:25 AM
  #189
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 11,246
vCash: 500
All are theoretically possible by the MOU details. There is some ambiguity on scenario #1 as the MOU doesn't address whether teams can retain salary on SPC's that are not in effect yet.

Would the league seek to block the trades as attempted circumvention? Unknown. Though I wouldn't dismiss the possibility.

Even if this were allowed. How much would you expect Buffalo to really gain? One would think they'd be a better team by using that $4m+ per season to improve their roster. Not to mention they would have to replace Vanek, probably with a player making $3m+ per season. Leaving the team with a outlay of $7m+ for not-Vanek when they could instead have Vanek for $8m+.

mouser is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 10:09 PM
  #190
JLewyB
Registered User
 
JLewyB's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Perry, NY
Posts: 599
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mouser View Post
All are theoretically possible by the MOU details. There is some ambiguity on scenario #1 as the MOU doesn't address whether teams can retain salary on SPC's that are not in effect yet.

Would the league seek to block the trades as attempted circumvention? Unknown. Though I wouldn't dismiss the possibility.

Even if this were allowed. How much would you expect Buffalo to really gain? One would think they'd be a better team by using that $4m+ per season to improve their roster. Not to mention they would have to replace Vanek, probably with a player making $3m+ per season. Leaving the team with a outlay of $7m+ for not-Vanek when they could instead have Vanek for $8m+.
I should clarify that considering his situation in Buffalo, Vanek is not signing an extension to play in Buffalo. We are in the midst of a rebuild, a rebuild that Vanek said he wants no part of it(ryan miller has said the same thing). So, it makes sense to trade him now(or by the deadline). The whole idea was to create more value by adding more years of control and at a cheaper rate then what you can normally pay for the caliber of player Vanek is. Since we are rebuilding, we should have the salary cap room for the next couple of years to pull off a maneuver like this

JLewyB is offline  
Old
06-02-2013, 05:57 PM
  #191
cheswick
Non-registered User
 
cheswick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Peg City
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,895
vCash: 574
I tweeted cap geek last week about their recapture formula and they've informed me they corrected it now.

cheswick is offline  
Old
06-02-2013, 06:14 PM
  #192
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,354
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheswick View Post
I tweeted cap geek last week about their recapture formula and they've informed me they corrected it now.
Mouser addressed this in the cap recapture thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mouser View Post
Capgeek just updated their FAQ and Cap Recapture Calculator to reflect that teams do receive credit for negative cap seasons while they are paying the player.

- If the cumulative salary paid to the player is less than the cumulative cap amount then the team does not receive a negative cap hit recapture penalty.
- Teams are only assessed during the period they hold the player contract. i.e. If Vancouver traded Luongo this offseason then their potential cap recapture penalty is locked in at $7.43m, even if Luongo were to play seasons with another team where his salary was less than cap hit it won't reduce the $7.43m amount.

kdb209 is offline  
Old
06-02-2013, 07:05 PM
  #193
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 11,246
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
Mouser addressed this in the cap recapture thread.
Yeah, sent a long email to Capgeek last week asking on it

mouser is offline  
Old
06-03-2013, 04:00 AM
  #194
The Saw Is the Law
Registered User
 
The Saw Is the Law's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: Finland
Posts: 1,835
vCash: 500
Draft Eligibility

From wikipedia about this 2013 draft:

Ice hockey players born between January 1, 1993, and September 15, 1995, are eligible for selection in the 2013 NHL Entry Draft. Additionally, un-drafted, non-North American players over the age of 20 are eligible for the draft; and those players who were drafted in the 2011 NHL Entry Draft, but not signed by an NHL team and who were born after June 30, 1993, are also eligible to re-enter the draft.

You can draft over 20 year old player if he is born in Europe, right? But there has to be some upper age limit, you cannot draft 30 year old European, right? Whats the upper age limit for Europeans?

The Saw Is the Law is offline  
Old
06-03-2013, 08:50 AM
  #195
cheswick
Non-registered User
 
cheswick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Peg City
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,895
vCash: 574
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saw Is the Law View Post
Draft Eligibility

From wikipedia about this 2013 draft:

Ice hockey players born between January 1, 1993, and September 15, 1995, are eligible for selection in the 2013 NHL Entry Draft. Additionally, un-drafted, non-North American players over the age of 20 are eligible for the draft; and those players who were drafted in the 2011 NHL Entry Draft, but not signed by an NHL team and who were born after June 30, 1993, are also eligible to re-enter the draft.

You can draft over 20 year old player if he is born in Europe, right? But there has to be some upper age limit, you cannot draft 30 year old European, right? Whats the upper age limit for Europeans?


An undrafted player who is 22 or older can become an unrestricted free agent

cheswick is offline  
Old
06-03-2013, 08:56 AM
  #196
The Saw Is the Law
Registered User
 
The Saw Is the Law's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: Finland
Posts: 1,835
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheswick View Post
An undrafted player who is 22 or older can become an unrestricted free agent
So European players born in -92 (21 years old) can still be drafted. Does it matter if they play in Europe or NA?

The Saw Is the Law is offline  
Old
06-03-2013, 09:21 AM
  #197
cheswick
Non-registered User
 
cheswick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Peg City
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,895
vCash: 574
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saw Is the Law View Post
So European players born in -92 (21 years old) can still be drafted. Does it matter if they play in Europe or NA?
An undrafted player who played in northamerica at age 18, 19, or 20 can become a free agent at age 21.

At age 22 if they solely played in Europe.

cheswick is offline  
Old
06-04-2013, 11:21 PM
  #198
knorthern knight
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: GTA
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,759
vCash: 314
Which minor league players' salaries count against the cap? Just the guys on a 1-way-contract, or everybody making more than $900,000?

knorthern knight is offline  
Old
06-05-2013, 12:23 AM
  #199
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,354
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by knorthern knight View Post
Which minor league players' salaries count against the cap? Just the guys on a 1-way-contract, or everybody making more than $900,000?
Both one-way and two way SPCs with compensation greater than $900K (min salary + $375K).

Quote:
Originally Posted by NHL/NHLPA CBA MOU
10. Contracts Outside the League

Money paid to Players on NHL SPCs (one-ways and two-ways) in another professional league will not be counted against the Players’ Share, but will be counted against the NHL Club’s Averaged Club Salary for the period during which such Player is loaned to another professional league as follows:
a) In the case of a one-way SPC, the AA of such SPC less the then applicable NHL Minimum Salary plus $375,000 (e.g., currently $900,000) will be counted against the Club’s Averaged Club Salary, or

b) In the case of a two-way SPC, the total compensation (defined for these purposes as the greater of: i) that League’s Year’s stated Paragraph 1 Minor League Salary and Bonuses (other than Exhibit 5 Bonuses unless earned) and ii) guaranteed salary and Bonuses) in excess of the then applicable NHL Minimum Salary plus $375,000 (e.g., currently $900,000) will be counted against the Club’s Averaged Club Salary.
For further clarity, any Exhibit 5 performance bonuses payable but not earned/paid shall not be charged to the Club’s Averaged Club Salary pursuant to this provision. For example, if a Player on a two-way SPC with Paragraph 1 Salary of $600,000/$60,000 and Earnable Exhibit 5 Performance Bonuses of $2,850,000 (AA = 3,450,000) is Loaned to another professional League, the Player’s Club will not receive a charge to its Averaged Club Salary for as long as such Player is on Loan.

kdb209 is offline  
Old
06-05-2013, 10:09 AM
  #200
Mr Sakich
Registered User
 
Mr Sakich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Motel 35
Posts: 8,013
vCash: 500
Teams to bid on Compliance Buyout players?

I did a search and found very little information on this. According to:

http://thehockeywriters.com/compliance-buyouts-nhl/

the process of NBA compliance buyouts is:


1) The player is still paid in full
2) The team gets to remove his salary from their books for cap and luxury tax purposes
3) The player enters a bidding pool of teams that are under the salary cap
4) Teams can bid to assume some (but not all) of the player’s contract and the highest bidder is awarded the player
5) If no team claims the player, he becomes an unrestricted free agent


The writers felt that the NHL adopted a similar policy but I cannot find that information anywhere. If the NHL did adopt this policy, I have a few questions about this process

1) does the winning bid team get the player for the original term of the contract?
2) can a team be under the cap before their bid and over the cap after? This would force them to dump salary before the next season but it allows them to bid
3) it seems odd that no team offered 1$ for Redden or Gomez. All it would have cost is a roster spot and they would have had the rights to either player for 1$.

Mr Sakich is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:39 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.