Alzner's cap hit is $1,675,000. Let's say he becomes ineligible for $400,000 in bonuses halfway through the season because he's in the AHL - then his cap number drops to $1,275,000. If he's then called up and plays the rest of the season in the NHL, he counts $637,500 against the cap for the time he's in the NHL. If at the end of the season he didn't meet the criteria for the other $400,000 in bonuses then his cap number would be $875,000 and he would have ended up counting $437,500 toward the cap.
The cap is not calculated on a "games played" basis, it's calculated on a daily basis.
__________________
"You better get to livin', because dying's a pain in the ass." - Frank Sinatra
Alzner's cap hit is $1,675,000. Let's say he becomes ineligible for $400,000 in bonuses halfway through the season because he's in the AHL - then his cap number drops to $1,275,000. If he's then called up and plays the rest of the season in the NHL, he counts $637,500 against the cap for the time he's in the NHL. If at the end of the season he didn't meet the criteria for the other $400,000 in bonuses then his cap number would be $875,000 and he would have ended up counting $437,500 toward the cap.
The cap is not calculated on a "games played" basis, it's calculated on a daily basis.
yeah I knew that but brain fart when it comes to the post. I was more concerned about the theory or what his actual bonus is not an actual calculation. My calc was just to highlight my thoughts for those who couldn't understand my jumbled verbage.
Thanks though for checking here and chiming in though.
I saw some discussion in another thread, so here's the info. based on my notes about waivers and which of the 22 Caps on the opening night roster are waiver exempt (see CBA article 13.4 table):
Schultz is waiver exempt to start this season: He signed as a 19yo in August 2005; he has played in 112 NHL games incl playoffs; if/when he plays in his 160th NHL game this season, he will no longer be waiver exempt; he will lose waiver exemption for next season if it does not end per the 160GP sometime this season
Backstrom is waiver exempt to start this season: Until he plays in his 160th game; he played in all 82 games during his rookie season plus 7 playoff games for a total of 89 NHL games played to date
As discussed in the line-up thread, some issue now about whether Brashear's cap hit is 1,250,000 or 1,200,000 - trying to get clarification
also, Strung asked awhile ago about Neuvirth's contract and whether it slid like Varlamov's; I got the information, told a few people, but forgot to post it here, sorry about that; anyway, it did slide as expected, they both have 3 years remaining on their contracts
Last edited by sk84fun_dc: 10-07-2008 at 01:07 PM.
Reason: fixed a typo
take a look at post 2, I know I have to update the Bears signings to include Maxwell and maybe another player, but I believe the Caps list is accurate and up to date; let me know if I am missing anyone
This is roster management/cap management stuff, I am sure. Erskine is a #7. The Caps young defensemen coming up are not going to be oft scratched #7 defensemen. The only other thing I can think of, is that this allows McPhee to send Erskine thru waivers if he needs a defenseman he has at Hershey particularly for an injury situation.
No other NHL team is going snag Erskine off waivers with two more one way years there too.
This is roster management/cap management stuff, I am sure. Erskine is a #7. The Caps young defensemen coming up are not going to be oft scratched #7 defensemen. The only other thing I can think of, is that this allows McPhee to send Erskine thru waivers if he needs a defenseman he has at Hershey particularly for an injury situation.
No other NHL team is going snag Erskine off waivers with two more one way years there too.
haha pay him too much so other people won't want him. good tactic
haha pay him too much so other people won't want him. good tactic
The idea wasn't to pay him too much (unless GMGM/Fishman were doing it wrong ), just to give him 2 years that people wouldn't pick up. In theory it should have been the same situation as Aucoin, but somehow things got terribly, terribly out of hand.
The idea wasn't to pay him too much (unless GMGM/Fishman were doing it wrong ), just to give him 2 years that people wouldn't pick up. In theory it should have been the same situation as Aucoin, but somehow things got terribly, terribly out of hand.
Maybe its 1.25 per year for JURskine. 1.25 for two defenders aint too shabby.
This is roster management/cap management stuff, I am sure. Erskine is a #7. The Caps young defensemen coming up are not going to be oft scratched #7 defensemen. The only other thing I can think of, is that this allows McPhee to send Erskine thru waivers if he needs a defenseman he has at Hershey particularly for an injury situation.
No other NHL team is going snag Erskine off waivers with two more one way years there too.
Wow...talk about crazy Gm'ing....
Sad if true...
__________________
George McPhee....The Teflon GM. 15 years of failure and counting....
6 - Number of playoff series the Capitals have won since George McPhee took over as General Manager in 1997 (which makes him the third-longest-tenured GM in the League), three of which came in McPhee's first season on the job.
well...i just saw the $1.25m. that doesn't make much sense to me. at all. Thats not a lot less than what Morrisonn is making. Indicates to me that somebody is out after this season. Morrisonn would be my guess, but who knows.
The only possible way to justify this deal is if Brashear is gone after this season and Erskine is being converted to full time enforcer and will play forward on the 4th line.
No, wait, that makes no sense. There's no way to justify this deal, period. Erskine is not good (check out hockeyanalytics.com if you need proof). The only value he provided in the past was by working for dirt cheap. If he's not doing that anymore, he shouldn't be on the roster.
This isn't just worse than the Bradley deal, it's worse than the Laich deal. This might cost us Alex Semin.
The only possible way to justify this deal is if Brashear is gone after this season and Erskine is being converted to full time enforcer and will play forward on the 4th line.
No, wait, that makes no sense. There's no way to justify this deal, period. Erskine is not good (check out hockeyanalytics.com if you need proof). The only value he provided in the past was by working for dirt cheap. If he's not doing that anymore, he shouldn't be on the roster.
This isn't just worse than the Bradley deal, it's worse than the Laich deal. This might cost us Alex Semin.
Laich's deal wasn't that bad. I don't even think Bradley's deal is that bad, but this Erskine deal is ****ing terrible.
In strungout's world...when it comes to Caps contract news...
I usually react to the signing (positive or negative), then take some time to reflect, and then return with some analysis and some reasoning for understanding why Mafki did what he did as what he does usually makes sense to me.
Well...this time?
It's still as bad as when it was first reported. The more I think about it...the less sense it makes.
The number can't be right. That's all I can keep telling myself.
), just to give him 2 years that people wouldn't pick up. In theory it should have been the same situation as Aucoin, but somehow things got terribly, terribly out of hand.
