Wouldn't this only apply to new contracts? Aren't the current contracts grandfathered?
Printable View
Wouldn't this only apply to new contracts? Aren't the current contracts grandfathered?
Are they grandfathering current contracts in or do those rules only apply to contracts signed under the CBA?
What do they do about deals like Jeff Carter's for instance if he retires early. Philly is the one that entered into the contract. Columbus traded for it. LA traded for it. Columbus and LA so far have had the benefits of having him paid more than his cap hit. What happens if he's traded say 2 more times before he retires? Is it just the final two teams that would be screwed when several teams before got the benefit of that contract?
Any contract longer than 6 years or with 6 remaining are technically susceptible including Doughty. However, Richards', Carter's and Quick's contracts end in the years where they turn 35, 37 and 37 respectively. They don't have any cheap "bogus" years as an incentive to retire. I suppose you could consider Jeff deciding to give up 4 million and retiring 2 years early in which case the Kings would have a cap recapture hit of 3.3 million for two years.Quote:
Originally Posted by keyTOarson
No this applies to any current or future contract 6 years or longer.Quote:
Originally Posted by eyesk8r
I actually forgot about Columbus when I calculated that cap recapture amount for Carter above but it wouldn't change much. Originally in the NHL proposals the full cap recapture amount went to the signing team, however in the final CBA it has gone proportionally per team played.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dana
As I stated above there's little incentive to not play and if he did pack it in 2 years early the damage is minimal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kubrick
P.S. If my calculations are correct, Columbus would be on the hook for about 100K if Jeff retired 2 years early...
They still are cap-circumventing contracts the way they are structured. They have lower salaried years tacked on at the end to lower the cap hit. Fortunately, it looks like the impact will be relatively minimal as long as any of them don't retire too early.Quote:
Originally Posted by sweatypickle
Not pro-rating the 2011-12 season, and taking his career up to to 2018-19, should he retire when Jeff Carter will have 3 years left in the deal he signed with Philly, there would be $51,000,000 paid in salaries by the Kings against $42,181,816 in Cap hit. The difference is roughly $8,8M (Cap vs. $ benefit to the Kings) spread over the last 3 years = $8.8M/3 = $2.93M Cap Hit over the remaining 3 years.
Quote:
To wit, part 2: If Luongo were to play the next seven years of his deal in Toronto before retiring, the Leafs would be paying him $43.666 million in salary but only counting $37.31 million against the cap over those seven years, a cap savings of $6.356 million. So if Luongo retires with three years left on his deal (because his salary falls to $1.618 million in the 10th year and then $1 million in the last two years of the deal), the Leafs would get charged that $6.356 million on their cap spread evenly over the remaining three years of his deal. Trades, cheat deals and more CBA details - Cross Checks Blog - ESPN
My math could be wrong but I can't imagine there wouldn't be some kind of grandfathering clause for teams that traded for a long term signed player prior to the new CBA rules. This calculation has got to apply only to new deals moving forward.
Only if he retires and there's little incentive for him to.. This isn't Hossa making 1 million per for four years at 38-42 years old... I did the calcs for all the cap circumvention deals over at hf if they retired when their Bogus years kick in..Quote:
Originally Posted by keyTOarson
A list of cap-circumventing contracts (with age of player when contract ends).
Kovalchuk - 42 4.7 x 5 years
Luongo - 43 4.1 x 3 years
Hossa - 42 4.275 x 4 years
Weber - 41 6.9 x 3 years
Parise - 40 6.2 x 3 years
Suter - 40 6.2 x 3 years
Keith - 40 3.7 x 2 years
Zetterberg - 40 5.2 x 2 years
Franzen - 40 2.95 x 2 years
(Brad) Richards - 40 5.7 x 3 years
Lecavalier - 39 6.5 x 2 years
Ehrhoff - 39 3.0 x 3 years
Your math is correct if for some reason he retired at 34 giving up 7 million dollars. However there is no grandfathering and applies to all deals 6 years or above in length and/or with 6 years or above left.Quote:
Originally Posted by Riofan
Not meaning to be rude because it's awesome for you to have done the work. Is there anything that has specifically said there won't be grandfathering? Or are we just operating on the assumption because nothing has been said regarding it, there is no grandfathering?Quote:
Originally Posted by sweatypickle
No offence taken! The link above discusses (there's a globe and mail one as well.. I'll look for it) how it applies to all contracts, however the NHL has been adamant from the start and has had it in every proposal that it applies to existing contracts. The PA outlined this calculation a while back and finally agreed to it applying to existing contracts in early December. The part about splitting the cap recapture between teams is new (at least it wasn't specified in the old NHL proposals).Quote:
Originally Posted by Dana
