The NHL collective bargaining process is starting to get interesting.
The storyline we are going to live with for the next month (months if we take a cynical view) is Team Owner vs. Team Player.
You know, if it were really that simple, I think this thing would get settled. The complexity of the thing is really much greater.
Showing posts with label salary floor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label salary floor. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
Monday, July 11, 2011
Will Travis Moen's Value Ever be Higher?
A twist, and suddenly teams may look and Travis Moen and say - hey, he's just what we need. Maybe even teams that have watched him labour on the first/second line.
The focus has naturally turned to Gomez and Spacek on this salary floor story, but it would be irresponsible to leave out Moen, who at his current salary is also a bit of a waste of money (the fighter that can't fight, the big guy who doesn't check, etc, etc.)
I'd suggest that even the mismanaged franchises among those listed in this article know enough to steer clear of G-Love, and probably Spacek too. But for a cool $1.5 million of salary floor relief, the fully playable/moveable/benchable Moen is salary floor magic.
(Note: I like Moen. It's nothing personal, but one has to admit that if a player can provide the same play for league minimum, $1 million is there for the taking. Anyway, I just think you should all check out the article...)
The focus has naturally turned to Gomez and Spacek on this salary floor story, but it would be irresponsible to leave out Moen, who at his current salary is also a bit of a waste of money (the fighter that can't fight, the big guy who doesn't check, etc, etc.)
I'd suggest that even the mismanaged franchises among those listed in this article know enough to steer clear of G-Love, and probably Spacek too. But for a cool $1.5 million of salary floor relief, the fully playable/moveable/benchable Moen is salary floor magic.
(Note: I like Moen. It's nothing personal, but one has to admit that if a player can provide the same play for league minimum, $1 million is there for the taking. Anyway, I just think you should all check out the article...)
Monday, June 20, 2011
$20,000,000 Should Do It
Your news for today:
- Cap set to rise to $64 million (floor to $48 million)
- Pacioretty signs for $3.25 million over a couple of seasons
- Markov still unsigned
That together with other non-news like Gomez not traded, Moen still inexplicably employed by the Canadiens, Jagr never to sign in Montreal and Pouliot without a contract gives us the grand sum of news which is this:
The Canadiens have about $20 million to spend on 4 defenders, 5 forwards and a back-up goalie.
Now, we know that one of these defenders is Andrei Markov, and we think his contract is being negotiated now. We don't know what the delay is or has been, but it's conceivable the team and the player have been waiting to see what the salary cap will be for the future of this contract.
Knowing now that the cap is high and $6 million is now a mere 10% of the team budget, the playing field is clearer.
Knowing this ourselves, we feel that there is little reason that Andrei Markov and whatever salary it takes to get him won't fit into the team's new budgetary calculations.
For the sake of argument, let's pull $6 million-ish as his cap number. With Andrei signed, together with the top two lines as they look like they will be going forward, PK Subban and Yannick Weber, Hal Gill and Carey Price, there is also little reason to believe that any of the remaining restricted free agents would be lost against the team's own strategic desires.
A remaining $14 million is more than enough to cover off Josh Gorges, Benoit Pouiot, David Desharnais, Ryan White, Alex Picard and Tom Pyatt. This illustrious list even gives hope that there would be plenty left over should Gauthier want to re-acquaint himself with someone like Roman Hamrlik, Brent Sopel or possibly even James Wisniewski.
A rising salary cap world
Now that the Canadiens have been in a rising salary cap world for 6 years, does anyone else think it's high time they started acting like they are?
Every team that we think is under threat of being dismantled come spring (barring the stacked Blackhawks) always seems to get their reprieve by the bustling budgetary numbers from the revamped league. The Philadelphia Flyers, serial cap violators all of a sudden have all the money they need to sign Ilya Bryzgalov and keep their roster mostly intact. It almost seems like they knew that a cap determined by their budget combined with other teams would get a boost. it almost seems like they read the market and learned that caps usually go up in June.
The Canadiens are doing better. The Plekanec contract for example, looks a lot better today than it did yesterday. Ditto Cammalleri. But the recent Kostitsyn signing (at an NHL median $3.25 million a year) seems like a very conservative bet on a clearly above average player.
In this rising cap world of nice surprises and unexpected cap space, I wouldn't mind seeing the Canadiens get a bit more crafty when their annual May break comes around.
Still, I'll be more than happy at this point with a Google search that turns up news for Andrei Markov before the end of June.
- Cap set to rise to $64 million (floor to $48 million)
- Pacioretty signs for $3.25 million over a couple of seasons
- Markov still unsigned
That together with other non-news like Gomez not traded, Moen still inexplicably employed by the Canadiens, Jagr never to sign in Montreal and Pouliot without a contract gives us the grand sum of news which is this:
The Canadiens have about $20 million to spend on 4 defenders, 5 forwards and a back-up goalie.
Now, we know that one of these defenders is Andrei Markov, and we think his contract is being negotiated now. We don't know what the delay is or has been, but it's conceivable the team and the player have been waiting to see what the salary cap will be for the future of this contract.
Knowing now that the cap is high and $6 million is now a mere 10% of the team budget, the playing field is clearer.
Knowing this ourselves, we feel that there is little reason that Andrei Markov and whatever salary it takes to get him won't fit into the team's new budgetary calculations.
For the sake of argument, let's pull $6 million-ish as his cap number. With Andrei signed, together with the top two lines as they look like they will be going forward, PK Subban and Yannick Weber, Hal Gill and Carey Price, there is also little reason to believe that any of the remaining restricted free agents would be lost against the team's own strategic desires.
A remaining $14 million is more than enough to cover off Josh Gorges, Benoit Pouiot, David Desharnais, Ryan White, Alex Picard and Tom Pyatt. This illustrious list even gives hope that there would be plenty left over should Gauthier want to re-acquaint himself with someone like Roman Hamrlik, Brent Sopel or possibly even James Wisniewski.
A rising salary cap world
Now that the Canadiens have been in a rising salary cap world for 6 years, does anyone else think it's high time they started acting like they are?
Every team that we think is under threat of being dismantled come spring (barring the stacked Blackhawks) always seems to get their reprieve by the bustling budgetary numbers from the revamped league. The Philadelphia Flyers, serial cap violators all of a sudden have all the money they need to sign Ilya Bryzgalov and keep their roster mostly intact. It almost seems like they knew that a cap determined by their budget combined with other teams would get a boost. it almost seems like they read the market and learned that caps usually go up in June.
The Canadiens are doing better. The Plekanec contract for example, looks a lot better today than it did yesterday. Ditto Cammalleri. But the recent Kostitsyn signing (at an NHL median $3.25 million a year) seems like a very conservative bet on a clearly above average player.
In this rising cap world of nice surprises and unexpected cap space, I wouldn't mind seeing the Canadiens get a bit more crafty when their annual May break comes around.
Still, I'll be more than happy at this point with a Google search that turns up news for Andrei Markov before the end of June.
Monday, July 06, 2009
Note To UFAs: Money Gone
I'm not sure I believe that Alex Kovalev used the Canadiens offers as bargaining chips with other teams or not. While it doesn't seem that far-fetched, it seems strange the Kovalev was being offered a raise.
Whatever happened, Alex can't be feeling too good about himself right at this moment in time. For one thing, the big buyers have moved. For another, Brian Gionta has taken his fortune in Montreal.
But this story isn't Kovalev's alone. This is the story of every UFA who waits for lazy GMs to return from their boozy holiday weekends. It is Saku Koivu's story, it is Alex Tanguay's and perhaps to a much greater extent, all those players reaching UFA contract status, while keeping the replaceable tag.
There have been a trough-full of articles these past few days about the cap space available to each NHL team and how they might accommodate the remaining players. But none was so intelligent and insightful as this one by James Mirtle. I say that, because Mirtle's is the only article that treats the critical issue with team budgets in mind. How could you forget team budgets Montreal? They almost got you that guy you've all been salivating over for the past 11 years.
Mirtle does some straightforward calculations using the very fair and realistic estimate that was last season's spending. It's very interesting. And it should interest Montreal fans. That's because even with 3 contract albatrosses, the Habs sit at #5 in the estimated remaining funds to spend to their budget cap.
Montreal still a bigger player
Keeping in mind that this was written on Friday, Montreal had (according to calculations) an estimated $7,964,000 to spend with at least 5 roster openings. The teams ahead of Montreal included the Rangers and Devils with $13m and $11m at the time. But both teams actually have more players to sign than Montreal to ice a team, and so may not be able to compete on the open market. The other two teams, the Islanders and Vancouver represent competition.
While the looming RFAs must be considered too, Montreal really only has Plekanec who can come anywhere close to claiming a raise. New Jersey and New York have issues of their own there too with Zajac and Zherdev heading their respective lists.
Remaining money scarce
Just telling you that Montreal should be one of the big spenders left should tell you a lot. It should tell the remaining free agents something too: their money and their luck may be running out.(Thanks Brian Gionta)
James Mirtle estimates that teams will probably be spending in the neighbourhood of $147 million. It sounds like a lot but spread over 30 teams it's not even room for Tanguay's salary last year. While James alludes to it:
I did some calculations of my own. Simply put, I used a list of UFAs with 2008-09 salaries on it. I then tallied up all the salaries of the people I would consider NHL regulars or potential regulars. I even removed Fedorov, Kozlov and other defectors for good measure.
The story my calculations told is that UFAs alone, if they are all asking for raises will be looking for more than $180 million this summer. Quite right, they'll be fighting for scraps. Particularly since many teams have now turned their focuses to restricted free agents who promise to figure in their plan for much longer.
It's a lesson to future free agents: you'd better be darn sure about your leveraging, because before you know it, Spacek, Gionta and Gaborik will have pinched your change.
Pay reduction
The limited money around will certainly mean that many players have to take a significant paycut (Francis Bouillon is someone who springs immediately to mind here).
And those that are quickest to accept that reality will be the ones with an NHL career after this summer. Those with big salary demands will be left out in the cold as younger players who can do their jobs almost as efficiently will filter through to be paid minimum wages.
Paradoxically, those veterans willing to take massive pay cuts should quickly become the next most valuable group of free agents as teams look to fill holes with affordable pieces. Someone like Bouillon, who looks a disaster at $2.5 million, quickly takes on a shine as his demands creep below $1 million. In fact, it would be an interesting dynamic to have veterans with such low cap hits later in the season when trades are happening left, right and centre to get anyone on board who's played a playoff minute or two.
3 K's: Koivu, Kovalev, KHL
As this affects two of my favourite players, it was of particular interest.
I think Koivu may be the best positioned of all the remaining free agents, because as many people who have been saying, veteran centres who step up their game in the playoffs are useful commodities, no matter their age.
Kovalev, on the other hand may have played himself into a corner here. I think even he'd admit that matching the Habs offer on the market now might be tricky. It seems Kovy may have stickhandled himself into a defender at the blueline again.
As with the marginal millionaires, it may get interesting if Koivu, Kovalev and any other fading stars suddenly drop their asking prices. And, before Gainey says all his adieus, I'd warn him to keep that in mind. Yes Kovalev at $4.5 million now is impossible. But instant PP proficiency for a couple of million should not be sneezed at. Similarly, the chance to start a centre like Koivu in a depth role for a budget – only a bad manager would pass the chance up.
The same of course goes for Tanguay, who must be thinking hard about getting a new agent by now.
Unfortunately for NHL fans, the benefactors of salary slippage in North America could once again be the KHL. While the Russian league doesn't boast the standard of North American play, it does boast the same top salaries. What's more, the league – actively engaged in trying to usurp NHL audience – will be only too willing to sweep up stars left out in the cold by imprudent contracts of the past.
The next few days should be interesting indeed. Perhaps not the frenzy that TSN promises annually on July 1, but in some ways much more definitive for the league as we know it.
Will low budget teams break their own limits?
Will UFAs smell the cash running out?
Will the Russians land their largest sucker punch yet?
Whatever happened, Alex can't be feeling too good about himself right at this moment in time. For one thing, the big buyers have moved. For another, Brian Gionta has taken his fortune in Montreal.
But this story isn't Kovalev's alone. This is the story of every UFA who waits for lazy GMs to return from their boozy holiday weekends. It is Saku Koivu's story, it is Alex Tanguay's and perhaps to a much greater extent, all those players reaching UFA contract status, while keeping the replaceable tag.
There have been a trough-full of articles these past few days about the cap space available to each NHL team and how they might accommodate the remaining players. But none was so intelligent and insightful as this one by James Mirtle. I say that, because Mirtle's is the only article that treats the critical issue with team budgets in mind. How could you forget team budgets Montreal? They almost got you that guy you've all been salivating over for the past 11 years.
Mirtle does some straightforward calculations using the very fair and realistic estimate that was last season's spending. It's very interesting. And it should interest Montreal fans. That's because even with 3 contract albatrosses, the Habs sit at #5 in the estimated remaining funds to spend to their budget cap.
Montreal still a bigger player
Keeping in mind that this was written on Friday, Montreal had (according to calculations) an estimated $7,964,000 to spend with at least 5 roster openings. The teams ahead of Montreal included the Rangers and Devils with $13m and $11m at the time. But both teams actually have more players to sign than Montreal to ice a team, and so may not be able to compete on the open market. The other two teams, the Islanders and Vancouver represent competition.
While the looming RFAs must be considered too, Montreal really only has Plekanec who can come anywhere close to claiming a raise. New Jersey and New York have issues of their own there too with Zajac and Zherdev heading their respective lists.
Remaining money scarce
Just telling you that Montreal should be one of the big spenders left should tell you a lot. It should tell the remaining free agents something too: their money and their luck may be running out.(Thanks Brian Gionta)
James Mirtle estimates that teams will probably be spending in the neighbourhood of $147 million. It sounds like a lot but spread over 30 teams it's not even room for Tanguay's salary last year. While James alludes to it:
"The average NHL club has between three and four free agents to lock up still and about $5-million to do so, so we're likely looking at a lot of smaller moves. None of the players left as UFAs should expect huge paydays, however, as we'll get down to fighting for table scraps rather quickly."
I did some calculations of my own. Simply put, I used a list of UFAs with 2008-09 salaries on it. I then tallied up all the salaries of the people I would consider NHL regulars or potential regulars. I even removed Fedorov, Kozlov and other defectors for good measure.
The story my calculations told is that UFAs alone, if they are all asking for raises will be looking for more than $180 million this summer. Quite right, they'll be fighting for scraps. Particularly since many teams have now turned their focuses to restricted free agents who promise to figure in their plan for much longer.
It's a lesson to future free agents: you'd better be darn sure about your leveraging, because before you know it, Spacek, Gionta and Gaborik will have pinched your change.
Pay reduction
The limited money around will certainly mean that many players have to take a significant paycut (Francis Bouillon is someone who springs immediately to mind here).
And those that are quickest to accept that reality will be the ones with an NHL career after this summer. Those with big salary demands will be left out in the cold as younger players who can do their jobs almost as efficiently will filter through to be paid minimum wages.
Paradoxically, those veterans willing to take massive pay cuts should quickly become the next most valuable group of free agents as teams look to fill holes with affordable pieces. Someone like Bouillon, who looks a disaster at $2.5 million, quickly takes on a shine as his demands creep below $1 million. In fact, it would be an interesting dynamic to have veterans with such low cap hits later in the season when trades are happening left, right and centre to get anyone on board who's played a playoff minute or two.
3 K's: Koivu, Kovalev, KHL
As this affects two of my favourite players, it was of particular interest.
I think Koivu may be the best positioned of all the remaining free agents, because as many people who have been saying, veteran centres who step up their game in the playoffs are useful commodities, no matter their age.
Kovalev, on the other hand may have played himself into a corner here. I think even he'd admit that matching the Habs offer on the market now might be tricky. It seems Kovy may have stickhandled himself into a defender at the blueline again.
As with the marginal millionaires, it may get interesting if Koivu, Kovalev and any other fading stars suddenly drop their asking prices. And, before Gainey says all his adieus, I'd warn him to keep that in mind. Yes Kovalev at $4.5 million now is impossible. But instant PP proficiency for a couple of million should not be sneezed at. Similarly, the chance to start a centre like Koivu in a depth role for a budget – only a bad manager would pass the chance up.
The same of course goes for Tanguay, who must be thinking hard about getting a new agent by now.
Unfortunately for NHL fans, the benefactors of salary slippage in North America could once again be the KHL. While the Russian league doesn't boast the standard of North American play, it does boast the same top salaries. What's more, the league – actively engaged in trying to usurp NHL audience – will be only too willing to sweep up stars left out in the cold by imprudent contracts of the past.
The next few days should be interesting indeed. Perhaps not the frenzy that TSN promises annually on July 1, but in some ways much more definitive for the league as we know it.
Will low budget teams break their own limits?
Will UFAs smell the cash running out?
Will the Russians land their largest sucker punch yet?
Monday, March 16, 2009
The NHL Salary Floor Cheats
The Sorry Case Of The New York Islanders
I know it's a strong headline. The New York Islanders are not cheating, merely taking the piss. They are not breaking the rules, per se; but could not be accused of operating with the true spirit of sportsmanship in mind.
After watching that game the other night, with barely a recognisable name on the gamesheet, I started wondering how it was the Islanders were even meeting the obligation of the salary floor. It turns out they don't, or at least they shouldn't given the way things have gone for them. They squeak it out on loopholes.
Initially, I felt anger towards the Islanders (and I would feel a heck of a lot more if I was an NHL-able body like Mike Johnson, for example), but really they are only playing within the rules set out for them.
I think the responsibility has to lay at the feet of the NHL, who have implemented and policed a salary floor, but can let it turn into the nonsense that the Islanders have been pulling this season.
New York Islanders under the floor
By my rudimentary calculations, if the Islanders had declared all the players that actually did have a long-term injury to actually have a long-term injury (instead of broken leg – day-to-day), then they would be in serious cap floor trouble.
If bonuses are hit, they are looking at $37.75 million. If not, as low as $32.8 million. Pretty low considering the salary floor for the NHL stands at $40.3 million for every other team...
Let's face it, the Islanders have tanked this season, and they did it from the outset. They signed veterans they knew were overpriced to make the floor knowing that they would trade them when the mandated salary obligation was met. They even tossed in bonuses which counted against the cap, but which they must have known would never have to be paid out:
What's more, they never declared certain players to have long-term injury, so they wouldn't have to pay, or as it happens, compete in the NHL.
The worst thing about all this is that instead of being encouraged to do otherwise, the rules will encourage more teams to do the same in the future. The model set forth by the trailblazing New York Islanders of 2008-09 is a blueprint for how to get a top 5 draft pick without having to pay for a full NHL roster.
Ghost players
Remember the punishment of having to pay Jassen Cullimore and Tony Salmelainen for 2 years because we bought out their contracts we never wanted? Bob Gainey should have traded these two to the Islanders or the Kings a couple of years ago – their buyout contracts would be gold dust.
The Islanders, of course, have their own ghost players in Alexei Yashin to the tune of two odd million a year and Shawn Bates at $400,000 annually.
Veteran bonuses
Over the age of 35, player bonuses are to count towards the cap. One can clearly see how this clause may be exploited by the Nashvilles, LAs and NYIs of the league.
"Doug Weight, want your biggest contract in years even though you're in full decline? The condition, of course is that you take it in bonuses, so when you decline even further we don't actually have to pay you."
This loophole, for the floor-pressed team, is even better than the ghost player (who has to be paid) because the bonuses can be set at such levels that they were never attainable anyway. It's money on the cap that will never have to be spent.
Day-to-day injuries
There is a giant loophole for those wishing to comply without complying with the terms of the NHL Collective bargaining agreement, and it is the long-term injury clause. At the moment, long-term injury requires initiative and paperwork from an NHL team to open up. If Komisarek dislocates a shoulder, the Canadiens management must process some forms to put him on long-term injured reserve and obtain the salary cap freedom allowed when players get injured.
While it boggles the mind that some GMs and their teams don't apply for this at every long-term injury (too busy talking to Eklund about trades he can invent, I guess), the more troubling bit of this arrangement is the way it affects the salary floor.
If a team does not apply for long-term injured reserve for say a player who broke his ankle or a goalie who tore his knee, that player remains on the books for the purposes of the salary cap. This in turn allows a team ice a sub-AHL team and get away with it.
Is it fair enough? Maybe so. Even so, it leaves a sour taste in my mouth.
What should the NHL do?
It's not that clear.
The first suggestion I would put forward would be to evaluate why they ever put a salary floor in place at all. It was purported at the time that the floor would be a method to foster competition, by ensuring that small market teams would sign players of star calibre – I think the Islanders have shown that this is contingent on the team's and not the league's or the fans' definition of star (Guerin, Weight, Comrie) and that, even then, there are plenty of ways around it.
Beyond excising the salary floor from the equation altogether, there could be a number of simple tweaks (as I see it) to prevent the Islanders from becoming the model for the other perennial stragglers of the NHL:
a) Count salary buyouts against the cap, but not towards the floor
Counting salary buyouts is meant to be a deterrent to GMs not an incentive. It only makes sense to leave it where it deters and remove it from the equation where it does not.
b) Count veteran bonuses against the cap, but not towards the floor
Similarly, the thinking behind counting veteran bonuses towards the cap was to prevent teams from stocking up on vets and paying them only contingent on their play. It was never intended to make Doug Weight a $4.5 million player even when his paid salary is less than $2 million.
c) Make LTI semi-automatic
It is one thing to allow teams flexibility to declare LTI for the upper level (if they want it). But entirely another to allow Rick DiPietro (out for the season in Jaunary) to count against the cap as if he were playing. The Islanders are not paying his salary (unless they have really bad insurance), so why should they get credit as if they were. Perhaps it could be as simple as an automatic LTI kicking in after 10 games are missed and going forward from there.
One or all of these would make some difference. And, to be honest, merely addressing the situation would be a positive step showing some concern for the competition they touted a few years ago.
I suspect that the Islanders would have something to say about the whole situation too, though. Particularly how injuries have hurt their chances, the attendance and their bottom line. It would be quite a convincing sob story if one ever believed that having Sillinger, Freddy Meyer and Brendan Witt would have turned the whole situation around for them. One point that they may bring up could have a lot of credence though, and that would be revenue sharing.
The current system in place in the NHL disqualifies the Islanders because of their geographic position. It conveniently fails to account for the immediate competition for hockey dollars in the "huge" hockey market. James Mirtle thinks the Islanders may deserve some help, after this whole fiasco, I find it hard not to agree.
After all that, does anyone else come to the conclusion that we really really messed up in losing twice to this team. I mean both teams seem to have had the same goal to drive towards – an Islanders loss at all costs.
After watching that game the other night, with barely a recognisable name on the gamesheet, I started wondering how it was the Islanders were even meeting the obligation of the salary floor. It turns out they don't, or at least they shouldn't given the way things have gone for them. They squeak it out on loopholes.
Initially, I felt anger towards the Islanders (and I would feel a heck of a lot more if I was an NHL-able body like Mike Johnson, for example), but really they are only playing within the rules set out for them.
I think the responsibility has to lay at the feet of the NHL, who have implemented and policed a salary floor, but can let it turn into the nonsense that the Islanders have been pulling this season.
New York Islanders under the floor
By my rudimentary calculations, if the Islanders had declared all the players that actually did have a long-term injury to actually have a long-term injury (instead of broken leg – day-to-day), then they would be in serious cap floor trouble.
If bonuses are hit, they are looking at $37.75 million. If not, as low as $32.8 million. Pretty low considering the salary floor for the NHL stands at $40.3 million for every other team...
Let's face it, the Islanders have tanked this season, and they did it from the outset. They signed veterans they knew were overpriced to make the floor knowing that they would trade them when the mandated salary obligation was met. They even tossed in bonuses which counted against the cap, but which they must have known would never have to be paid out:
The Islanders were happy to give the veteran the incentives for two reasons. For starters, they would be properly rewarding Weight if his offensive statistics rebounded closer to his career averages after a 25-point output in 2007-2008. With 21 points (4-17-21) in his first 21 games this season for the Islanders, the move has paid off for both team and player.
But there was additional strategy behind the Weight incentives package. As a player over age 35 and on a one-year deal, those bonuses counted towards the Islanders’ salary cap number. And Weight’s deal - along with the signing of Mark Streit to a deal averaging $4.1 million - took the Islanders above the salary cap “floor” as mandated by the Collective Bargaining Agreement.
What's more, they never declared certain players to have long-term injury, so they wouldn't have to pay, or as it happens, compete in the NHL.
The worst thing about all this is that instead of being encouraged to do otherwise, the rules will encourage more teams to do the same in the future. The model set forth by the trailblazing New York Islanders of 2008-09 is a blueprint for how to get a top 5 draft pick without having to pay for a full NHL roster.
Ghost players
Remember the punishment of having to pay Jassen Cullimore and Tony Salmelainen for 2 years because we bought out their contracts we never wanted? Bob Gainey should have traded these two to the Islanders or the Kings a couple of years ago – their buyout contracts would be gold dust.
The Islanders, of course, have their own ghost players in Alexei Yashin to the tune of two odd million a year and Shawn Bates at $400,000 annually.
Veteran bonuses
Over the age of 35, player bonuses are to count towards the cap. One can clearly see how this clause may be exploited by the Nashvilles, LAs and NYIs of the league.
"Doug Weight, want your biggest contract in years even though you're in full decline? The condition, of course is that you take it in bonuses, so when you decline even further we don't actually have to pay you."
This loophole, for the floor-pressed team, is even better than the ghost player (who has to be paid) because the bonuses can be set at such levels that they were never attainable anyway. It's money on the cap that will never have to be spent.
Day-to-day injuries
There is a giant loophole for those wishing to comply without complying with the terms of the NHL Collective bargaining agreement, and it is the long-term injury clause. At the moment, long-term injury requires initiative and paperwork from an NHL team to open up. If Komisarek dislocates a shoulder, the Canadiens management must process some forms to put him on long-term injured reserve and obtain the salary cap freedom allowed when players get injured.
While it boggles the mind that some GMs and their teams don't apply for this at every long-term injury (too busy talking to Eklund about trades he can invent, I guess), the more troubling bit of this arrangement is the way it affects the salary floor.
If a team does not apply for long-term injured reserve for say a player who broke his ankle or a goalie who tore his knee, that player remains on the books for the purposes of the salary cap. This in turn allows a team ice a sub-AHL team and get away with it.
Is it fair enough? Maybe so. Even so, it leaves a sour taste in my mouth.
What should the NHL do?
It's not that clear.
The first suggestion I would put forward would be to evaluate why they ever put a salary floor in place at all. It was purported at the time that the floor would be a method to foster competition, by ensuring that small market teams would sign players of star calibre – I think the Islanders have shown that this is contingent on the team's and not the league's or the fans' definition of star (Guerin, Weight, Comrie) and that, even then, there are plenty of ways around it.
Beyond excising the salary floor from the equation altogether, there could be a number of simple tweaks (as I see it) to prevent the Islanders from becoming the model for the other perennial stragglers of the NHL:
a) Count salary buyouts against the cap, but not towards the floor
Counting salary buyouts is meant to be a deterrent to GMs not an incentive. It only makes sense to leave it where it deters and remove it from the equation where it does not.
b) Count veteran bonuses against the cap, but not towards the floor
Similarly, the thinking behind counting veteran bonuses towards the cap was to prevent teams from stocking up on vets and paying them only contingent on their play. It was never intended to make Doug Weight a $4.5 million player even when his paid salary is less than $2 million.
c) Make LTI semi-automatic
It is one thing to allow teams flexibility to declare LTI for the upper level (if they want it). But entirely another to allow Rick DiPietro (out for the season in Jaunary) to count against the cap as if he were playing. The Islanders are not paying his salary (unless they have really bad insurance), so why should they get credit as if they were. Perhaps it could be as simple as an automatic LTI kicking in after 10 games are missed and going forward from there.
One or all of these would make some difference. And, to be honest, merely addressing the situation would be a positive step showing some concern for the competition they touted a few years ago.
I suspect that the Islanders would have something to say about the whole situation too, though. Particularly how injuries have hurt their chances, the attendance and their bottom line. It would be quite a convincing sob story if one ever believed that having Sillinger, Freddy Meyer and Brendan Witt would have turned the whole situation around for them. One point that they may bring up could have a lot of credence though, and that would be revenue sharing.
The current system in place in the NHL disqualifies the Islanders because of their geographic position. It conveniently fails to account for the immediate competition for hockey dollars in the "huge" hockey market. James Mirtle thinks the Islanders may deserve some help, after this whole fiasco, I find it hard not to agree.
After all that, does anyone else come to the conclusion that we really really messed up in losing twice to this team. I mean both teams seem to have had the same goal to drive towards – an Islanders loss at all costs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)