Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Enter Search Term. Use arrows to navigate between autocomplete results. If no results appear, use Enter to do a full site search.
Forum Closure ×
Canucks Community
Forum Closure

Tentative Agreement Reached.

Brendan Gaunce

Recommended Posts

elvis15 Canucks Hall-of-Famer

elvis15

Posted
Posted

Some details coming out, keep an eye on Twitter and other news sources:

@tsnbobmckenzie Now that draft copy of CBA terms has been distributed to all 30 teams, there are all sorts of details of the deal now coming out.

For example, the so-called Make Whole deferred payment of $300M to the players is payable in $100M instalments in Years 2, 3 and 4.

CBA is 10 yrs with mutual 8 yr opt-out but NHL has 1st option to terminate, no later than Sept. 1, 2019. NHLPA 2nd option, Sept. 15, 2019.

Players' playoff pool $ go from $6.5M last yr to $13M in each of next 2 yrs, $14M for 2 yrs, $15M for 2 yrs, $16M for 2 yrs and $17M for 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
surtur Canucks Regular

surtur

Posted
Posted

if i was wearing a aluminum foil hat i would say this was needed for certain top players to become healthy and certain teams to have certain people be able to purchase certain teams...

but who knows why they wanted to lose half a season... but i is so obvious they had no desire to resolve anything before this point in time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
elvis15 Canucks Hall-of-Famer

elvis15

Posted
Posted

Oddly, this was posted in the Luongo trade thread before the CBA agreement thread, but worth a look.

Another article from CBC's Friedmen

http://www.cbc.ca/sp...rto-luongo.html

Since the various reports of a Roberto Luongo trade to Toronto aren't already insane enough...let's throw some gasoline on the fire!

One of the intricacies of the new yet-to-be-ratified CBA is the "cap-recapture system." Basically, this affects players with long-term deals (minimum five or six years, I'm not 100 per cent certain).

Either way, Luongo's counts because his is a 12-year deal. Therefore, there will be a penalty if he retires before the contract is completed.

How does it work?

The simplest way to explain it is this: Let's assume the Canucks and Maple Leafs make the deal. Vancouver would be responsible for the "cap benefit" that it received in the first two years. Toronto would be responsible for any remaining "cap benefit" it gets as a result of contract structure if he walks away early.

Here's the math. Luongo salary:

2010-11: $10 million US

2011-12: $6,716,000

That's a total of $16,716,000.

Luongo's cap hit is $5,333,333. You multiply it by how many years he spent with the Canucks, so, in this case, that figure is doubled. That's $10,666,666.

What was the cap benefit to Vancouver? You take the actual salaries paid ($16,716,000) and subtract the total amount of cap space the Canucks used ($10,666,666). The answer is $6,049,334.

That is the "cap benefit" Vancouver received in the first two years of Luongo's contract. The key -- and the thing I had to check -- is that this number has zero immediate effect on the Canucks' cap situation. It is basically "frozen" and does not become an issue unless he retires before his contract is up.

So let's say he happily goes to Toronto (and really, who wouldn't happily go there?), spending seven seasons there before saying, "I've had enough" in the summer of 2019.

Actual cash numbers

Here are his actual cash numbers for those years:

2012-13 through 2017-18: $6,714,000

2018-19: $3,382,000

He would then walk away from three years at a combined $3,618,000. And, it's time for the penalties.

Vancouver's "frozen" $6,049,334 thaws. It is divided by the number of "unused" years in Luongo's contract -- three. The figure is $2,016,445. The Canucks will get a "cap penalty" at that amount for the 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22 seasons.

As for Toronto, the Maple Leafs will pay Luongo $43,666,000. (I'm not pro-rating this year's lockout-infected salary. Going for the easy math here). The total cap hit for those seven seasons is $37,333,331. The difference is $6,332,669. Divide it by the three unused years in Luongo's contract, and the penalty per season is $2,111,890 -- slightly larger than Vancouver's.

I wasn't really tuned into the outside world today, but heard people were wondering if it made more sense for Vancouver to buy out Luongo. These figures make it seem non-sensical. First of all, with the opt-out clauses attached to the length of the new CBA, there's no guarantee the rules will be the same by the time the penalties are scheduled to take effect.

Second, there may just be a loophole. From what I understand, Long-Term Injury Reserve still exists. (For example, it allows Chris Pronger to come off the Philadelphia cap while he recovers from concussions).

God forbid Luongo (or anyone else) goes through that. But he will be 40 in the summer of 2019. Who knows what happens to a goalie's body by then? Maybe he's had enough and is battling some nagging groin or hip or knee problem. He goes on LTIR, still gets paid and neither Toronto nor Vancouver gets any kind of penalty.

Could work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WHL rocks Canucks All-Star

WHL rocks

Posted
Posted

Posted this in the Luongo thread, belongs here i guess.

So they did get the cap recapture rule in. I quickly read the above on twitter but didn't have time to read thoroughly. This is good, I like this rule better than no rule against back diving contract as in previous CBA or the signing club being responsible for entire cap hit like originally proposed by NHL.

One thing I'd like clarification on is, if the Canucks trade Luongo to Florida and take part of his salary do they have to take that amount in his cap hit as well ??

Edit, this is what I found. This was the original proposal

In the context of Player Trades, participating Clubs will be permitted to allocate Cap charges and related salary payment obligations between them, subject to specified parameters. Specifically, Clubs may agree to retain, for each of the remaining years of the Player's SPC, no more than the lesser of: (i) $3 million of a particular SPC's Cap charge or (ii) 50 percent of the SPC's AAV ("Retained Salary Transaction"). In any Retained Salary Transaction, salary obligations as between Clubs would be allocated on the same percentage basis as Cap charges are being allocated. So, for instance, if an assigning Club agrees to retain 30% of an SPC's Cap charge over the balance of its term, it will also retain an obligation to reimburse the acquiring Club 30% of the Player's contractual compensation in each of the remaining years of the contract. A Club may not have more than two (2) contracts as to which Cap charges have been allocated between Clubs in a Player Trade, and no more than $5 million in allocated Cap charges in the aggregate in any one season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DeNiro Canucks Hall-of-Famer

DeNiro

Posted
Posted

They had to have changed that, otherwise the rule doesn't really help do what it's supposed to; which is to allow one team to reatain cap, while the other team absorbs salary.

You have to be able to have that seperation of cap and salary, or it really isn't a very effective rule.

Why would a low spending team trade a player and keep half their salary and half their cap hit? They wouldn't wanna be spedning millions on a player they've traded, but they do want their cap hit. They'd be better off keeping the player, or dumping all of their salary and overpaying a free agent.

And why would a high spending team trade a player and keep half of their cap hit? That doesn't make sense. It might make sense if they're trading for a player, and they can absorb only half of their cap hit. But like I said, it doesn't make much sense for a low spending team to pay half a players salary to play on another team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
-Vintage Canuck- Canucks Hall-of-Famer

-Vintage Canuck-

Posted
Posted

Is Ilya Kovalchuk staying in the KHL?:

A lot of big-name Russian-born players went to the KHL over the lockout and a couple, like Ilya Kovalchuk, suggested months ago that it might not be a temporary assignment.

“Basically, I don’t rule out staying in Russia in the case of a reduction of our salaries in the NHL,” Kovalchuk told Sportbox.ru.

With the NHL season is about to get underway, Kovalchuk is still with St. Petersburg SKA and playing with them today, according to the Bergen Record’s Tom Gulitti. So is he just getting in a little extra time with the team he has been captaining or is something else going on?

TSN Bob McKenzie’s tweeted that many in New Jersey are hearing that Kovalchuk might not return, although McKenzie cautioned that it’s just a rumor and not something he’s confirmed.

For his part, Devils GM Lou Lamoriello hasn’t spoken with Kovalchuk yet, according to the Bergen Record. However, Lamoriello hasn’t gotten any indication that Kovalchuk is thinking about staying in Russia in defiance of the 15-year, $100 million deal he signed with New Jersey.

Kovalchuk’s agent Jay Grossman added that he’s “working on” arrangements for the superstar to head back to New Jersey.

So now we wait to see if that happens or if the rumors have a basis in reality.

http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2013/01/08/is-ilya-kovalchuk-staying-in-the-khl/

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WHL rocks Canucks All-Star

WHL rocks

Posted
Posted

They had to have changed that, otherwise the rule doesn't really help do what it's supposed to; which is to allow one team to reatain cap, while the other team absorbs salary.

You have to be able to have that seperation of cap and salary, or it really isn't a very effective rule.

Why would a low spending team trade a player and keep half their salary and half their cap hit? They wouldn't wanna be spedning millions on a player they've traded, but they do want their cap hit. They'd be better off keeping the player, or dumping all of their salary and overpaying a free agent.

And why would a high spending team trade a player and keep half of their cap hit? That doesn't make sense. It might make sense if they're trading for a player, and they can absorb only half of their cap hit. But like I said, it doesn't make much sense for a low spending team to pay half a players salary to play on another team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WHL rocks Canucks All-Star

WHL rocks

Posted
Posted

Is Ilya Kovalchuk staying in the KHL?:

A lot of big-name Russian-born players went to the KHL over the lockout and a couple, like Ilya Kovalchuk, suggested months ago that it might not be a temporary assignment.

“Basically, I don’t rule out staying in Russia in the case of a reduction of our salaries in the NHL,” Kovalchuk told Sportbox.ru.

With the NHL season is about to get underway, Kovalchuk is still with St. Petersburg SKA and playing with them today, according to the Bergen Record’s Tom Gulitti. So is he just getting in a little extra time with the team he has been captaining or is something else going on?

TSN Bob McKenzie’s tweeted that many in New Jersey are hearing that Kovalchuk might not return, although McKenzie cautioned that it’s just a rumor and not something he’s confirmed.

For his part, Devils GM Lou Lamoriello hasn’t spoken with Kovalchuk yet, according to the Bergen Record. However, Lamoriello hasn’t gotten any indication that Kovalchuk is thinking about staying in Russia in defiance of the 15-year, $100 million deal he signed with New Jersey.

Kovalchuk’s agent Jay Grossman added that he’s “working on” arrangements for the superstar to head back to New Jersey.

So now we wait to see if that happens or if the rumors have a basis in reality.

http://prohockeytalk...ing-in-the-khl/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...