Are the Canucks Actually in Cap Hell?

[mll]

On 3/15/2023 at 11:46 PM, Provost said:

Except it was the NHLPA who artificially raised the cap ceiling every single year beyond what revenues indicated even though it resulted in higher escrow.

 

It doesn’t seem at all unlikely that they would do the same again as they did it every time they had a chance.  Especially since the cap ceiling is artificially low compared to HRR due to money owed by players from previous years.

 

It doesn’t change how much players get overall, just slightly altering very slightly how it is distributed.

 

There will literally be hundreds of UFA and RFA players needing a contract extension between now and next season.  Their contracts will be highly impacted by the lack of cap space league wide.  Compare that to a very tiny impact on escrow for all players to add another $2 million to the cap ceiling.

 

 

 

 

Chris Johnston is categorical that players will never accept an increase to escrow - says having a cap on escrow was a major win for the NHLPA in the last negotiations.  He's adamant that if these are truly the terms to increase the cap by more than 1M than there's just no chance of that happening.   

 

Fwiw Johnston says a couple of times 'if that's truly the offer'.  Bettman laid out those conditions after the GMs meeting but who knows if he would be open to negotiate different terms with the NHLPA.

 

At the 2:55 mark.

 

 

 

[HKSR]

2 hours ago, mll said:

Chris Johnston is categorical that players will never accept an increase to escrow - says having a cap on escrow was a major win for the NHLPA in the last negotiations.  He's adamant that if these are truly the terms to increase the cap by more than 1M than there's just no chance of that happening.   

 

Fwiw Johnston says a couple of times 'if that's truly the offer'.  Bettman laid out those conditions after the GMs meeting but who knows if he would be open to negotiate different terms with the NHLPA.

 

At the 2:55 mark.

 

 

 

Yeah, I don't see them increasing the escrow.  It would penalize the members of the PA that are already under contract to benefit only those that are up for renewals.  Doesn't make sense at all for them to do that.  It will be a $1M increase in the cap unless Bettman and Co. back off on the escrow and just allow a smoothing of the increase in cap limit with the caveat of a longer payback.  Given the economics of the world right now, I doubt the billionaire owners would be onboard for this.

[Provost]

5 hours ago, mll said:

Chris Johnston is categorical that players will never accept an increase to escrow - says having a cap on escrow was a major win for the NHLPA in the last negotiations.  He's adamant that if these are truly the terms to increase the cap by more than 1M than there's just no chance of that happening.   

 

Fwiw Johnston says a couple of times 'if that's truly the offer'.  Bettman laid out those conditions after the GMs meeting but who knows if he would be open to negotiate different terms with the NHLPA.

 

At the 2:55 mark.

 

 

 

There is no other way, it is just math.  Escrow doesn’t change the HRR share and is just a function of estimated revenue vs. Actual revenue in a given year.  The league has to guess on revenue but the players only get 50% of actual HRR revenue and not on the guess.

 

The players caused large escrow by artificially increasing the cap beyond the revenue targets using their escalator clause.  No one else was responsible or in control of it.  The league projections were too optimistic and that would have resulted in small escrow amounts.  Now the cap is artificially low because of the money owed by the players, it is the opposite situation.

There certainly won’t be an artificial cap on escrow after all the Covid stuff is sorted and the end of this CBA.  

[ToTellTheTruth]

yes;

 

ster Statistics
				ROSTER SIZE				23	18	8	4	2	1
				STANDARD PLAYER CONTRACTS				45	33	16	7	3	1
				AVERAGE AGE				26	26.9	28.8	29.8	30.5	35
				ROSTER SIGNING BONUSES				$6,117,500	$18,277,500	$6,000,000	$5,000,000	$0	$3,000,000
Cap Hit Statistics
				ROSTER & BURIED CAP HIT				$87,568,750	$84,243,750	$54,010,000	$37,810,000	$23,110,000	$8,000,000
				DEAD CAP HIT				$3,775,000	-	-	-	-	-
				CARRYOVER BONUS OVERAGES				$1,250,000	-	-	-	-	-
				PROJECTED CAP HIT				$88,782,096	$84,243,750	$54,010,000	$37,810,000	$23,110,000	$8,000,000
				SALARY CAP				$82,500,000	$83,500,000	$87,500,000	$92,000,000	$92,000,000	$92,000,000
				PROJECTED CAP SPACE				$0	$0	$33,490,000	$54,190,000	$68,890,000	$84,000,000
				CURRENT CAP SPACE				$4,831,250	-	-	-	-	-
Additional Statistics
				POTENTIAL PERFORMANCE BONUSES				$1,782,500	$850,000	$0	$0	$0	$0
				ESTIMATED SALARY EXPENDITURE				$88,807,500	$100,925,000	$59,780,000	$38,100,000	$19,870,000	$7,500,000
				DEAD CAP SALARY EXPENDITURE				$3,512,500	-	-	-	-	-
				NON-ROSTER SIGNING BONUSES				$777,500	$662,500	$217,500	$75,000	-	-
				RETAINED SALARY REMAINING				2	3	3	3	3	3

 

$100,000,000.00

That is how much the owner is spending for a bottom feeder.

 

Bonuses paid count against this year even if the player is traded.

Buyouts count against the cap this year.

An OEL buyout gives a 7.2 million off the cap but then adds only 176K next year but then 2.4 mil , 4.4, 4.4 the following years with 2.4 for the next 4 years. So only a net gain of 5 mil the year Pettersson will get a 5 mil pay increase

A Myer's trade after July 1 the team will carry a 5 million signing bonus cap hit but another gain of 5 million on the cap hit.

A Garland buyout is the best, the team gains over 4 million in cap space and it cost only 1.8 mil for the following 4 years after net year.

A Boeser buyout is only a 2 million net gain.

 

But then the team needs to sign 7 more players AND pay Pettersson soon. 

 

BUT

Retention would be for a negotiated amount on a much shorter time line.

 

SO, OEL and a first pick to Boston with retention! Boston because he already waived his clause to go there. So let's move OEL to Boston and help them stay strong with a top 10 pick too.

 

 

Edited March 17, 2023 by ToTellTheTruth

[mll]

2 hours ago, Provost said:

There is no other way, it is just math.  Escrow doesn’t change the HRR share and is just a function of estimated revenue vs. Actual revenue in a given year.  The league has to guess on revenue but the players only get 50% of actual HRR revenue and not on the guess.

 

The players caused large escrow by artificially increasing the cap beyond the revenue targets using their escalator clause.  No one else was responsible or in control of it.  The league projections were too optimistic and that would have resulted in small escrow amounts.  Now the cap is artificially low because of the money owed by the players, it is the opposite situation.

There certainly won’t be an artificial cap on escrow after all the Covid stuff is sorted and the end of this CBA.  

For now it's on the guess though and players don't want that to change per Chris Johnston.  Mathematically players only get 50% of HRR but the set scale creates a solidarity among different generation of players where the future is paying for the past, rather than the balance being settled year on year.  

 

Escrow is capped at 6% throughout the remaining length of the CBA.  Any difference to 50% of HRR is going to adjust the escrow balance (ie the overall share that players owe back) but not the players own revenue for the year.  By capping escrow players have for now the certainty that their share in any year won't fall below that threshold till the next negotiations.  

 

Having a fixed scale pushes the responsibility of settling the escrow balance to the next generation of players.  Players active during the pandemic brought back home considerably more than they should have and it's the players today that are still paying for it.  It's a change to the approach pre-pandemic where there wasn't a set scale and where players brought back home 50% of HRR year on year.  

 

They could decide to maintain a fixed rate in the next negotiations and continue to have the escrow balance be settled over time vs on the year.  The cap is going to be linked to HRR so the fluctuation should be minimal unless another major disruption.

 

[canuck73_3]

On 3/16/2023 at 6:10 PM, EastCoastNucks said:

Depends on team, if its Montreal, they should do it. If its Columbus, Yes. If its Chicago, no. Sharks, Yes, Ducks, yes.

the teams who need goaltending would do it in a heartbeat.

Zero chance Miller and Demko gets you Bedard. 

[awalk]

More like cap heck

[The Lock]

On 3/16/2023 at 6:10 PM, EastCoastNucks said:

Depends on team, if its Montreal, they should do it. If its Columbus, Yes. If its Chicago, no. Sharks, Yes, Ducks, yes.

the teams who need goaltending would do it in a heartbeat.

If we had Bedard and another team came up with a similar offer of something similar to Miller and Demko, would you do it?

 

If your answer is no, you should not expect ANY other team to accept it either. I don't care what team you're talking about.

[EastCoastNucks]

On 3/18/2023 at 12:09 AM, canuck73_3 said:

Zero chance Miller and Demko gets you Bedard. 

Well, unless someone wants MIllar, Demers, Myers, OEL for Bedard, we dont actually need him. As long as OEL and Myers are off the ice, we can beat the top teams

[EastCoastNucks]

On 3/17/2023 at 6:35 PM, ToTellTheTruth said:

yes;

 

ster Statistics
				ROSTER SIZE				23	18	8	4	2	1
				STANDARD PLAYER CONTRACTS				45	33	16	7	3	1
				AVERAGE AGE				26	26.9	28.8	29.8	30.5	35
				ROSTER SIGNING BONUSES				$6,117,500	$18,277,500	$6,000,000	$5,000,000	$0	$3,000,000
Cap Hit Statistics
				ROSTER & BURIED CAP HIT				$87,568,750	$84,243,750	$54,010,000	$37,810,000	$23,110,000	$8,000,000
				DEAD CAP HIT				$3,775,000	-	-	-	-	-
				CARRYOVER BONUS OVERAGES				$1,250,000	-	-	-	-	-
				PROJECTED CAP HIT				$88,782,096	$84,243,750	$54,010,000	$37,810,000	$23,110,000	$8,000,000
				SALARY CAP				$82,500,000	$83,500,000	$87,500,000	$92,000,000	$92,000,000	$92,000,000
				PROJECTED CAP SPACE				$0	$0	$33,490,000	$54,190,000	$68,890,000	$84,000,000
				CURRENT CAP SPACE				$4,831,250	-	-	-	-	-
Additional Statistics
				POTENTIAL PERFORMANCE BONUSES				$1,782,500	$850,000	$0	$0	$0	$0
				ESTIMATED SALARY EXPENDITURE				$88,807,500	$100,925,000	$59,780,000	$38,100,000	$19,870,000	$7,500,000
				DEAD CAP SALARY EXPENDITURE				$3,512,500	-	-	-	-	-
				NON-ROSTER SIGNING BONUSES				$777,500	$662,500	$217,500	$75,000	-	-
				RETAINED SALARY REMAINING				2	3	3	3	3	3

 

$100,000,000.00

That is how much the owner is spending for a bottom feeder.

 

Bonuses paid count against this year even if the player is traded.

Buyouts count against the cap this year.

An OEL buyout gives a 7.2 million off the cap but then adds only 176K next year but then 2.4 mil , 4.4, 4.4 the following years with 2.4 for the next 4 years. So only a net gain of 5 mil the year Pettersson will get a 5 mil pay increase

A Myer's trade after July 1 the team will carry a 5 million signing bonus cap hit but another gain of 5 million on the cap hit.

A Garland buyout is the best, the team gains over 4 million in cap space and it cost only 1.8 mil for the following 4 years after net year.

A Boeser buyout is only a 2 million net gain.

 

But then the team needs to sign 7 more players AND pay Pettersson soon. 

 

BUT

Retention would be for a negotiated amount on a much shorter time line.

 

SO, OEL and a first pick to Boston with retention! Boston because he already waived his clause to go there. So let's move OEL to Boston and help them stay strong with a top 10 pick too.

 

 

I agree, but they should take Myers too. And give them Millar as a 'bonus' How much cap does that free up?

 

[EastCoastNucks]

3 hours ago, The Lock said:

If we had Bedard and another team came up with a similar offer of something similar to Miller and Demko, would you do it?

 

If your answer is no, you should not expect ANY other team to accept it either. I don't care what team you're talking about.

Yes, and would even take a couple bad contracts like Myers/OEL to sweeten the pot, Bedard will be cheap for a few years. Time to make cap

[The Lock]

Just now, EastCoastNucks said:

Yes, and would even take a couple bad contracts like Myers/OEL to sweeten the pot, Bedard will be cheap for a few years. Time to make cap

Well then I'm glad you're not GM. lol

 

I could tell you that no one's going to trade away Bedard but you're not going to listen anyway so there's no point in me bothering. lol