CBA Loophole

Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by RangerBoy, Oct 8, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. RangerBoy

    RangerBoy TRUST THE PROCESS

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2002
    Messages:
    38,537
    Likes Received:
    2,077
    Trophy Points:
    231
    Location:
    New York
    Home Page:
    From Ken Campbell of the Toronto Star

    http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Co...8&call_pageid=1044442959412&col=1044442957278

    So the Blues cap hit for 2005-06 is $5.7 million instead of $7.6 million and they are not hit with the other $5.7 million for 06-07 when the Blues don't pick up the option
     
  2. Hawker14

    Hawker14 Registered User

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2004
    Messages:
    3,084
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    84
    interesting.

    i disagree with the article in that the blues won't pick up tkachuk's option at $ 3.8 million. he's still an excellent hockey player.

    has there been anything from the blues that they may not pick up his option ? (honestly asking as i don't know)
     
  3. X8oD

    X8oD Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    7,491
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    141
    Occupation:
    *********orial Engineer
    Location:
    612 Warf Ave.
    thats not really a loophole.

    Its just going to effect players who are towards the end of thier career who sign long term deals.

    there is no way you are going to get a young star to sign a long term deal, with a team option year worth half his yearly salary going in. But you can get a guy like Tkachuk, or Shanahan, or Roenick or countless other low to mid 30 aged players to do it.
     
  4. Steve L*

    Steve L* Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2003
    Messages:
    11,548
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Southampton, England
    Home Page:
    I thought option years were not allowed at all in the new CBA so this will only be an issue for pre new CBA signed contracts.
     
  5. Resolute

    Resolute Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    Messages:
    4,125
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    AB
    That was what I thought too.

    Regardless, this is clearly a case of a preexisting contract conflicting with the new CBA. It is hardly a loophole, and I completely fail to see how this can be called "creative accounting" on the part of the Blues when they had to do no accounting at all.
     
  6. futurcorerock

    futurcorerock Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2003
    Messages:
    6,831
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    If by excellent you mean fat, I totally agree
     
  7. boredmale

    boredmale Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    35,806
    Likes Received:
    1,533
    Trophy Points:
    169
    you would assume that if the team doesn't pick up the option year, they would forward that extra cap expense to the next year(ie in Tkachuk's case, if they don't pick up that 3.8 million option, the Blues will be charged 2 million next year for the cap).
     
  8. Guy Legend

    Guy Legend Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2005
    Messages:
    2,527
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    St. Louis
    The Blues not likely to pick up the $3.8 million option? Is Ken Campbell an idiot?

    The Blues will pick up the option with out any hesitation. They could keep him for that price (a steal) or trade him.
     
  9. PecaFan

    PecaFan Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2002
    Messages:
    8,938
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    141
    Location:
    Ottawa (Go 'Nucks)
    Home Page:
    Which is exactly why I said all along it's silly to average. If you pay someone $7.6, the cap hit should be $7.6. I've yet to hear a good reason why a team should have a cap hit of $5.7 twice, when in neither year they paid that, it's $2 mill over one year, then $2 mill under the other.
     
  10. Kimi

    Kimi Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2004
    Messages:
    8,730
    Likes Received:
    180
    Trophy Points:
    111
    Location:
    Newcastle upon Tyne
    If you can still have option years, I can see team giving a player a contract for how ever long thay want and then add a player option year to it. This would mean the team doesn't have to make a agreements with the player to not pick it up, and they get the player cheeper on the cap.
     
  11. McJadeddog

    McJadeddog Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2003
    Messages:
    14,965
    Likes Received:
    292
    Trophy Points:
    154
    Location:
    Regina, Saskatchewan
    arent options not allowed (player or team) under the new CBA?
     
  12. Steve L*

    Steve L* Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2003
    Messages:
    11,548
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Southampton, England
    Home Page:
    From what Ive read, theyre not which means this isnt a a loophole for long.
     
  13. RangerBoy

    RangerBoy TRUST THE PROCESS

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2002
    Messages:
    38,537
    Likes Received:
    2,077
    Trophy Points:
    231
    Location:
    New York
    Home Page:
    Could you provide the link to option years not being allowed in the CBA?I don't think that is the case :shakehead
     
  14. RangerBoy

    RangerBoy TRUST THE PROCESS

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2002
    Messages:
    38,537
    Likes Received:
    2,077
    Trophy Points:
    231
    Location:
    New York
    Home Page:
    Why is Campbell an idiot?Maybe Dave Checketts will want to start fresh and let Tkachunk walk.Campbell is one of the best hockey writers in the business
     
  15. RangerBoy

    RangerBoy TRUST THE PROCESS

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2002
    Messages:
    38,537
    Likes Received:
    2,077
    Trophy Points:
    231
    Location:
    New York
    Home Page:
    http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Co...ageid=968867503640&col=970081593064&t=TS_Home

    Barry refiled the Nolan player option for 05-06 and filed the grievance against Toronto.Team and player options are still part of the new NHL CBA
     
  16. victor

    victor Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2003
    Messages:
    3,607
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Prior options were grandfathered into the new CBA.

    That said - it's pretty much a moot point, as I do not see Kovalchuk, Hossa, Iginla, et al., signing a freebie option year into their contracts.
     
  17. Steve L*

    Steve L* Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2003
    Messages:
    11,548
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Southampton, England
    Home Page:
    Search HF, I cant be arsed.
     
  18. Burke's Evil Spirit

    Burke's Evil Spirit Registered User

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2002
    Messages:
    17,243
    Likes Received:
    375
    Trophy Points:
    199
    Occupation:
    CS
    Location:
    San Francisco
    "What's that, Dominik? You're going to retire after this year? Well, I'll sign you to a 1-year deal worth $2.5 million, and give you, oh, 500 team options after at $1.25 million each. Sound like a plan?"
     
  19. HeavyD

    HeavyD Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2004
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If this is true, then what it to stop 'player option' contracts being given to young stars with say 6mil/4 yrs, +2/yrs 3mil option. 5 mil hit, instead of 6. Instead of having that 500k guy, a team could now have a 1.5mil guy. Then renegotiating the contract when the 4 years are up.
     
  20. Resolute

    Resolute Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    Messages:
    4,125
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    AB
    Logically, there is language in the deal that prevents that, otherwise there would have been several teams already who would have signed deals exactly like that, as it is a pretty obvious loophole.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"