CBA loophole?

Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by Art Vandelay, Jul 4, 2006.

  1. Art Vandelay

    Art Vandelay Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2004
    Messages:
    5,597
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    College Student
    Location:
    Stockholm
    Home Page:
    Dunno if this been posted before but it's news to me.

    Can this be something the Devils are counting on? Or are M&M not applicable to this becasue of their age when they signed?

     
  2. Irish Blues

    Irish Blues Worth waiting for :)

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2002
    Messages:
    21,800
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Actuary
    That refers to salary arbitration only - not any arbitration case.

    Gosh, since we're picking on New Jersey this year, here's how it would work: say Gionta goes to arbitration and gets $4.5 million. The Devils could then buy out any player on the roster within 48 hours to make room for Gionta.

    However, the buyout thing still wouldn't help them with Mogilny and Malakhov because the "35 and older" clause still applies even if those players are bought out. (See: Tie Domi, Toronto and Shawn McEachern, Boston)

    The best hope New Jersey has is that Mogilny reports and fails his physical and doesn't retire at any point in '06-07. Then they can place him on Injured Non-Roster, he'd be unfit to play, and 50.10(d) would kick in and they'd get the injury exemption like they did last year for Elias.

    The worst thing that could happen is that Mogilny decides to retire outright before the season starts, making it impossible for the Devils to get any injury relief on him.
     
    Last edited: Jul 4, 2006
  3. Bubba Thudd

    Bubba Thudd Just Relax

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2005
    Messages:
    21,452
    Likes Received:
    1,028
    Trophy Points:
    169
    Occupation:
    Cantankerous Curmudgeon
    But it sounds like it says:

    Player A goes to arbitration, and gets awarded a nice chunk of change.

    The team opts to pay Player A that chunk, but cannot afford it under the cap.

    But, with that clause, the team can buyout Player B to make room for Player A's salary. Even though Player B had nothing to do with any arbitration.

    (Nevermind. I posted this as Irish Blues was making edits to his post.)
     
  4. dafoomie

    dafoomie Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2005
    Messages:
    14,370
    Likes Received:
    75
    Trophy Points:
    131
    Location:
    Boston
    Is it even likely that NJ will get injury relief for Mogilny? I don't think being old is a valid injury.

    Can the league or Mogilny do anything if NJ tries to make up some phony injury?
     
  5. No One

    No One Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2003
    Messages:
    432
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Staples Center
    Home Page:
    Actually, the buyout clause is for the 48 hours following the third day of the LAST arbitration award.

    Also, the number of "walk aways" has increased. In the old CBA it was no more than 3 in two years. Now, teams can walk-away from 1 if they are subject to one or two decisions, 2 if they are subject to 3 or 4 decisions, 3 if they are subject to 5 or 6 decisions, and so on.

    I also could no longer find the "matcing clause" in the new CBA for "walk aways". Therefore, the team no longer has a right to match offers that are 80% or greater than the award.
     
  6. kdb209

    kdb209 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    16,272
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    126
    This is no loophole - it is just (as stated a bove) a mechanism to allow teams to get back under cap/budget after an arbitration award.

    This is covered in Article 11.18 of the CBA and paragraph 13(c)(ii) of the Standard Players Contract.

    This Buyout outside the Regular Period is only for teams with two or more arbitration cases, and may be done in a 48 hour window starting 3 days after after the last arbitration award (or settlement if the team/player sign a deal before the arbitration award is announced).

    Note that this option is not available to teams with zero or one arbitration cases during the offseason.

     
  7. kdb209

    kdb209 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    16,272
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    126
    Do you have any links confirming that bought out players are still subject to the Mogilney/Malakhov rule.

    My reading of the CBA leads me to beleive that they would not, but I admit this is a grey area.

    This would be a case of double dipping, since the buyout payments are explicitly listed as being counted immediately before the 35+ clauses, and that the buyout terminates the contract so that a player would not be "in the second or later year of a multi-year SPC which was signed when the Player was age 35 or older".

     
  8. Irish Blues

    Irish Blues Worth waiting for :)

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2002
    Messages:
    21,800
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Actuary
    See news reports on buyouts of Tie Domi and Shawn McEachern - they were both 35 when they signed in 2005, both got '06-07 bought out, and both still count in full for '06-07.
     

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"