Compensatory Pick Question? (re: Fedorov)

[ginnungagap]

Anyone know for sure if Detroit will get a compensatory pick for losing Fedorov as an UFA? My understanding is that they're doled out on a case by case basis with UFAs brought in weighed against those lost. I've also heard, and I'm not sure where or if it was reliable info, that team salary is considered (with the big spenders excluded completely) and that the UFAs brought in are only compared on a one-to-one basis (i.e.- even if a team signed three mid-level UFAs the same compensatory pick would be awarded for losing a big ticket player). I'm not expecting it but I am curious- an extra pick in the middle of the second round sure would be nice.

Click to read more...

 

[David A. Rainer]

They are awarded for Group III UFA only. Each Group III player gets rated by the league according to some formula (which is like 90% driven by the contract signed by the player). Then you add p all the rating points for those lost and for those gained. If you lost more than gained, you get comp pick(s). If you gained more than lost, you get squat.

As far as I know, team salary does not factor into this, but I don't recall. I seem to remember the Kings getting a comp pick once for losing Luc to Detroit when the Kings were about 10th in league payroll.

 

[The Mighty Duck Man]

I don't think Detroit will get a compensatory pick, mainly because of the Hatcher and Whitney signings. Hatcher and Whitney combine for around $9 million, while Fedorov's salary(not including signing bonus) was $8 million, so I don't think they get one.

 

[Word]

As I recall team salary is part of the process. That is the reason why players like Leetch get traded [Edmonton?] for future considerations. The Rangers wouldnt have gotten a compensation pick but the other team would.

 

[David A. Rainer]

As I recall team salary is part of the process. That is the reason why players like Leetch get traded [Edmonton?] for future considerations. The Rangers wouldnt have gotten a compensation pick but the other team would.

I always thought they did that because they traditionally sign more than they lose, so they wouldn't be getting any comp picks because of their signings. So they trade them to teams that will be getting comp picks.

I seem to remember the Rangers trading Messier during the offseason to San Jose and then resigning him the same offseason. Here is another example - trade him to a team that will get a draft pick for losing him and get a draft pick yourself (since they wouldn't because a.) they were going to resign their own player; or b.) they were going to sign other Group III and not get a comp pick).

But like I said, don't quote me on this. It's been a long day at work and I don't feel like whipping out the CBA (it should be somewhere in Exhibit 15 if anyone is so inclined).

 

[Seachd]

Team payroll is not a factor. At least not according to the CBA.

The Rangers knew they wouldn't get compensation for losing Leetch - not because of payroll, but because of their plans to sign big name free agents.

 

[KM]

Trading players off before re-signing them is very common and is a loophole that needs to be addressed.

 

[Gwyddbwyll]

They are awarded for Group III UFA only. Each Group III player gets rated by the league according to some formula (which is like 90% driven by the contract signed by the player). Then you add p all the rating points for those lost and for those gained. If you lost more than gained, you get comp pick(s). If you gained more than lost, you get squat.

As far as I know, team salary does not factor into this, but I don't recall. I seem to remember the Kings getting a comp pick once for losing Luc to Detroit when the Kings were about 10th in league payroll.

90% is a little high? I remember with Roenick, there were a lot of other factors which were taken into consideration (captaincy, all-star appearances, goalscoring) which I think counted for a little more than 10%.

I dont understand this about rating points lost and gained. It was my understanding that it is merely if the team signs a direct UFA replacement. If they do, then they do not get a pick at all. The way you describe it, it sounds like if Phoenix had signed some crappy replacement, they might still get a comp pick because Roenick's rating points vastly outweigh the scrub's.

 

[Seachd]

90% is a little high? I remember with Roenick, there were a lot of other factors which were taken into consideration (captaincy, all-star appearances, goalscoring) which I think counted for a little more than 10%.

I dont understand this about rating points lost and gained. It was my understanding that it is merely if the team signs a direct UFA replacement. If they do, then they do not get a pick at all. The way you describe it, it sounds like if Phoenix had signed some crappy replacement, they might still get a comp pick because Roenick's rating points vastly outweigh the scrub's.

That's actually pretty close to how it works. The Oilers lost Leetch, and signed UFAs like Cross, Oates, and Ulanov, but still expect a compensatory pick, because their "points" don't add up to Leetch's.

The salary is the most important thing by far. Captaincy, all-star appearances, awards, Cup wins, and age all factor in, but only a very small amount. For example, if a player is the captain of his team, is voted a First Team All-Star, wins the Hart and the Conn Smythe, and goes on to win the Cup, that seems to be worth 110 "points". But if his salary is $5 million a year, that's 50000 "points".

 

[David A. Rainer]

The salary is the most important thing by far. Captaincy, all-star appearances, awards, Cup wins, and age all factor in, but only a very small amount. For example, if a player is the captain of his team, is voted a First Team All-Star, wins the Hart and the Conn Smythe, and goes on to win the Cup, that seems to be worth 110 "points". But if his salary is $5 million a year, that's 50000 "points".

Exactly!!

The formula is something like 10 points for Allstar, 20 points for winning the Cup, 30 points for winning the Hart, 10 points for being captain, and so on. But then they take the salary the player signed at, multipy by .01 (Exhibit 15, § 2(a)) and add those as points.

So it would look someting like this (fictional player):

Allstar: 20
Captain: 10
Won the Cup: 20
Won the Hart: 30
Salary of $5M/year: 50,000
Total Points: 50,070

And then they repeat this for every single player. A team will get a comp pick in two cases: (i.) add up all the points of those lost and those gained - if lost more than gain, comp picks are awarded; and (ii.) a player lost from one percentile (after ranking each player #1, #2, #3...) is not countered with a gain of a player from an equal or greater percentile. Exhibit § 3(a)(i-ii).

Anyone who is still doubting this, just look at Exhibit 15 of the CBA.

 

[pittengineer]

Detroit will not be rewarded a comp pick for losing federov because they signed whitney and hatcher this past year.

 

[Kevin Forbes]

Detroit will not be rewarded a comp pick for losing federov because they signed whitney and hatcher this past year.

as well as Steve Thomas

 

[pittengineer]

I believe you're wrong. The averages for players lost Fedorov (8 mill), Robitaille(1.15), and Larionov(I think 1.5) are greater than the averages for players gained Hatcher(6), Whitney(3.16), and Thomas (1). Detroit was very smart about their signings and made sure they were below what they lost. They should get the 41st pick for Fedorov.

I dont believe it will be enough though to warrant a comp pick. 8 + 1.15 + 1.5 = 10.65. 6 + 3.16 + 1 = 10.16. That is not enough to warrant a comp pick. Just because you sign slightly less than you lost doesnt mean detroit gets a comp pick, especially only when the difference is half a million dollars.

 

[Motown Beatdown]

I believe you're wrong. The averages for players lost Fedorov (8 mill), Robitaille(1.15), and Larionov(I think 1.5) are greater than the averages for players gained Hatcher(6), Whitney(3.16), and Thomas (1). Detroit was very smart about their signings and made sure they were below what they lost. They should get the 41st pick for Fedorov.

Robitaille salary in 2002-2003 was 4.5 million or so. The Wings bought him out for one million dollars. I dont know if that matters or not.

 

[garry1221]

Robitaille - 1.15
Larionov - 1.5
Fedorov - 10.0
total 12.65

Whitney - 3.0
Hatcher - 5.0
Thomas - 1.0
total 9.0 million

 

[Motown Beatdown]

Robitaille - 1.15
Larionov - 1.5
Fedorov - 10.0
total 12.65

Whitney - 3.0
Hatcher - 5.0
Thomas - 1.0
total 9.0 million

Gary i think they average out the contracts. Hatchers average salary is 6 million, while Fedorov is 8 million.

 

[Seachd]

You're making a very common mistake. It's a confusing part of the CBA, but the total salaries/points difference doesn't matter. It could be one point in Detroit's favor and they'd still get the second round pick.

They do pro-rate the contracts to a yearly average. They then add the bonus points listed earlier. Players are slotted against the whole league, not just the group three's that were signed. Fedorov should be easily in the top 5% and should get the 41st overall pick.

Not necessarily. If Hatcher ends up being in the top five percent, or if Fedorov somehow isn't in the top five percent, then they wouldn't get a pick.

And the highest awarded compensatory pick isn't necessarily 41st overall.

 

[degroat*]

Compensatory Draft System

1. A Compensatory Free Agent ("CFA") is defined as a Group III
unrestricted free agent who signed a contract with a New Club.
Clubs that suffer a "net loss" (as described below) shall be
eligible to be awarded a Compensatory Draft Selection in the
subsequent Entry Draft in accordance with the provisions of
Paragraph 3 below.

2. The following calculation, calculated as of June 30 each
year, based on a player's (i) "average annual compensation" and
(ii) honors, shall be used to determine a CFA's ranking on a
percentile basis as against all other players on Club rosters at
the conclusion of a regular season:

(a) All CFAs and other League players on rosters at the
conclusion of a regular season shall be ranked in ascending order
by their "average annual compensation," which shall be determined
by dividing a player's Compensation (for all contract years) by
the number of contract years. (Thus, the player with the lowest
average annual Compensation shall be ranked first, etc.) Each
player shall receive 1/100th of a point per dollar of his
"average annual compensation." Rankings and calculations for
CFAs shall be based on the CFA's new contract and shall be
determined as of the first day of the regular season.

(b) At the end of each year, the League shall assign to all
such players additional points based on honors in the prior three
Seasons, as follows:

(1) Twenty (20) points for being selected First Team
NHL All-Star by the PHWA.

(2) Ten (10) points for being selected Second Team NHL
All-Star by the PHWA, [or for being awarded by the Lady Byng or
Masterton Trophies.]

(3) Thirty (30) points for being awarded the Hart,
Norris, Ross, Vezina, Selke, or Conn Smythe Trophies.

(4) Ten (10) points for being selected Captain.

(5) Twenty (20) points for winning the Stanley Cup.

(6) Twenty (20) points if the player is 32 on June 30;
fifteen (15) points if the player is 33 on June 30; ten (10)
points if the player is 34 on June 30.

(c) The sum of the numerical values in (a) and (b) above
shall represent each player's final numerical value.

(d) The players shall then be re-ranked based upon such
final numerical values.

(e) Each CFA's final numerical value shall be measured in
percentile terms against all players' (including the CFA's)
numerical values to determine the position, if any, of a Club's
Compensatory Draft Selection.

3. (a) A Club shall qualify to be eligible for a Compensatory
Draft Selection if:

(i) it has lost a CFA and not gained a
corresponding CFA in an equal or higher percentile bracket (based
on subsection (c) below); and

(ii) the Club has suffered a "net loss" of
CFAs when the numerical value of all CFA's gained is deducted
from the numerical value of all CFA's lost;

(b) The CFA's for which a Club did not receive a
corresponding CFA gain per subsection 3(a)(i) above shall then be
ranked according to their numerical value. Then in descending
order based upon a CFA's numerical value, each Club shall be
awarded a Compensatory Draft Selection based upon its CFA, up to
a maximum of two per Club. This procedure shall continue until
the available Compensatory Draft Selections are exhausted.

(c) The position of a Compensatory Draft Selection shall be
determined by a CFAs percentile ranking pursuant to 2(d) above
and the following provisions:

(1) Clubs that lost a CFA within the top 5% of all
League players shall receive a Compensatory Draft Selection no
earlier than the 11th selection in the second round of the
Entry Draft.

(2) Clubs that lost a CFA below the top 5% of all
League Players but within the top 10% shall receive a
Compensatory Draft Selection following the 52nd selection in the
Entry Draft.

(3) Clubs that lost a CFA below the top 10% of all
League Players but within the top 15% shall receive a
Compensatory Draft Selection following the 78th selection in the
Entry Draft.

(4) Clubs that lost a CFA below the top 15% of all
League Players but within the top 25% shall receive a
Compensatory Draft Selection following the 104th selection in the
Entry Draft.

(5) Clubs that lost a CFA below the top 25% of all
League Players but within the top 50% shall receive a
Compensatory Draft Selection following the 130th selection in the
Entry Draft.

(6) Clubs that lost a CFA below the top 50% of all
League Players but within the top 75% shall receive a
Compensatory Draft Selection following the 156th selection in the
Entry Draft.

(7) Clubs that lost a CFA below the top 75% of all
League Players shall receive a Compensatory Draft Selection
following the 234th selection in the Entry Draft.

(8) The exact slot, subject to the above guidelines
and availability of Compensatory Draft Selections, shall be
determined by the Commissioner prior to the Entry Draft

 

[degroat*]

Hatcher wouldn't have to end up higher than Fedorov, he would just have to end up in the same percentile group. And, unless I'm forgetting someone here Fedorov and Hatcher got the two largest contracts last year so it's safe to say that they will be in the same percentile group and won't be getting a pick for Feds.

 

[Seachd]

Hatcher wouldn't have to end up higher than Fedorov, he would just have to end up in the same percentile group. And, unless I'm forgetting someone here Fedorov and Hatcher got the two largest contracts last year so it's safe to say that they will be in the same percentile group and won't be getting a pick for Feds.

It's true that he doesn't have to be ahead of Fedorov, just in the same group.

But remember that it's not just free agents taken into account when they're figuring out the groups. It's every player in the league, so getting the two largest contracts last year doesn't necessarily mean they'll both be in the top group.

 

[degroat*]

That's right... my bad.

Even still... Hatcher may still fall within the top 5%... it'll be close.