Minor CBA Amendment - Extensions on ELS Contracts

[kdb209]

This point came up in a "Is Crosby a Max Salary Player" thread on the NHL talk board - so i thought I'd post the tidbit here to give it a bit more exposure to the BoH folks.

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/columns/hotstove-notebook/

Hotstove Notebook
Saturday, Feb. 10, 2007
by Scott Morrison

Each week, Hockey Night in Canada's Scott Morrison takes you behind Saturday night's Satellite Hotstove discussions.
...
The NHL and NHLPA quietly amended the CBA last week, allowing clubs to extend entry-level players on the same basis they extend any other player in the last year of a contract, meaning they don't have to wait for the deal to expire. In the case of the Penguins, it means they can start extension talks with Sidney Crosby this July instead of waiting to 2008. Speaking of Crosby, he should be a "maximum salary" player in his new deal. Based on a salary cap at roughly $48 million, he could earn in excess of $9 million annually

Click to read more...

 

[Hawker14]

so side deals can be cut on this legal document without the union as a whole voting on it ? interesting. i understand union executives have the right to run day to day operations, but isn't changing the cba outside that scope ?

not that i have an issue with this particular addendum, but i have a feeling sheila block, chelios, roloson et all are going to have a field day if this is an example of how ted saskin runs the nhlpa.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

I'd ask you to prove that the CBA was in fact amended without the union voting on it, but I'll save you the trouble and say that it's likely the NHLPA has some kind of procedure set up to approve some changes without the entire union having to cast a vote.

Of course, if that procedure isn't in place, then it's on you to prove that the union as a whole didn't vote on the change.

 

[jamiebez]

I'd ask you to prove that the CBA was in fact amended without the union voting on it, but I'll save you the trouble and say that it's likely the NHLPA has some kind of procedure set up to approve some changes without the entire union having to cast a vote.

I watched the Hotstove on Saturday, and (assuming my memory is correct) Pierre LeBrun said something to this extent. It was a small change, which didn't require a vote by the entire membership, and that the CBA (or NHLPA? not sure) allowed for such minor amendments without a full union vote.

 

[discostu]

One, it's pretty typical that a union gives authority to its top end executives to make minor changes without going through a full vote process.

Two, this is a small, but, important move. Teams should have plenty of time to negotiate with their rookies. Leaving just a week or two to have the negotiations could have lead to negotiations turning sour for no reason other than timing.

 

[NYR469]

maybe i'm missing something...but can someone explain to me what the benefit there is for the penguins to start paying crosby $9 mil/year a year early instead of getting another year at $850k out of him?? he can't be a ufa yet so he can't leave

 

[AdmiralPred]

maybe i'm missing something...but can someone explain to me what the benefit there is for the penguins to start paying crosby $9 mil/year a year early instead of getting another year at $850k out of him?? he can't be a ufa yet so he can't leave

Aren't they talking about negotiating contract extensions to players on an ELS? This wouldn't mean paying Crosby $9 mil early, just being able to negotiate a contract extension prior to the expiration of the ELS to avoid having someone like Crosby exposed as a RFA. The extension wouldn't begin until the original contract expired. This is how I'm reading it.

 

[NYR469]

Aren't they talking about negotiating contract extentions to players on an ELS? This wouldn't mean paying Crosby $9 mil early, just being able to negotiate a contract extention prior to the expiration of the ELS to avoid having someone like Crosby exposed as a RFA. The extention wouldn't begin until the original contract expired. This is how I'm reading it.

oh ok if it means they can negotiate sooner thats different, i thought they meant voiding the final year of the ELS and giving him a new deal.

 

[NYR469]

Well, I asked the same question albeit from a different angle. He can hold out and wait for an offer sheet from another team. Would you give up draft picks to get Crosby at the age of 21? The Pens at that point have the option of matching or walking away with the draft compensation. Crosby can also take the Pens to arbitration (or vice versa), where an arbiter would look at comparable RFA's and their contributions. That might be hard if he leads the league in points.

when crosby can become a free agent, he will get the max. so it really doesn't matter if another team makes an offer sheet. he basically gets that $$ whether someone forces the pens hands or not.

 

[Fugu]

when crosby can become a free agent, he will get the max. so it really doesn't matter if another team makes an offer sheet. he basically gets that $$ whether someone forces the pens hands or not.

That's not what I meant, but thanks for replying. This goes back to the Hot Stove discussion pointing out that the Pens can now talk contract extension with Syd during the last year of his current contract. The Hot Stove group felt he'd get the league max at that time (next contract). That will be several years before he's an unrestricted free agent-- in his case at 25 years of age. He'll be up for contract renewal when he's 21.

So yes, the Pens can try to offer less, and have someone force their hand, or go the arbitration route... or just give him whatever his agent wants. My question was really to ask what the "restricted" part of RFA meant these days as it was always interpreted that teams save money on RFA's, not pay top dollar as one would for UFA's. Furthermore European and Russian players could hold the "I have a better offer at home" card, having some believe this was really the only way for RFA's to squeeze more money out of a team. (See Kovalchuk's last deal, for example).

 

[kdb209]

Aren't they talking about negotiating contract extentions to players on an ELS? This wouldn't mean paying Crosby $9 mil early, just being able to negotiate a contract extention prior to the expiration of the ELS to avoid having someone like Crosby exposed as a RFA. The extention wouldn't begin until the original contract expired. This is how I'm reading it.

Correct. A contract extension is just a new binding SPC signed before a players current SPC expires and that takes effect immediately upon the expiration of the players current deal. It has no effect (in dollars or cap hit) on the players current contract. The only cap caveat for a team signing a player to an extension is that they must be able to fit the averaged value of the extension in under their current Payroll Room (based on the current seasons cap) plus the total dollar amount of SPCs (including the extended player's) that expire at the end of the season.

Note also, that the Max Salary for an extension is 20% of the current years Upper Limit - not the potentially higher 20% of the next season's (presumably higher) cap, which the player could get if he let himself become an RFA.

 

[AdmiralPred]

You couldn't wait to quote me until after I corrected the rather erroneous spelling gaff?

 

[Wetcoaster]

You couldn't wait to quote me until after I corrected the rather erroneous spelling gaff?

When are you correcting "gaffe"???

 

[GSC2k2*]

When are you correcting "gaffe"???

How very gauche of you to notice.

 

[AdmiralPred]

When are you correcting "gaffe"???

I had debated whether "gaffe" or "erroneous" would be the "mistake" of choice in that post. Since I am neither a sailor nor a crossdresser I have almost no use for the word "gaff". So, I thought I'd give it a shot.

 

[Timmy]

I had debated whether "gaffe" or "erroneous" would be the "mistake" of choice in that post. Since I am neither a sailor nor a crossdresser I have almost no use for the word "gaff". So, I thought I'd give it a shot.

An admiral who doesn't sail?

How incongruous.

 

[GSC2k2*]

I had debated whether "gaffe" or "erroneous" would be the "mistake" of choice in that post. Since I am neither a sailor nor a crossdresser I have almost no use for the word "gaff". So, I thought I'd give it a shot.

Sailors and crossdressers. Now THAT would make for an interesting Venn Diagram.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

"Me fail English? That's unpossible!"