Some renegotiation permitted per NYPost

norrisnick · Jul 21, 2005

http://www.nypost.com/sports/50574.htm (registration required)

...Almost all team and individual bonuses are banned, with entry-level, signing and roster bonuses exempt. In addition, players over 35 and those returning from injury can have certain performance bonuses. The entry-level cap drops to $850G per year, and those deals will be three-way â€” meaning they can be sent to the ECHL as well as the AHL. Trades cannot include cash as part of the transactions, and contract renegotiations are only permitted in the final year of a deal...

This was posted at another forum. There are a ton of pricey guys out there with one year left. Nice to have a little leeway to get under the cap.

If this is true of course.

Seachd · Jul 21, 2005

I can't read the whole article, but I take it to mean renegotiation and not restructuring. For example, a player would be able to extend his contract, but not mess around with the current structure.

That's just how I read it.

norrisnick · Jul 21, 2005

Seachd said:
I can't read the whole article, but I take it to mean renegotiation and not restructuring. For example, a player would be able to extend his contract, but not mess around with the current structure.

That's just how I read it.

Then it would be negotiations and not REnegotiations.

That's how I read it.

GirardIsStupid · Jul 21, 2005

norrisnick said:
Then it would be negotiations and not REnegotiations.

That's how I read it.

I'm with you on this one. It's great news ain't it?

Malefic74 · Jul 21, 2005

I thought I had read somewhere that they were specifically against restructuring veteran contracts (like Yashins)

Could be wrong but that bell will not stop ringing in my ear.

norrisnick · Jul 21, 2005

jericholic19 said:
I'm with you on this one. It's great news ain't it?

If is actually in there, absolutely.

hockeytown9321 · Jul 21, 2005

norrisnick said:
http://www.nypost.com/sports/50574.htm (registration required)

This was posted at another forum. There are a ton of pricey guys out there with one year left. Nice to have a little leeway to get under the cap.

If this is true of course.

Could be good for the Wings, huh? We could probably get another $2M in cap space from Lidstrom. I told you Khabibulin would be a Wing.

bling · Jul 21, 2005

I don't know for sure about the cred of this article though. It has a picture of Chris McAllister carrying a copy of the contract and identifies him as Colorado Avalanche player...Chris was traded to New York at the deadline in 2004. (This is from a New York newspaper)

Cloned · Jul 21, 2005

I take it to mean that restructuring will be allowed AFTER this initial "no-restructuring" period to get under the cap.

HSHS · Jul 21, 2005

I wonder if they let you renegotiate entry level contracts with one year left???

Kill 'Em All · Jul 21, 2005

norrisnick said:
Then it would be negotiations and not REnegotiations.

That's how I read it.

yeah, me too.

if true, this would awsome.

big market teams really deserve this clause.

hockeyfan33 · Jul 21, 2005

I don't understand why the owners would oppose of this, I mean another way for them to save money right?

GSC2k2* · Jul 21, 2005

This is a non-event. All it means is that if you are playing the final year of your contract, the team is not forced to let you become a free agent.

Well, duh.

This is not the type of cap-avoiding renegotiations to lower salaries such as what you guys are talking about.

norrisnick · Jul 21, 2005

gscarpenter2002 said:
This is a non-event. All it means is that if you are playing the final year of your contract, the team is not forced to let you become a free agent.

Well, duh.

This is not the type of cap-avoiding renegotiations to lower salaries such as what you guys are talking about.

Then why use the term renegotiation instead of negotiation? That 're' is huge. If it was a slip up by the Post, fine. If that was a slip up in the actual CBA...

GSC2k2* · Jul 21, 2005

Why use that term? Well, the answer might be that it is written by a hack writing in a newspaper. I would not give it quite the degree of scrutiny if it were written by a Skadden Arps partner.

To me there is no difference in either event.

norrisnick · Jul 21, 2005

gscarpenter2002 said:
Why use that term? Well, the answer might be that it is written by a hack writing in a newspaper. I would not give it quite the degree of scrutiny if it were written by a Skadden Arps partner.

To me there is no difference in either event.

If the word renegotiation exists in the CBA, in that context, you can pretty much count on some team/player combo using it the way I, and others, have read it. It might be quickly edited, but renegotiation quite clearly implies an altering of what has been negotiated before.

I'll scan the PDF as soon as it comes out.

ColoradoHockeyFan · Jul 21, 2005

norrisnick said:
If the word renegotiation exists in the CBA, in that context, you can pretty much count on some team/player combo using it the way I, and others, have read it. It might be quickly edited, but renegotiation quite clearly implies an altering of what has been negotiated before.

I'll scan the PDF as soon as it comes out.

I have to agree with norrisnick that the "re" is huge if it is in fact worded that way. My only concern is... will this apply to existing contracts with one year left (like a Blake, for example) this summer, or will it only apply after this initial summer has passed?

me2 · Jul 21, 2005

I don't see the problem with renegotiation. There are bound to be some clauses to prevent exploitation. What is likely to happen

a) player renegotiates salary down. That's not a bad thing for the owners.

b) player renegotiates salary up. It's still getting covered in the cap.

c) player extends his deal a few years. It's all covered in the cap in the future years

If someone like Linden decides to renegotiate his 1 year $1.5m deal into a 2 year $800K/y deal, is that a problem for the cap? I don't think so. No money is going unaccounted for.

If a young star approaching the last year of a deal that takes him to UFA age he might offer to renegotiate for a raise and a 4 year deal. This could suit both the club and the player. Again, no money is unaccounted for.

Seachd · Jul 23, 2005

I was just going to bring this up again, because it looks like it does actually mean extending contracts and not restructuring them:

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=131133&hubName=nhl

So contracts can't be messed with during their term.

Buffaloed · Jul 23, 2005

Seachd said:
I was just going to bring this up again, because it looks like it does actually mean extending contracts and not restructuring them:

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=131133&hubName=nhl

So contracts can't be messed with during their term.

Has there been any confirmation of the report that the average salary over the term of the contract is going to be used to determine it's cap hit rather than the actual salary is payed in a given year? If it's average salary, extensions could really give teams some wiggle room.

KL* · Jul 23, 2005

bling said:
I don't know for sure about the cred of this article though. It has a picture of Chris McAllister carrying a copy of the contract and identifies him as Colorado Avalanche player...Chris was traded to New York at the deadline in 2004. (This is from a New York newspaper)

Uh, you've never worked at a newspaper before, I take it.

News writers, op ed writers and photo editors are all completely different positions with completely different people. Just because your photo team is a bunch of boneheads doesn't say anything about your news team.

KL* · Jul 23, 2005

gscarpenter2002 said:
Why use that term? Well, the answer might be that it is written by a hack writing in a newspaper. I would not give it quite the degree of scrutiny if it were written by a Skadden Arps partner.

To me there is no difference in either event.

I would expect someone who knows what Skadden Arps is to have a little better understanding of basic contractual terminology.

Seachd · Jul 23, 2005

Buffaloed said:
Has there been any confirmation of the report that the average salary over the term of the contract is going to be used to determine it's cap hit rather than the actual salary is payed in a given year? If it's average salary, extensions could really give teams some wiggle room.

Good question. I haven't seen it, but if I had to guess, I'd say they would probably not be able to average the extension with the current contract, and count them separately. But I really have no idea.

sveiglar · Jul 25, 2005

norrisnick said:
Then why use the term renegotiation instead of negotiation? That 're' is huge. If it was a slip up by the Post, fine. If that was a slip up in the actual CBA...

I'm with Seachd here: "re"negotiating is the changing of an existing contract, either in length, value, or structure. If they have a year left, then an extension is a "renegotiation" (a change of term from the originally negotiated term). You can only "negotiate" a contract if you don't have one; ie if it has expired... which is not what they are talking about here.

Now back to your regularly scheduled programming.

GSC2k2* · Jul 25, 2005

MikeJones said:
I would expect someone who knows what Skadden Arps is to have a little better understanding of basic contractual terminology.

Pardon?

Some renegotiation permitted per NYPost

The best...

Registered User

The best...

Registered User

Registered User

The best...

Registered User

Registered User

Begging for Bega

Losing is a disease

Registered User

Registered User

GSC2k2*

Guest

The best...

GSC2k2*

Guest

The best...

Registered User

Go ahead foot

Registered User

webmaster

KL*

Guest

KL*

Guest

Registered User

Registered User

GSC2k2*

Guest

Ad

Ad

Ad