Will Anaheim be able to make the cap?

[GSC2k2*]

Any buyouts outside the "no cap hit period" are for 2/3 the contract amount over 2 times the contract length. So you basically take a cap hit of 1/3 of the contract for twice the length of the contract.

Not necessarily. The player can also elect to take a lump sum payment for the NPV. It is uncelar how that would be treated under the cap.

 

[Captain Ron]

Injury replacements don't count against the cap unless their salary exceeds the salary of the injured player that they're replacing.

Show me where it says that.

CLUB PAYROLLS

What will be the range of Club payrolls?

The payroll range in Year One (2005-06) of the CBA will be $21.5 million (U.S.) at the lower limit and $39 million (U.S.) at the upper limit. A Club's payroll will include all salaries, signing bonuses and performance bonuses paid to players. Except in the case of bona fide long-term injury (injuries that sideline a player for a minimum of 24 days and 10 games) to one or more of a club's players, Club payrolls will never be permitted to be below the minimum or in excess of the maximum. Clubs at or near the upper limit that have players who incur a bona fide long-term injury will be entitled to replace up to the full value of the injured player's NHL salary (even if such salary would result in the club's team salary exceeding the upper limit). The "replacement salary" will not count against the club's upper limit but will count against the League-wide players' share. Upon return of the injured player, the team must come into immediate compliance with the requirements of the payroll range.

This will not exempt short-term injuries. So unless a the Ducks play through their "minor" injuries. They will not be able to replace the player.

 

[GSC2k2*]

Show me where it says that.



This will not exempt short-term injuries. So unless a the Ducks play through their "minor" injuries. They will not be able to replace the player.

Well it says it in the section you quote below, Spongebob.

As for short term injuries, that is part of why teams carry 22 players.

 

[Captain Ron]

Well it says it in the section you quote below, Spongebob.

As for short term injuries, that is part of why teams carry 22 players.

I am not a Pejorative Slur. Players can only be replaced if they suffer long term injuries. I have seen teams with 4+ guys on the IR with bruises, sprains ,pulled muscles and whatever else. A 22 man roster will not be sufficient for these incidents.

 

[kdb209]

Injury replacements don't count against the cap unless their salary exceeds the salary of the injured player that they're replacing.

Not necessarily true.

The salary cap exemption for injury replacements is only true for serious IR injuries - 10 games and 24 days minimum. If a team has a bunch of minor injuries and needs to call up a couple of min salary warm bodies, thats almost another $1M cap hit. This is a very real danger, especially for a nearly capped team that decides to go with only 20 or 21 players.

And I'm sure that the league has access to team medical records to prevent a team from exagerating the severity of an injury for cap purposes.

 

[kdb209]

Not necessarily. The player can also elect to take a lump sum payment for the NPV. It is uncelar how that would be treated under the cap.

Well given that the lump sum payment is a decision of the player, that the team has no control over, and that that decision cannot be made untill after the notice of termination is given to the player and the team is committed to the buyout, the only realitic ways to handle the situation are:

1. Get rid of the lump sum payment option - unlikely.

2. Treat the lump sum payment option the same as the standard buyout for cap purposes - the obvious solution.

Of course any player/agent could get the same effect with an outside financial instrument that advances the full NPV and is guaranteed by the future payments.

 

[GSC2k2*]

I am not a Pejorative Slur. Players can only be replaced if they suffer long term injuries. I have seen teams with 4+ guys on the IR with bruises, sprains ,pulled muscles and whatever else. A 22 man roster will not be sufficient for these incidents.

Point taken. Multiple injuries will be a problem.

I know you are not a Pejorative Slur. That is why i was scratching my head at your original post.

 

[Ford Prefect]

The local papers and Burke himself have said repeatedly that there is room.

Link



Burke has also said he'll carry a 22-man roster. That means 5 players must sign for an average of $600,000 or less, or the qualified veterans (like Chistov for example) take a hike and some space is freed that way. It's really not as dire as it's being made out to be.

The math in your quote is wrong. If the ducks have 36 million tied up in 13 players, that is 3 million left to sign nine players. With the qualifiers out there, sounds like $0 to sign 6 players.

 

[HockeyCritter]

Quick question --- is there a requirement/provision in the CBA that states a team has to field a 23-man roster or can they field less?

I thought I read there was a set roster number (makes sense, especially with the new wavier restrictions)

 

[Captain Ron]

Quick question --- is there a requirement/provision in the CBA that states a team has to field a 23-man roster or can they field less?

I thought I read there was a set roster number (makes sense, especially with the new wavier restrictions)

Not sure but some GM's (who have read the CBA) claim they are going with less so?
But like kdb209 and I have said. All teams will have minor injuries. Carrying less than 23 guys will be a risky move by GM's. Especially if they are against the cap.

 

[HockeyCritter]

I know you can bring up a player to replace someone on IR (more than ten games or 24 days) and NOT have that salary count against your cap. It gets sticky if you’re replacing a guy that will be out just a few games.

 

[kdb209]

Quick question --- is there a requirement/provision in the CBA that states a team has to field a 23-man roster or can they field less?

I thought I read there was a set roster number (makes sense, especially with the new wavier restrictions)

The old CBA had no minimum except for the game day requirement of 20 (18 skaters and 2 goalies). The 23 man limit was a maximum only. So unless thay've changed that, a team can field fewer than 23. Several GMs have said that that is what they plan to do.

 

[Captain Ron]

I know you can bring up a player to replace someone on IR (more than ten games or 24 days) and NOT have that salary count against your cap. It gets sticky if you’re replacing a guy that will be out just a few games.

Exactly so guys are either going to have to play through their "small" injuries or be great actors so they can turn that sprained ankle into a major deal.

 

[kdb209]

Exactly so guys are either going to have to play through their "small" injuries or be great actors so they can turn that sprained ankle into a major deal.

That's why I'm sure the league will have access to team medical records, to prevent teams from exagerating injuries for cap purposes.

 

[Timmy]

That's why I'm sure the league will have access to team medical records, to prevent teams from exagerating injuries for cap purposes.

Will this put an end to "It's an upper-body injury."?

 

[SJeasy]

That's why I'm sure the league will have access to team medical records, to prevent teams from exagerating injuries for cap purposes.

Agreed:
Key word in the quote bona fide