I just read in today's Atlanta Journal

[ATLANTARANGER*]

that Waddel said that Atlanta was 1 or 5 teams that exceeded last year's cap. As a result they will have $1M in additional salary applied towards this year cap. Does anyone know who the other 4 are and how much they will get penalized?

Click to read more...

 

[Ted Hoffman]

There's a distinction I think:

5 teams spent over $39 million. 3 of those 5 went over apparently because of injuries ... menaing the long-term injury clause kicked in, and I don't think teams are considered to be over the upper limit if that's the case.

However ... it appears that 2 teams, even after considering injuries, went over the upper limit - Atlanta being one of them.

My guesses:

1. Atlanta - a given, they've admitted they're carrying about $1M in dead cap space for '06-07.
2. Colorado - they went over due to injuries to Konowalchuk, Vaananen and Theodore.
3. Detroit - I think they're the other team that has dead cap space in '06-07 because of this. They were so close to the cap to begin with, and when Fischer went down they clearly went over. They also had Chelios and Yzerman who had bonus clauses in their contracts (Yzerman had $750,000; Chelios I'm not sure). Depending on the amount scheduled to go to Chelios and the amount each of them got, I think they were over but not by a lot (less than $500K), but that amount will be dead cap space for '06-07.
4. Philadelphia - Injuries to Johnsson, Desjardins, Esche, Pitkanen, Stevenson, and so on? Oh yeah, injuries pushed them over.
5. Vancouver - Injuries to Salo, Jovanovski, Cooke and Cloutier? Injuries pushed them over as well.

 

[GentlemanOfLeisure]

that Waddel said that Atlanta was 1 or 5 teams that exceeded last year's cap. As a result they will have $1M in additional salary applied towards this year cap. Does anyone know who the other 4 are and how much they will get penalized?

http://www.ajc.com/sports/content/sports/thrashers/stories/0702nhlinsider.html

NHL INSIDER

Thrashers among teams over salary cap
Five teams spent more than $39 million last season

By JOHN MANASSO
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Published on: 06/30/06

Five teams — including the Thrashers — went over the NHL's inaugural salary cap limit of $39 million in 2005-06.

NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly did not identified the teams during a briefing last Saturday at the NHL draft but the Thrashers were one of two teams to spend over the limit.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

New Jersey was one of the three teams that were allowed because of injury(says in the article), they arent being penalized.

As I said in the thread on the NHL Talk board, Bill Daly didn't mention the 5 teams that went over ... and the writer is from Atlanta so he'd know the Thrashers were over b/c they've admitted it.

So if the writer knows New Jersey was over, why wouldn't he know the other 3 teams that were over?

I think everyone thinks New Jersey was over, forgetting that before Elias came back they assigned McGillis ($2.2M), Malakhov ($3.6M) and Mogilny ($3.5M) to Albany to help open up some room for Elias when he came back ... and that was just shy of the halfway point in the season. I think they actually finished under, but not by a lot.

 

[GentlemanOfLeisure]

As I said in the thread on the NHL Talk board, Bill Daly didn't mention the 5 teams that went over ... and the writer is from Atlanta so he'd know the Thrashers were over b/c they've admitted it.

So if the writer knows New Jersey was over, why wouldn't he know the other 3 teams that were over?

I think everyone thinks New Jersey was over, forgetting that before Elias came back they assigned McGillis ($2.2M), Malakhov ($3.6M) and Mogilny ($3.5M) to Albany to help open up some room for Elias when he came back ... and that was just shy of the halfway point in the season. I think they actually finished under, but not by a lot.

The writer knew the 2 other teams, i'm assuming, but was too lazy to write in the article, since I highly doubted he belived anyone outside of Atlanta would care.

 

[GentlemanOfLeisure]

The writer knew the 2 other teams, i'm assuming, but was too lazy to write in the article, since I highly doubted he belived anyone outside of Atlanta would care.

What I mean, to clarify, 5 total teams were over the cap. only 2 were over because of bonuses and now this year it will count against the cap. The 3 other teams, including New Jersey, which is menitioned in the article, were over because of injury. Thus not having to take the cap hit.

Although New Jersey is taking one anyway, because of Malakhov and Mogilny.

The write probably knew the other 2 teams that had injury overrages, but was too lazy to put it in the article, since its an Atlanta paper, and an Atlanta Problem.

as for the one other team that has to take a bonus hit this year besides the Thrashers, its anyone's guess.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

The writer knew the 2 other teams, i'm assuming, but was too lazy to write in the article, since I highly doubted he belived anyone outside of Atlanta would care.

You meant "other 3 teams"?

I'll say this: I got an e-mail from someone who saw the numbers I posted on my website, and I was told I was "pretty close". The person wouldn't say what the correct numbers were and wouldn't help where I was missing numbers, but said that he knew the actual numbers and was impressed I was as close as I was.

And from what I put together, I'm pretty sure that of the five teams that spent over $39 million last year, New Jersey wasn't one of them.

 

[ATLANTARANGER*]

Appreciate the the info.

You meant "other 3 teams"?

I'll say this: I got an e-mail from someone who saw the numbers I posted on my website, and I was told I was "pretty close". The person wouldn't say what the correct numbers were and wouldn't help where I was missing numbers, but said that he knew the actual numbers and was impressed I was as close as I was.

And from what I put together, I'm pretty sure that of the five teams that spent over $39 million last year, New Jersey wasn't one of them.

Do you think that the reason why the assessment of a penalty was post season was due to the computation of those bonuses? Are fans under the misimpression that an immediate resolution would be required if a team did actually go over during the season, or was this issue solely related to bonuses and that required the season to run its course before a determination could be had?

 

[ATLANTARANGER*]

I'm sorry, but I think people are combining 2 seperate statements.

As I said in the thread on the NHL Talk board, Bill Daly didn't mention the 5 teams that went over ... and the writer is from Atlanta so he'd know the Thrashers were over b/c they've admitted it.

So if the writer knows New Jersey was over, why wouldn't he know the other 3 teams that were over?

I think everyone thinks New Jersey was over, forgetting that before Elias came back they assigned McGillis ($2.2M), Malakhov ($3.6M) and Mogilny ($3.5M) to Albany to help open up some room for Elias when he came back ... and that was just shy of the halfway point in the season. I think they actually finished under, but not by a lot.

The writer says that there were 5 teams over. Then he says that there were 3 who went over due to injuries. Nowhere does he make a connection that the 3 that went over due to injuries were part of the 5. The way I read it there were a total of 8 teams that exceded the cap, of which 3 went over due to injuries. He also doesnot say that any of the 3 that went over due to injuries were still not part of the group that were over due to non injury issues.

All in all a poorly crafted article. Left a lot to be desired. One of the reasons I don't read or buy it. I happened to be at a friends house and picked up the sports section.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

The bonuses absolutely had everything to do with it.

If we're talking about the injury exemption, the league is on top of that. If a guy gets hurt and it's considered a long-term injury, it's treated as if the guy's going to be out the rest of the year. If/when he comes back early, the team has to make whatever roster moves it needs to bring the guy back onto the roster. If a team were to make a roster move that would put them over the upper limit (after considering injuries), the league would void it; if the team still went ahead with it, the league could levy fines or forfeit games.

With the bonuses, no one knows because some of them are tied to postseason performance and other incentives that generally aren't known until after the end of the season ... hence the 7.5% overage allowed for bonuses. But teams know that if they're going to sign a guy to a contract that has potential bonuses, if those bonuses push them over the upper limit it will count against them the following year.

The explanation about 3 and another 5, ... I agree, it's not totally clear what happened but what I posted is my best guess and what I have based on my work with this.

 

[ATLANTARANGER*]

Again, thanks for clearing

The bonuses absolutely had everything to do with it.

If we're talking about the injury exemption, the league is on top of that. If a guy gets hurt and it's considered a long-term injury, it's treated as if the guy's going to be out the rest of the year. If/when he comes back early, the team has to make whatever roster moves it needs to bring the guy back onto the roster. If a team were to make a roster move that would put them over the upper limit (after considering injuries), the league would void it; if the team still went ahead with it, the league could levy fines or forfeit games.

With the bonuses, no one knows because some of them are tied to postseason performance and other incentives that generally aren't known until after the end of the season ... hence the 7.5% overage allowed for bonuses. But teams know that if they're going to sign a guy to a contract that has potential bonuses, if those bonuses push them over the upper limit it will count against them the following year.

The explanation about 3 and another 5, ... I agree, it's not totally clear what happened but what I posted is my best guess and what I have based on my work with this.

up the issue as best that can be without fully knowing all the info. I jsut wish the guy wrote a better article and constructed his sentences a wee bit better.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060708/SPORTS0101/607080389

Detroit was the other team.

Well, now forget those numbers, because the Wings' cap number actually is only $43.6 million this season. Whenever a team is operating at the cap maximum and a player reaches performance bonuses that put them over the cap -- teams are allowed to go over the cap by 7.5 percent in bonus money only -- that money comes off the cap the following season. And since Steve Yzerman earned $400,000 in bonus money while the Wings were over the cap last winter, they'll take that hit this season.

It's probably really some weird number like $397,418 or whatever, but it confirms what I thought and could never find proof of.

 

[gooseman]

IB, from all evidence I can find, your numbers are the best I can find publicly available. I have contacted you a couple of times now, and your numbers have almost always proved better than any I could locate or have matched mine almost to the penny. People were watching NJ very, very closely last year, and with a pending arbitration ruling will likely be watching them even closer this year. I think the entire league offices and 29 other teams that are waiting for a chance to pick Lou's bones will not let him fail to dot one i or miss crossing one t. I will take you numbers over a reporter in Atlanta any time.