News: If Shea Weber retires at the end of the 2025/26 season Nashville will suffer a $24.57M cap hit.

[Spazkat]

I just believe Poile when he says we don't have to worry about it.

And even if someone believes the preds should pay a penalty, and that it's completely fair based on the current CBA (that's a fine argument to make, I'll accept that), it's still incorrect when people keep saying that Poile knew the circumstances when it was signed. He could only know the circumstances after the CBA was approved which is after the contract was signed.

The CBA was signed as is by all of the owners, and its pretty naive to think that they didn't review its contents with the legal teams and the rest of the management group to examine the implications for their particular situation beforehand. It would be bordering on negligence not to have done so. My guess is that they assumed that the risk of getting hit with that was low because they assumed they could talk Weber into taking the Hossa route, but I can't imagine any scenario where they had no idea this was a possibility.

It was a calculated risk that still has the potential to come back and bite them in the ass... and the risk has increased now that they traded him. Montreal has almost zero incentive to try to put him on LTIR and get stuck carrying the cap hit vs retirement where they are off the hook altogether, whereas Nashville would work harder to steer him towards that option to avoid the recapture.

Had Nashville not traded Shea Weber, that cap recapture in the final year is just $6M.

 

[Voight]

Yes but a reason will be found to stash him on LTIR so there is no penalty just like every other case except Luongo. I am sure Hossa can pass on his "skin condition"

people still trying with this one....

Would the league even let this happen if that amount is higher than the allowed cap percentage for one player?

Why not? They knew the rules before signing the contract, it sucks but then again the league eventually let the Devils off for Kovy's first contract so who knows.

That’s what you get for cheating.

Who cheated? I don't remember it being one of those cap circumventing ones like Kovalchuk's. It was an offer sheet anyhow.

 

[aemoreira1981]

Please he's going to get a bad case of Gingivitis and go on LITR and work in Nashville in some role.
Can see it coming from a bazillion miles away.

With his knee issues, I see that as more likely.

 

[HockeyGuy1964]

And how exactly are they going to go into some sort of arbitration?

Most of you just don't get it. There's a collectively bargained agreement governing how these issues will be dealt with. The CBA clearly lays out what will happen here. There is no route to go into arbitration about this.. and there needs to be go go into some kind of arbitration. Nashville can try to challenge in a court of law but there's 0% chance they win, courts don't touch collectively bargained agreements that all parties entered into willingly... including the Nashville owner when he agreed to the current CBA with the cap recapture clause in there and no way out for his franchise.

And nobody can make the case that Nashville did NOT circumvent the cap. By definition, they did. They paid Weber more than Weber cost them against the cap. That is the definition of cap circumvention. It doesn't matter if they didn't use all of the cap benefit he provided them.. end of the day, the owners paid out more money to the players (i.e. circumventing the cap) than they otherwise should have under the CBA. Cap cirvumention.

These are all dumb arguments that don't hold water in any fashion. Not in common sense, not according to the CBA, not in a court of law.

Nashville has two outs:
1) The next CBA does away with cap recapture or explicitly provides an exception for their situation
2) Weber doesn't retire and goes on LTIR

We'll just agree to disagree.

 

[Legionnaire11]

We'll just agree to disagree.

I like how this guy says 100% no way around it, the preds agreed to the CBA, they can't challenge this at all...

They also agreed to a CBA that sets a cap floor, yet a $24M recapture penalty would put them below that floor. So either the cap floor or the recapture penalty has to give somewhere. And I'd stake quite a bit on the recapture being the one to bend to modification. And it's not just "The Preds agreed to the CBA, 30 other owners won't let them out of this". But this also has a huge impact on the NHLPA which is spread across 31 teams.

 

[Junohockeyfan]

Simple solution- Habs trade Weber back to Nashville prior to his inevitable LTIR for a 1st round pick. If not, he retires and Nash is screwed. If you have a problem with that the price increases to 2x 1sts.

Suckas!!!

 

[Soundgarden]

Simple solution- Habs trade Weber back to Nashville prior to his inevitable LTIR for a 1st round pick. If not, he retires and Nash is screwed. If you have a problem with that the price increases to 2x 1sts.

Suckas!!!

Yeah, I'm sure we're fine with not paying a first.

 

[MtoD]

I like how this guy says 100% no way around it, the preds agreed to the CBA, they can't challenge this at all...

They also agreed to a CBA that sets a cap floor, yet a $24M recapture penalty would put them below that floor. So either the cap floor or the recapture penalty has to give somewhere. And I'd stake quite a bit on the recapture being the one to bend to modification. And it's not just "The Preds agreed to the CBA, 30 other owners won't let them out of this". But this also has a huge impact on the NHLPA which is spread across 31 teams.

The cap recapture applies to the cap (that's the whole point) so they will certainly be above the cap floor.. what's the issue there?

And yes, they can't challenge it. It's a f***ing contract, that's how things work. When you agree to something, you can't just walk back later and say you need to change what you agreed to because it hurts your feelings.

Let's see the Predators challenge this in federal court and have the judge throw it out before either lawyer utters a single word

 

[Legionnaire11]

The cap recapture applies to the cap (that's the whole point) so they will certainly be above the cap floor.. what's the issue there?

And yes, they can't challenge it. It's a ****ing contract, that's how things work. When you agree to something, you can't just walk back later and say you need to change what you agreed to because it hurts your feelings.

Let's see the Predators challenge this in federal court and have the judge throw it out before either lawyer utters a single word

Take $24M off of the upper limit and they most certainly are not above the floor.

It's also pretty easy to find an endless amount of legal cases involving CBA's and contracts. You're simply posting all of your definitive claims out of a personal desire to see the penalty applied, but again, it doesn't make you correct.

 

[AcerComputer]

That’s what you get for cheating.

In a twist, Philly must bear NSH cap hit!

 

[MtoD]

Take $24M off of the upper limit and they most certainly are not above the floor.

It's also pretty easy to find an endless amount of legal cases involving CBA's and contracts. You're simply posting all of your definitive claims out of a personal desire to see the penalty applied, but again, it doesn't make you correct.

You don't even get the basics of the penalty. You don 't take 24M off the upper limit. You add a 24M cap hit. Neither the floor nor the upper limit have anything to do with this.

Please show me a recent legal case involving a sports league and its CBA in which federal courts did not agree with the CBA. If there are endless, this should be a breeze.

 

[Stephen]

They should make Philadelphia eat half of the cap recapture.

 

[Buffalo Preds]

It has already been pointed out in this thread that specific points in a CBA can be modified while the labor agreement is still in effect. This is typically done as a memorandum of understanding between management and labor when a portion of the contact benefits neither party.

That would likely be the case here. The NHLPA has no interest in a procrustean application of cap recapture, and would gladly accept a re-negotiation that benefits its members. The Board of Governors is really the critical piece of this. I don’t feel like looking up bylaws, but if a majority/supermajority of the board feels that the penalty application would not benefit them, then they would certainly agree not to apply the penalty.

Clearly there are fans of other teams who would be content to see a good opponent ripped to shreds for basically any reason. Would there be enough owners that agree with them to force the cap penalty? I don’t think so. Having teams that are financial basket cases is bad enough, but forcing a team to shift from in the black success to being a sinkhole or revenue would defy business sense.

So what this comes down to is some non-Nashville fans want the league to cripple a team. Maybe it will happen. I doubt it. Owners want cups, but even more than cups they want stability.

 

[MtoD]

It has already been pointed out in this thread that specific points in a CBA can be modified while the labor agreement is still in effect. This is typically done as a memorandum of understanding between management and labor when a portion of the contact benefits neither party.

That would likely be the case here. The NHLPA has no interest in a procrustean application of cap recapture, and would gladly accept a re-negotiation that benefits its members. The Board of Governors is really the critical piece of this. I don’t feel like looking up bylaws, but if a majority/supermajority of the board feels that the penalty application would not benefit them, then they would certainly agree not to apply the penalty.

Clearly there are fans of other teams who would be content to see a good opponent ripped to shreds for basically any reason. Would there be enough owners that agree with them to force the cap penalty? I don’t think so. Having teams that are financial basket cases is bad enough, but forcing a team to shift from in the black success to being a sinkhole or revenue would defy business sense.

So what this comes down to is some non-Nashville fans want the league to cripple a team. Maybe it will happen. I doubt it. Owners want cups, but even more than cups they want stability.

They also want money though. And the cap recapture would provide them with that. That's 24M charged against the player's portion that the owners don't have to pay out.

The most realistic scenario here is LTIR or the next CBA rewrites the cap recapture clause (or eliminates entirely). I don't think the BoG is going to get involved in negotiating a change for the current CBA for a situation that involves a singular team..

There's a difference between wanting the league to cripple a team and explaining to people what the CBA allows and doesn't allow. There is no current avenue for Nashville to avoid the cap recapture penalty. If Weber were to retire tomorrow, that's exactly what would happen.

If you're relying on the NHL and NHLPA negotiating an exception to the cap recapture clause, that's fine.. but recognize that's what needs to happen and there's no arbitration, lawsuit or the NHL just deciding not to apply the cap recapture clause.

 

[triggrman]

Poile explained that offer sheet signing would be handled like a trade prior to 2013. Which would make it exempt.

 

[MtoD]

Poile explained that offer sheet signing would be handled like a trade prior to 2013. Which would make it exempt.

source?

 

[triggrman]

source?

If I had it I would have posted it. This was years ago, right after the trade. It was on 102.5 if you want to search it

 

[MtoD]

If I had it I would have posted it. This was years ago, right after the trade. It was on 102.5 if you want to search it

I imagine if it were true, it would be more widely reported than a single radio soundbyte. Even moreso considering how much media coverage has been on Weber the past week or so since the PK trade.

NHL was dumb to even let the Flyers off the hook for Richards and Carter. Obvious abuse of power by Snider/catering by the league and for basically nothing since Carter never played a game under said contract (so Flyers were never going to owe cap recapture) and Richards only provided a total of 200k or so cap benefit. It helps to own NBC and have the league at your mercy, I guess.

 

[Honour Over Glory]

I doubt he'll ever actually officially retire.

Kind of like people thought Luongo would never do it and LTIr his career out?

 

[triggrman]

I imagine if it were true, it would be more widely reported than a single radio soundbyte. Even moreso considering how much media coverage has been on Weber the past week or so since the PK trade.

NHL was dumb to even let the Flyers off the hook for Richards and Carter. Obvious abuse of power by Snider/catering by the league and for basically nothing since Carter never played a game under said contract (so Flyers were never going to owe cap recapture) and Richards only provided a total of 200k or so cap benefit. It helps to own NBC and have the league at your mercy, I guess.

You can believe what you want or need too.

 

[Legionnaire11]

You don't even get the basics of the penalty. You don 't take 24M off the upper limit. You add a 24M cap hit. Neither the floor nor the upper limit have anything to do with this.

Wow... I obviously needed to be done with this conversation a while ago.