News: Shea Weber likely retiring/LTIRetiring

[Buffalo Preds]

View attachment 455367

Let's see, and tally up the benefit the Preds illegally gained.
I scowered the internet and only came up with stats from capfriendly and some other site and only lost the 2012-13 season.

Random stats from a random site I found from google, fromthisseat
13-14: Benefit 6 142 857 dollars, remaining cap at 4 856 543. Actual benefit of 1 286 314.
14-15: Benefit 6 142 857 dollars, remaining cap 12 887 856, no benefit.
Capfriendly:
15-16: Benefit 6 142 857 dollars, and the Predators had 9 396 695 left to use at seasons end, they did not benefit. They would have had 3 253 838 left.
16-17: Benefit 4 142 857, remaining cap was 3 570 699. Actual benefit of 572 158 over the cap.
17-18: Benefit 4 142 857, remaining cap was 2 883 956 Actual benefit of 1 257 901 over the cap.
After that it's useless to make the comparison as the benefit is negative already, and it would only lessen the actual benefit, according to the excel sheet above.

So, actual benefits from the contract come up to 3 116 373 dollars without the initial contract year benefits from 2012-13.
That's what the Nashville Predators has benefitted from that contract, up to this point, and that benefit is already negated by that excel sheet above, which was made for this situation.

That's the type of "unfair advantage" the Predators actually gained on all the other woeful teams who didn't get to choose between both of their top defenders leaving and saving one but having to give them a shitton of money upfront and term the Preds probably weren't going to offer otherwise
People really think the Preds of 2013 are the Preds of 2021 or something because that team wasn't all that stable in the grand scheme of things.​

Thank you so much for digging up those cap figures. It’s sad how the historical numbers are so hard to access. I still miss Capgeek, which not only was comprehensive, but well organized and with a good archive. RIP Matthew Wuest.

 

[Frank Drebin]

See the post exactly above yours. Paying a player more than their cap hit doesn't necessarily create a cap advantage.

I think in fairness when figuring out the cap "advantage" that Nashville got, the 4 back diving years (3,1,1,1) should be eliminated to bring the cap hit up for penalty purposes.

That's 104 M over the first 10 years. Is it fair to say that Nashville had a 2.6m cap advantage per year for those first few years? (Paying 7.85 for a 10.4 million player)

I think so

 

[Qwijibo]

I think in fairness when figuring out the cap "advantage" that Nashville got, the 4 back diving years (3,1,1,1) should be eliminated to bring the cap hit up for penalty purposes.

That's 104 M over the first 10 years. Is it fair to say that Nashville had a 2.6m cap advantage per year for those first few years? (Paying 7.85 for a 10.4 million player)

I think so

The contract was a cap circumvention contract BECAUSE of those years. Philly never expected him to play them out. That’s the point. You can’t just erase that fact

 

[Legionnaire11]

I think in fairness when figuring out the cap "advantage" that Nashville got, the 4 back diving years (3,1,1,1) should be eliminated to bring the cap hit up for penalty purposes.

That's 104 M over the first 10 years. Is it fair to say that Nashville had a 2.6m cap advantage per year for those first few years? (Paying 7.85 for a 10.4 million player)

I think so

You think it's fair to say they had a 2.6M cap advantage when they didn't spend 2.6M above the cap? That's pure mental gymnastics that comes off as nothing more than an unjustified vendetta against a franchise.

 

[Frank Drebin]

You think it's fair to say they had a 2.6M cap advantage when they didn't spend 2.6M above the cap? That's pure mental gymnastics that comes off as nothing more than an unjustified vendetta against a franchise.

The recapture thing has nothing to do with what the team spent towards the cap, does it?

I thought it was a simple calculation that Nashville got a 13.8m (salary) player for a 7.8m hit, for an accrued penalty of 6m. (Simple figures to illustrate the point)

By removing the back diving years, that were never intended to be played, the cap hit for penalty purposes goes up, reducing the actual penalty.

Shea Weber, on a 8 year deal at the time, was probably going to get 9-11 per year, so Nashville did get a cap advantage for a few years, even if they didn't utilize it. But instead of 6m per year advantage its closer to 3.

Idk, maybe I'm off base here.

 

[Legionnaire11]

The recapture thing has nothing to do with what the team spent towards the cap, does it?

I thought it was a simple calculation that Nashville got a 13.8m (salary) player for a 7.8m hit, for an accrued penalty of 6m. (Simple figures to illustrate the point)

By removing the back diving years, that were never intended to be played, the cap hit for penalty purposes goes up, reducing the actual penalty.

Shea Weber, on a 8 year deal at the time, was probably going to get 9-11 per year, so Nashville did get a cap advantage for a few years, even if they didn't utilize it. But instead of 6m per year advantage its closer to 3.

Idk, maybe I'm off base here.

Nah, the price was always $7.5M. Poile offered both Suter and Weber matching $7.5x7 deals (allegedly) which was pretty responsible. But they both took the giant backdiving deals because they knew the NHL was about to put in rules against it.

 

[Frank Drebin]

Nah, the price was always $7.5M. Poile offered both Suter and Weber matching $7.5x7 deals (allegedly) which was pretty responsible. But they both took the giant backdiving deals because they knew the NHL was about to put in rules against it.

I don't know if a Gms hardball offer has any place in calculations. Perhaps if poile paid closer to actual value (9+) he could have saved his franchise a world of pain?

Anyways, Weber played 10 years and earned 104m. His effective cap hit for penalty purposes should be 10.4m not 7.8

 

[nhlfan9191]

The contract was a cap circumvention contract BECAUSE of those years. Philly never expected him to play them out. That’s the point. You can’t just erase that fact

What’s your point? It was within the rules 10 years ago.

 

[Enoch]

Should have traded up for Chaz. Oh well. I bet he was HIGH on the board.

 

[Shane Diesel]

Weber should've won a Norris. Goddamn old boys club. Goddamn Nick Lidstrom.

 

[Qwijibo]

What’s your point? It was within the rules 10 years ago.

Do some research. The league knew about the loophole and warned teams not to circumvent the cap. They also warned there would be penalties to anyone who circumvented the cap. The contracts had to be approved because they were technically legal. But GM’s who signed them knew they would face sanctions.

 

[HabsQC]

But I have been hearing for years that Montreal was going to trade him back to Nashville for a huge return because of cap recapture…..

So shocked that didn’t happen lol

And we heard for years that it was one of the worst contracts in the league. Knowing that he retires this year, it might have been one of the best contract ever.

 

[Colezuki]

See the post exactly above yours. Paying a player more than their cap hit doesn't necessarily create a cap advantage.

But it did in this case with these contracts? Contracts now have a %higher or lower limit for each year the difference between the first year and last years of his deal is -93%

 

[Name Nameless]

Do some research. The league knew about the loophole and warned teams not to circumvent the cap. They also warned there would be penalties to anyone who circumvented the cap. The contracts had to be approved because they were technically legal. But GM’s who signed them knew they would face sanctions.

I am sorry to say I sometimes miss a downvote-button here.