Sportsnet: NO Grandfathering

[Resolute]

probarbly just give up a first round pick...not a playoff spot!..calm down...imagine that actually happend? which fans would go see their time NOT FIGHTING for anything

A single draft pick is a worthless punishment - especially if the team ends up with one of the better records.

If you want the cap to be honored - especially if the league were to allow the combined salary to float over the cap as long as the paid dollars end up lower - then the punishment has to be severe to ensure comlpiance. I would think forefitting a playoff spot would be extremely effective in preventing such behavior.

That said, the entire line of reasoning is based on an cap rule that I do not believe the NHL will adopt.

 

[LadyStanley]

performance bonuses will probably be counted against the following years cap, as it is the only way to deal with them, IMHO.

And there are apparently will be three different sets of guidelines for setting (individual) bonuses. Forwards would be able to set goals based on goals/assists, TOI, for instance, with defensemen having a different set of measurable things, and goalies, yet a different set.

 

[Resolute]

I would think performance bonuses count against the cap.. if they didn't then.. whoa nelly... sign a star player for the league minimum and give him large bonuses for incredibly easy targets.

The closing of such a loophole is an absolute certanty. Based on how the last rookie cap was destroyed, there is no chance the owners allow for such bonuses to exist.

If teams set their own bonusses, then they will count against the cap.

My speculation on bonusses possibly not counting is based on the suggestion of standardized performance bonusses. If that were to be adopted league wide, one would have to assume they would be a part of the standard players contract. If that were the case, I could possibly see the league allowing bonusses to fall outside of the hard cap, but likely still count against the 54% linked cap.

 

[Street Hawk]

Not many loopholes...

The closing of such a loophole is an absolute certanty. Based on how the last rookie cap was destroyed, there is no chance the owners allow for such bonuses to exist.

If teams set their own bonusses, then they will count against the cap.

My speculation on bonusses possibly not counting is based on the suggestion of standardized performance bonusses. If that were to be adopted league wide, one would have to assume they would be a part of the standard players contract. If that were the case, I could possibly see the league allowing bonusses to fall outside of the hard cap, but likely still count against the 54% linked cap.

To the original poster who wondered about salary levels, I think the best way to describe it would be with an example. If the cap is say 38 million, and your team starts the year with a 36 million dollar roster. So, by the trade deadline (less than 20 games left), can they add a player who made 6 million for the season?

Well, I think it should be yes, because with 20 games left in the season, that player is only due 1.5 million, meaning that the team will "PAY OUT" 37.5 million in salary for the year for their players. That makes the most sense to me.

As for Performance Bonuses, well, I think a team should have to calculate that into their budget.

 

[Egil]

That could open itself up to abuse though ..

You could plan a Stanley Cup run in July UFA season by offering the best stars lower base and playoff performance bonuses and stack a team .. Then pay the piper the following year as lost cap space ..

Trust me teams would exploit this .. and fans might even be willing to support it .. One year you go all out for the CUP .. the next you are in prime entry draft lottery territory.

This isn't an exploit though, as at the end of the day your still capped.

 

[SENSible1*]

This isn't an exploit though, as at the end of the day your still capped.

Just ask the 49ers.