Question about CBA

[Shoeless]

It seems like in the next week or so there will a change to the CBA relating to the signing of players over the age of 35 which might be why some guys like Sundin, Sakic, Selanne are not deciding.

I don\'t pretend to understand what could go down here but it seems to me that the cap hit might be less for guys like this to sign.

Anyone got a handle on this?

[peekNpoke]

Its my understanding that it has to do with performance bonus money and if a player should retire.

The nhlpa has the ability to say that this year is the last year of this cba and until they confirm that they want it to go the full length of the term these bonus monies cannot be defered into the following year. They must be part of the current years cap.

Now I think this only affects selanne because anaheim is above the cap as it is. The other guys I don\'t see this as being the critical reason why they haven\'t signed.

[Stephane Richer]

That\'s my understanding also Peek\'nPoke. Shanahan is also in the same situation as Selanne I believe. FzUsher explained this pretty well a little while ago on this Forum. See his reply here:
http://www.dobberhockey.com/componen...41581/catid,6/

[MXHockey]

What counts against the cap?

-Players who have been on the Active Roster. Some may be inactive now but the time spent on the Active Roster is used to calculate the prorated cap hit.

-Players on IR and Long Term IR.

-Buyouts

-Retired players with contracts signed when aged 35 or over

-Bonuses count against the cap if met. If the bonuses are met and pushes the team\'s Cap Hit over the upper limit, the overage is added on to the following year\'s Cap Hit.

-------------------------------------------------------
Shoeless, the above is from NHL numbers dot com.

http://www.nhlnumbers.com/faq.php

I think what may be happening is the league is taking a good look at the sensibility behind players over 35 who retire while still under contract hurting their former teams who end up taking the cap hit anyways.

Having teams take a cap hit for players over 35 who retire isn\'t helping any of the franchises and can\'t be helping any of the older players sign deals longer than 1-2yrs.

What does make sense is: If a player is over 35 and under contract and then retires - that there is no cap hit against the team.

This is part of the reason Jagr left for the KHL, as he couldnt get a long term deal. ON the flip side why would teams risk a long term deal with any player over 35 with the cap implications if that player does end up retiring.

Not sure if this answers your question.

PS - If I\'ve misinterpreted what the nhlnumbers site is saying or have this wrong someone please correct me.

Cheers.

[peekNpoke]

MolsonX,

You would be 100% correct if this year the nhlpa didn\'t have (or decides to decline) the option of opening up the current cba after the next season.

Stephane Richer\'s link, to fzusher\'s comments explain that until the nhlpa decide if they want to continue with the cba as is, then this year is considered the last year, and in the last year the bonuses must be accounted for.

(I knew I read it somewhere on this site - thanks for the link SR and the explaination FZ)


Regarding the comments about it hurting the teams that sign 35+ players, I think it makes sense. Would you rather put your money on old guys, or invest it into the younger (future) players. The new cba has shifted the thinking and direction of the gm\'s.

There were too many old guys that were not performing but had big contracts in the old cba. It would always be justified by saying that they were great team leaders but the production mostly didn\'t justify the salaries they were making. And guys getting big dollars had to play or else it would look bad on the gm\'s. In the end the general case was that the young players/prospects took a back seat and played 4th line minutes or sat in a press box.

I agree that it probably stopped many teams from offering Jagr a two year deal. But it doesn\'t look to be stopping them from offering Sundin (vancouver) a two year deal.

I guess it comes down to how strongly they feel a player will fulfill the full term of a multi year deal if they are over 35.