AHL- Apolyton Hockey League 08/09 (II): Game On

[Kontiki]

Ottawa is going to be in the market for another goalie. I'm not sure what their salary cap situation is, though.

[snoopy369]

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/cap-central/

Not particularly great, $3m or so free - adding either of Chicago's goalies would almost certainly require Chicago to take a portion of the salary (how does that work in the NHL?).

[Flubber]

Originally posted by snoopy369

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/cap-central/

Not particularly great, $3m or so free - adding either of Chicago's goalies would almost certainly require Chicago to take a portion of the salary (how does that work in the NHL?).

I'm not sure but it should be prorated for how much of the season remains I would think. Ottawa is just such a team that seems to have a goaltending need and who may be willing to spend now. They probably still see themselves as a potentially elite team if they had a top-flite keeper. Colorado also may be such a team-- what their cap situation??

[snoopy369]

You can click on that link just as easily as I can

I was more asking about if a team acquiring a player gets his whole cap hit, gets only the non-bonus cap hit, or what, and if the giving team can pay cash to offset some of the receiving team's cap hit (other sports leagues have variations on these options, NFL, NBA, etc.) Of course it will be prorated for games.

[notyoueither]

The new CBA no longer allows teams to pay parts of salaries (and absorb cap hit) for players traded away.

In a normal season under the 05 CBA there is a cushion for bonuses. You can go 10% (?) over the cap in potential bonuses (any actual paid overage being charged to the next season's cap).

This year is different. Since the NHLPA has the option of reopening the CBA, the league can't assume this CBA for next year as far as the bonus spillover provision is concerned, so the 10% cushion is not in effect.

Some young players have been sent to the minors due to the bonus problem (Ryan) and it likely kept some vets out (Shanahan).

[Asher]

Originally posted by snoopy369

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/cap-central/

Not particularly great, $3m or so free - adding either of Chicago's goalies would almost certainly require Chicago to take a portion of the salary (how does that work in the NHL?).

http://www.nhlnumbers.com is the best salary site.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by notyoueither
The new CBA no longer allows teams to pay parts of salaries (and absorb cap hit) for players traded away.

In a normal season under the 05 CBA there is a cushion for bonuses. You can go 10% (?) over the cap in potential bonuses (any actual paid overage being charged to the next season's cap).

This year is different. Since the NHLPA has the option of reopening the CBA, the league can't assume this CBA for next year as far as the bonus spillover provision is concerned, so the 10% cushion is not in effect.

Some young players have been sent to the minors due to the bonus problem (Ryan) and it likely kept some vets out (Shanahan).

I understand the rationale for not allowing overages but I don't understand why they could not allow parties to "dump" a player but still pay a portion of the salary. It seems like it would allow some of the higher priced folks to actually stay in the league a little longer instead of being sent to minors so their salary "doesn't count"---

Now it seems like some people are getting "priced out of the league" even in situations where on talent alone they should stick around

[Sparrowhawk]

Couldn't those same players agree to take a salary cut if it means staying in the league?

I have little sympathy for players or owners in this situation, before the lockout I had almost stopped watching NHL Hockey because of some of the rediculous salaries, during and after the lockout I had some hope of sanity returning to the league but it seems that has pretty much gone out the window once again.

I would think if a player wanted to play, they could accept a lesser salary to play if their play didn't warrant paying htem the contract amount. Do I think any player will do this? Likely not, because how could a player who signed for 4 million a year be expected to only make 2 million a year....I mean, how would he feed his kids!

/me

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Flubber


I understand the rationale for not allowing overages but I don't understand why they could not allow parties to "dump" a player but still pay a portion of the salary. It seems like it would allow some of the higher priced folks to actually stay in the league a little longer instead of being sent to minors so their salary "doesn't count"---

Now it seems like some people are getting "priced out of the league" even in situations where on talent alone they should stick around

The idea is that teams that sign bad contracts need to be punished for it. The best punishment is that they have to live with the bad contracts.

There is a way though. It is allowed to put a vet on waivers and then recall him. If the player is claimed off of re-entry waivers then the original team pays half the salary and takes half the cap hit. In this case the team still pays and gets nothing in return. Not even a seventh rounder. Zero reward for a bad contract.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Sparrowhawk
Couldn't those same players agree to take a salary cut if it means staying in the league?

Contracts can't be renegotiated under the NHL's CBA. I don't know if that is at the insistence of the NHLPA or the owners.

I have little sympathy for players or owners in this situation, before the lockout I had almost stopped watching NHL Hockey because of some of the rediculous salaries, during and after the lockout I had some hope of sanity returning to the league but it seems that has pretty much gone out the window once again.

I think it is better now. You don't have teams pushing $100 million in salaries with a 3rd or 4th line centre who could play 1st line on half the teams in the league.

The salaries now are directly linked to the revenues of the league. If people are willing to pay higher ticket prices, the salaries will go up. If enough people want to watch on TV and the league gets better TV deals, the salaries will go up. Top end salaries are no longer completely divorced from reality.

I would think if a player wanted to play, they could accept a lesser salary to play if their play didn't warrant paying htem the contract amount. Do I think any player will do this? Likely not, because how could a player who signed for 4 million a year be expected to only make 2 million a year....I mean, how would he feed his kids!

If the contract is signed, he will be paid regardless. The players have no-cut contracts. They may be paid millions to ride the bus in the AHL, but they will be paid the millions they signed for (if on a one-way deal).

If the contract is up, then the player is completely free to sign for the league minimum if he wants. Shanahan could be making a couple million and play right now. I am sure the Canucks would welcome the veteran scoring. However, Shanahan wants to play for the Rangers and only the Rangers. The Rangers are at less than $1 million cap space. I guess he isn't willing to sign for what they can afford.

[Asher]

Flames come back from a 3-0 deficit with 5 straight goals to win 5-3.

[mrboo123]

Originally posted by Asher
Flames come back from a 3-0 deficit with 5 straight goals to win 5-3.

And I get a hat trick from it. Yet you still had the better night in the auction league.

[Asher]

Iginla's hattrick is the only production you got, is why.

Iginla

[snoopy369]

Iginla

[Flubber]

Originally posted by snoopy369
Iginla

As a Flames fan it was great to see him show up in a big way to lead the team to a win. He had not done that yet this season.

Plus it seems that Kipper kept the Flames in the game in the first despite the Flames being badly outplayed. Thats what a goalie should do for you from time to time-- allow you to win a game you don't really deserve