Alfie about to sign four year deal!!!!!!

I know you can't pay less than 50% of salary less than the year before, so you can't pay $10M one year, then $2M the next, for a $12M over 2 the most you can front load is $8M and $4M the second year.

I like how they cheated the system here.

The contract, which includes a no-movement clause, pays $4 million in salary in the first year with a $3 million signing bonus, plus $2.1 million for the removal of the option years from his old contract for a total $9.1 million.

Alfredsson will then make $4 million in Year 2 with a $3 million signing bonus for $7 million, a third year salary of $2 million with a $2.5 million signing bonus for $4.5 million, and $1 million in Year 4.

So
2009-10: $4M + $3M + $2.1M
2010-11: $4M + $3M
2011-12: $2M + $2.5M
2012-13: $1M
_________________
Total: $21.6 / 4 = $5.4M Cap hit

ALFIE!!! ALFIE!!!

shabbs wrote:

beedub wrote:For example if the first two years were for say 7 million a season and the last two were for 4 million a season, wouldn't the cap hit for the first two years be 7 million?

No. The cap hit is a constant across the length of the contract. So $22M/4 years = $5.5M cap hit in each of the 4 years. That would have happened no matter how they spread the money. Front loaded, back loaded, side loaded, under loaded, upper loaded, whatever kind of loaded...

Thank you. I just explained this, like, 2 pages back....

Just remember: a player's cap hit for the life of a contract CANNOT change and will always remain constant at one number for the life of the contract. The cap number is always the total amount of the contract divided by the total number of years in the contract -- no ifs, ands, buts, or exceptions. This is one of the founding principles of the new CBA.

That means that a player's salary for a given year means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING when it comes to calculating what his cap hit is. Heatley's cap hit will be a constant $7.5 mil for the next 6 years even though we're paying him $10 mil this year and $5 mil in 2013-14; Spezza's cap will be a constant $7 mil for the next 7 years even though we're paying him $8 mil this year and $4 mil in 2014-15; and Fisher's cap hit will be a constant $4.2 mil even though we're paying him $6 mil this year and $3 mil in 2012-13.

Alfie's new deal (if the numbers currently being reported are correct) will be front- loaded -- I'm guessing something like $7 mil + $7 mil + $4 mil + $4 mil -- but his cap hit will be $5.5 mil over the life of the deal. That can't change, regardless of what Garrioch or anyone else says.

Look up. Alfie's new deal is posted.

Rooney:

Isn't it also true that in terms of front loaded or back loaded contracts, they cannot be less than half of the first half? What I mean is, in the case of Alfie's, for instance, where he's getting $7M for the first 2 years of his 4 yr deal, the last years have to be $4M each instead of like $5 for one year and $3M for the last one, right?

I'm not sure about that. I know that from one year to the next it can't be less than half of the first year. I'll be interested to find out.

mattshock wrote:Look up. Alfie's new deal is posted.

That got posted as I was writing mine.

The point, tho', is not the exact numbers. It's about understanding how the cap functions. Alfie's new deal pays him $9.1 mil this year, and $1 mil four years from now -- but the only thing we really need concern ourselves with, as fans, is that his cap hit for the life of the contract is $5.4 mil for all four of those years. The other numbers are really pretty irrelevant to helping us understand where our team stands, cap-wise.

Anyway, in the end, Alfie's new cap hit is really quite friendly. Overall, that's only $1 mil more than his previous cap hit of $4.338 mil. That puts over total team salary cap figure next year at just over $45 mil -- giving us about $10-15 mil to re-sign Neil (and Kuba, if desired), and pick up a real goalie and/or D. That's a little tight, but not too bad overall.

My guess is Murray will be cautious this coming off-season, however. If the cap is going to decline soon -- the revenues are largely committed this year already, so the cap is not expected to fall for the 2009-10 season, but rather the 2010-11 season, if it falls -- he might stick to short deals so he's not forced (ala Burke) into moving an important player for cap considerations.

Cronenbergfan wrote:Rooney:

Isn't it also true that in terms of front loaded or back loaded contracts, they cannot be less than half of the first half? What I mean is, in the case of Alfie's, for instance, where he's getting $7M for the first 2 years of his 4 yr deal, the last years have to be $4M each instead of like $5 for one year and $3M for the last one, right?

I'm not 100% certain on that one, to be honest, but I'd tend to say no.

I'm positive that a player can't make less than 1/2 one year compared to what he made in previous year.

Looking at Heater, Spezza's, and Fisher's deal -- which start off, respectively, at $10, $8, and $6 mil and end, respectively, at $5, $4, and $3 mil -- or precisely half of the first year of the contract -- it seems like they are structured along the lines you suggest.

But then I look at Alfie's new deal, and I think that there's no set rules for the final year of the contract equaling at least half of the first year. Once you take out all the signing bonuses and the removal of option years, Alfie's base salary is $4, $4, $2, and $1 mil. That structure adheres to the "no player on a contract shall receive less than 50% of what he made the previous year", but it doesn't adhere to the kind of rule you're talking about ("the final year of a player's deal must equal to half or more of the first year").

If, that is, I'm reading you correctly.

Not bad at all. Our salary cap payroll for next year is 44,038,996.

If the cap remains at $56.7, that gives us 12,661,004 to play with.

Re-upping Neil at the same $$ isn't unreasonable, leaving us with $11.561M, Kuba for $4M gets us to $7.561, Elliott at $1M, and we have the space for a D-man. On the other hand, as you said, we could bring up Lee for that ~$1M and spend the money on a goalie, and give Elliott another year in the minors or a backup role.

Or maybe we do both and bring in a top forward. Either way, we have some room to play with next season, and no more key UFAs to sign. Especially no key goalies Swiss goalies, that's for sure.

rooneypoo wrote:

mattshock wrote:Look up. Alfie's new deal is posted.

That got posted as I was writing mine.

The point, tho', is not the exact numbers. It's about understanding how the cap functions. Alfie's new deal pays him $9.1 mil this year, and $1 mil four years from now -- but the only thing we really need concern ourselves with, as fans, is that his cap hit for the life of the contract is $5.4 mil for all four of those years. The other numbers are really pretty irrelevant to helping us understand where our team stands, cap-wise.

Anyway, in the end, Alfie's new cap hit is really quite friendly. Overall, that's only $1 mil more than his previous cap hit of $4.338 mil. That puts over total team salary cap figure next year at just over $45 mil -- giving us about $10-15 mil to re-sign Neil (and Kuba, if desired), and pick up a real goalie and/or D. That's a little tight, but not too bad overall.

My guess is Murray will be cautious this coming off-season, however. If the cap is going to decline soon -- the revenues are largely committed this year already, so the cap is not expected to fall for the 2009-10 season, but rather the 2010-11 season, if it falls -- he might stick to short deals so he's not forced (ala Burke) into moving an important player for cap considerations.

That was just bad management though. Any deals signed before the cap hit goes down would be subject to the grandfather rule, no?

As far as I know the only grandfathering was with deals like Jagr's. I think now that the Cap CBA is in place you are stuck figuring out how to make it work. I think the problem comes with players making the Cap player Max (Are there any) that would then be over the percentage of the Cap if it drops.

mattshock wrote:Not bad at all. Our salary cap payroll for next year is 44,038,996.

If the cap remains at $56.7, that gives us 12,661,004 to play with.

Re-upping Neil at the same $$ isn't unreasonable, leaving us with $11.561M, Kuba for $4M gets us to $7.561, Elliott at $1M, and we have the space for a D-man. On the other hand, as you said, we could bring up Lee for that ~$1M and spend the money on a goalie, and give Elliott another year in the minors or a backup role.

Or maybe we do both and bring in a top forward. Either way, we have some room to play with next season, and no more key UFAs to sign. Especially no key goalies Swiss goalies, that's for sure.

Not that I have a problem with Kuba, at all, but if Murray does his job Kuba wont be back here and we will give that 4 mil, plus 3 more to a D man. Everyone knows where I am going with this! GET HIM NOW RATHER THAN LATER!

I have faith in Murray. If it can be done, he'll get it done.

Cap'n Clutch wrote:As far as I know the only grandfathering was with deals like Jagr's. I think now that the Cap CBA is in place you are stuck figuring out how to make it work. I think the problem comes with players making the Cap player Max (Are there any) that would then be over the percentage of the Cap if it drops.

Yashin's too... who you ask is that, he used to play for the Senators and we traded him for Chara, Spezza, and Mckault(sp) At this point, Mckault would have been fair trade haha.

They've made some doozies. At least Oleg Kvasha got a (bad) rap made after him...

Neely4Life wrote:

Cap'n Clutch wrote:As far as I know the only grandfathering was with deals like Jagr's. I think now that the Cap CBA is in place you are stuck figuring out how to make it work. I think the problem comes with players making the Cap player Max (Are there any) that would then be over the percentage of the Cap if it drops.

Yashin's too... who you ask is that, he used to play for the Senators and we traded him for Chara, Spezza, and Mckault(sp) At this point, Mckault would have been fair trade haha.

I don't think Yashin's contract was grandfathered ... the buyout hits their cap. Jagr's contract was grandfathered because Washington was paying half his salary ... something no longer allowed.

It was also grandfathered because his salary was over the maximum allowed for a single player (under the new CBA)

504Heater wrote:

That was just bad management though. Any deals signed before the cap hit goes down would be subject to the grandfather rule, no?

As far as I'm aware, there's no grandfathering or flexibility when it comes to these things. If the salary cap dropped to $40 mil next year (unlikely, but just by way of example), we'd have to become cap compliant by moving salary, no ifs, ands, or buts.

That's why some of these ridiculously long, expensive contracts are so irresponsible. If the cap drops significantly for an extended period of time, there literally might not be a market for guys like Brian Campbell, who, good as he is, is not worth $7+ mil dollars. Same goes for Briere and Drury. I really hope the NHL looks at re-tooling aspects of the CBA; specifically, I hope they make it so that two teams can pay parts of one player's salary. That would help prevent a number of potential problems down the road.

We're going to learn a lot of new things about how to, and how not to, sign players in the next couple of years if the cap goes down significantly. Bad signings will rise to the top quickly because they will cripple teams, forcing them to move cheaper players because no one can accommodate the more expensive salary and still ice a competitive team (imagine having close to a 1/3rd of your team's salary invested in Huet and Campbell?). Hopefully, if that happens, it will teach GMs not to sign players for ridiculous amounts for long terms. Of course, that was what the salary cap was supposed to do in the first place...

Laker wrote:

Neely4Life wrote:

Cap'n Clutch wrote:As far as I know the only grandfathering was with deals like Jagr's. I think now that the Cap CBA is in place you are stuck figuring out how to make it work. I think the problem comes with players making the Cap player Max (Are there any) that would then be over the percentage of the Cap if it drops.

Yashin's too... who you ask is that, he used to play for the Senators and we traded him for Chara, Spezza, and Mckault(sp) At this point, Mckault would have been fair trade haha.

I don't think Yashin's contract was grandfathered ... the buyout hits their cap. Jagr's contract was grandfathered because Washington was paying half his salary ... something no longer allowed.

The league max was 7 mil when the new CBA was signed, and even with the roll back in salary of 24%, Yashin was still making 7.8 mil I believe. If I'm wrong, then, well I'm wrong, haha, but thats why his contract was granfathered in.