Quote:
Originally Posted by transplant99
Tagging restrictions from last year prevented a deal being signed for this year?
Im not sure I understand...or really have no idea what tagging does. The Flames could have Stone on their cap starting July 1 at 11M and not be over the upper limit...nevermind the 10% float they would be allowed. Maybe I completely misunderstand how that works but I dont see how an extension that wouldnt kick in until Monday has anything to do with last years cap compliance.
At any rate, I think it came down to not willing to trade Valimaki AND having to sign Stone to 10 or 11 million over 8 years.
Im really happy BT said no to that, regardless of how good one thinks stone is.
|
Tagging room:
Quote:
Under Article 50.5 of the 2013 NHL Collective Bargaining Agreement, any team that is trying to re-sign a player to a multi-year contract after December 1 needs to have “Payroll Room.” Basically, Payroll Room is the difference between the cap ceiling and the total amount of all Average Annual Values (“AAV”) and bonuses for the team’s one-way contract players, any deferred bonuses applicable during the current season, any buyout amounts, any outstanding offer sheets, any qualifying offers, or any money earned from two-way players while those players are playing in the NHL.[1]
So, if a team wants to re-sign a player, the difference between the team’s Payroll Room and the cap ceiling must exceed the amount of the AAV of the player’s contract. For those who keep up with NHL Free Agency, this isn’t a hard concept: you have to have cap space for the player to acquire him.
But in the world of extensions, it gets a bit trickier. In order to sign a player to an extension, the team needs enough of that difference to be able to afford his AAV this season. However, if the team does not have enough cap space from this difference, then the team may pull from any available cap space received from the expiration of the AAVs of its other players’ contracts at the end of the season so long as the cap space received would accommodate the player’s AAV after re-signing after the space is added to the existing difference in cap space.
For example:
If a team has $2 million in current cap space after Payroll Room is calculated, and that team wants to re-sign a player to a 3-year extension worth $3 million AAV, then it can do so if the team has at least one other player whose contract is worth at least $1 million, and that player’s contract expires at the end of the season. Thus, $2 million in current space + $1 million in expiring space = enough for the new $3 million AAV of the player. This $3 million would then be “tagged.”[2]
|
If Mike stone, Brodie or Frolik had contracts that expired this July 1, I believe the flames would've had enough tagging room to sign Stone to his extension. Having said that, they still wouldn't have been able to pay him without moving out Neal's deal. Imagine this week in terms of offersheets if the flames had 3 million in cap space for next season instead of 13.
Vegas reportedly had to wait until the March 1 tagging room as well, but knew they could get under the cap in the off-season (like they just did) before the Karlsson extension came into effect. Because Neal's term was already looking to be immoveable, Calgary did not have nearly the confidence they'd be able to move the cap pieces necessary to keep stone, tkachuk and sign competent goaltending.
I know it's been beaten to death and the severity of it is seriously depressing to consider going forward, but Neal's contract is absolutely crippling for Calgary.