[Signing] Tampa signs Palat (5 yrs, $5.3 mil AAV)

[sureLoss]

Craig Morgan @craigsmorgan
Ondrej Palat (T.B) has settled:
17-18: 5600
18-19: 6855
19-20: 5300
20-21: 3445
21-22: 5300

Elliotte Friedman @FriedgeHNIC
Rumblings TB and Ondrej Palat working on five-year extension at a little over a $5M AAV

Leaves Tampa with about $3 mil in cap space with 13f 7d and 2g signed

[Knut]

That's a solid contract right there

[Gaudfather]

If that holds up it is another solid signing by Stevie Y.

[PlayfulGenius]

It's odd the variance between years... any idea why they'd set it up that way?

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by PlayfulGenius

It's odd the variance between years... any idea why they'd set it up that way?

lockout insurance. INstead of having the value decline in the final year when there may be a lockout, it declines the year prior and likely has the bulk of the final year salary in july 1st bonus which would have to be paid out even if there was no season.

that's my guess.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

lockout insurance. INstead of having the value decline in the final year when there may be a lockout, it declines the year prior and likely has the bulk of the final year salary in july 1st bonus which would have to be paid out even if there was no season.

that's my guess.

Aye, you can only lose so much money to work stoppages before players begin taking steps to protect themselves. Ryan O'Reilly's deal in Buffalo is like 90% signing bonuses paid July 1 with actual salary during the year around $1M. McDavid's new contract also does something similar.

[Imported_Aussie]

Very solid deal here, good 50-60 point player that has played well in playoffs and fits well in their forward corps. Comes off a bridge deal and gets a raise and a good amount of term, but the deal still fits well with Tampa's structure, locked in long term like Stamkos, Johnson and Killorn, and at a cap hit they can work around (especially with Kucherov needing a new deal in 2 years)

This deal is a good way to illustrate why it isn't in Bennett's interest to sign long term.
Palat signed a 3 year bridge off his ELC (10M/3, and had much better numbers) and then gets 2M more on his next deal.
Bennett, having lower numbers would command less on a bridge, but would be betting he can get a bigger raise in 3 years. Especially considering his higher potential value as a centre

[SebC]

Interestingly, by agreeing to these "lockout protection deals", the NHL's own bargaining is being weakened, so there could be a compounding effect through the next CBA negotiations.

[MarkGio]

Yup. I betcha a lot of players will be fine with a work stoppage this next time around. Bettman simply locked the players out too many times rather than using negotiation tactics. The owners can only play hardball for so long

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

Yup. I betcha a lot of players will be fine with a work stoppage this next time around. Bettman simply locked the players out too many times rather than using negotiation tactics. The owners can only play hardball for so long

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but he has to lock them out otherwise, in all likelihood, they'll strike.

[SebC]

Like Yzerman, I find that AAV to be palatable.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by SebC

Interestingly, by agreeing to these "lockout protection deals", the NHL's own bargaining is being weakened, so there could be a compounding effect through the next CBA negotiations.

There's a thousand or more players under contract in the NHL. I don't think <20 players with these lockout protected contracts is going to amount to a hill of beans in the next CBA.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by MarkGio

Yup. I betcha a lot of players will be fine with a work stoppage this next time around. Bettman simply locked the players out too many times rather than using negotiation tactics. The owners can only play hardball for so long

As EE noted above, there are far more players who will be without any sort of lockout protection the next time around. I foresee it being far more difficult to convince the rank-and-file to forfeit a full year's earnings in a short career for the sake of—what, exactly? There is no way the owners will now agree to abolish the cap, and the split in HRR can probably only move a maximum of a single percentage-point in one direction or the other. What would be the rallying cry for the hundreds of NHL players who have real life stakes in a lockout?

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

There's a thousand or more players under contract in the NHL. I don't think <20 players with these lockout protected contracts is going to amount to a hill of beans in the next CBA.

How many more will have them when it's time for negotiations though? And from the league's side of things, their sunk cost is measured in dollars, not players. A top paid players with a multi-million signing bonus outweighs an ELC scrub without one.

I think it could have an impact. Not will, but could.

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by Toonage

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but he has to lock them out otherwise, in all likelihood, they'll strike.

He WILL lock them out if a contract isn't settled by season start. Too much risk of a strike during mid season, which leaves them vulnerable and costs them a lot with their networks and arena contracts.

I'm sure the P.A has been helping all their members structure lock-out protected contracts. It's no coincidence that a lot of them are carrying them.

[powderjunkie]

Crazy question: could the P.A. create a managed lock-out fund, where all players could pay (ie. defer a portion of their income before taxes) into? If/when a lockout comes, they can receive the funds. If there is no lockout before they retire, they receive the income in the years following retirement (almost certainly at a lower tax rate).


Players will hate it because they are too dumb to understand escrow, so they are almost certainly too dumb to understand tax difference strategies. But, it would improve their bargaining position (theoretically increasing future income) and lower absolute tax burden (absolutely increasing total income).

[SebC]

That sounds almost like unilaterally deferring income... possibly fradulent?

[Mister Yamoto]

You can count on a lockout in 2020.

Why are players insisting on getting lockout protection? It's because everyone in the business already knows there is gonna be a lockout.

Really bad move by the GMs/owners to give it out.

[Sylvanfan]

Tampa is really raking advantage of no state income tax.

[MarkGio]

Originally Posted by SebC

That sounds almost like unilaterally deferring income... possibly fradulent?

What about banked overtime?