[News] Blackhawks will have $3.07 million in bonus overages for next season

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

If they trade Hossa or he is taken in an expansion draft, and he retires early, they and the the team that acquires him would be subjected to the recapture penalties.

Pretty much makes him unmoveable IMO, but the Panthers did trade for Luongo despite the potential of cap recapture penalties with his contract.

Given the structure of Luongo's contract, the recapture penalties for the Panthers are relatively minimal. Really they are looking at Luongo retiring in the 2019 off-season, which would come with a 1.3M cap hit for 3 years. If Luongo retires after that, the Panthers effectively receive no penalty.

The Canucks on the other hand will receive a 2.4M cap hit for 3 years if Luongo retires in the 2019 off-season, a 4.3M cap hit for 2 year if Luongo retires in the 2020 off-season or a remarkably 8.5M cap hit for a year if he retires in the 2021 off-season which would just be hysterical.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Meh, I don't think anybody expected the Hawks to remain elite forever. Not even the Hawks. Like most contenders, they made some deals for short-term gain and keeping the core together at the expense of long-term cap pain. Unlike other contenders who make those trade-offs, it paid off for the Hawks with three Cups. And they'll still have a good - though probably not great - team for the next five seasons.

The NHL is a cyclical league. Not sure how the Hawks could have really handled this much better and still have their three Cups.

Precisely, and its not like the dream is over and they suck again, they're still likely to be highly competitive for a number of years yet and with 3 cups under their belts already everything else is gravy.

[thefoss1957]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

You think Seabrook would waive his NMC to be exposed for the expansion draft?

I had forgotten that the new contract had the NMC...the old contract only had a limited NTC...

[shadowlord]

I think Hossa's contract was signed under a previous CBA, does capture-recapture even apply? Since capture-recapture didn't exist when the contract was signed, the GM wouldn't have been able to take that factor into consideration.

Imagine, we sign Johnny and Mony to big dollar 8-year contracts now, and then in X years time, the rules change.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

If they trade Hossa or he is taken in an expansion draft, and he retires early, they and the the team that acquires him would be subjected to the recapture penalties.

No they wouldn't. Starting in 16-17 his salary is lower than his cap hit which means any team that acquired him wouldn't accrue any type of benefit which means no recapture for them.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by shadowlord

I think Hossa's contract was signed under a previous CBA, does capture-recapture even apply? Since capture-recapture didn't exist when the contract was signed, the GM wouldn't have been able to take that factor into consideration.

Imagine, we sign Johnny and Mony to big dollar 8-year contracts now, and then in X years time, the rules change.

In X year's time, Monahan will be 29 and Gaudreau will be 30. Not too worried about it.

And to answer your question: yes.

[Finger Cookin]

Originally Posted by shadowlord

I think Hossa's contract was signed under a previous CBA, does capture-recapture even apply? Since capture-recapture didn't exist when the contract was signed, the GM wouldn't have been able to take that factor into consideration.

Imagine, we sign Johnny and Mony to big dollar 8-year contracts now, and then in X years time, the rules change.

The whole point of cap recapture penalties in the new CBA was to target the back diving contracts of the previous CBA. And the new rules were agreed to by the league and the NHLPA, collectively. Everyone agreed to the changed rules.

[getbak]

Cap recapture only applies to contracts signed under the old CBA. The current CBA changed the rules to make those sorts of deep back-diving contracts impossible to sign.

[Dajazz]

Uhm.

Isn't this a good problem to have - people overperforming?