[CP Story] RFArmageddon

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Your calculation of Flames cap room assumes a 22 man roster. My point is they have less room than that, specifically by the amount equal to a #7 defenseman.

I didn't look at the other teams so I don't know if their cap room would be any less vs. just taking the number from CapFriendly.

For sure.

But 800K either way doesn't really change the point. They're already short with the capfriendly number as it stands.

The point of the whole thing is the majority of the big RFAs have to be signed by 10-16 days into the season or they won't be signed at what they are likely asking.

Adding or subtracting $800K from Calgary is kind of moot.

[bubbsy]

Im confused. I thought that the caphit is the total contract value divided by the term (# of years).

I had just assumed that nylanders first year bump was to get $ he would have lost due to only playing a prorated season.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

Im confused. I thought that the caphit is the total contract value divided by the term (# of years).

I had just assumed that nylanders first year bump was to get $ he would have lost due to only playing a prorated season.

Gross up mechanism for RFAs that sign late contracts.

Have a look at Nylander's capfriendly https://www.capfriendly.com/players/william-nylander

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Bingo

For sure.

But 800K either way doesn't really change the point. They're already short with the capfriendly number as it stands.

The point of the whole thing is the majority of the big RFAs have to be signed by 10-16 days into the season or they won't be signed at what they are likely asking.

Adding or subtracting $800K from Calgary is kind of moot.

I hear you and that is impacting a lot of teams. Thing is, Calgary doesn't have room to sign Tkachuk to an $8+ million contract under the current conditions (assuming season started) especially when you consider Treliving would want to keep some room for the deadline.

So whether it Frolik, a defenseman or something minor a la Jankowski or Czarnik, I think you have to assume Flames are making a move before the season which changes the dymamic on the available $'s for Tkachuk.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

Im confused. I thought that the cap hit is the total contract value divided by the term (# of years).

I had just assumed that nylanders first year bump was to get $ he would have lost due to only playing a prorated season.

It works the opposite way - and he didn't lose any dollars.

They take your salary for the year - let's say $6M as an example - and then the number of games you're playing - let's say 3/4 of the season - and then they reverse pro-rate it and say that getting $6M for 60 games is the same as getting $8M for 80 games (even though you were never getting $8m and you would still have gotten $6M if you played the entire season).

That's why his AAV went up for the first year. And that's why I argued that it isn't real money. In the example above, the player still gets their $6M, regardless of the number of games played. The league does it this way so that teams can't cheat and slide in some cap circumvention by letting a player sit for some games.

For example, let's say you only had $6M of cap space, but the player wants $8M per year. If you pro-rated the way you were suggesting, all a team would have to do is wait 20 games to sign the player, then the $8M would be pro-rated down to $6M for the first year, at which point the team has artificially improved their cap.

Doing it this way, it is a detriment to the team to have the player sit, because the cap hit actually goes up in the first year. This system is much better because it protects players and really punishes the team to have the player sit out for a while.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I hear you and that is impacting a lot of teams. Thing is, Calgary doesn't have room to sign Tkachuk to an $8+ million contract under the current conditions (assuming season started) especially when you consider Treliving would want to keep some room for the deadline.

So whether it Frolik, a defenseman or something minor a la Jankowski or Czarnik, I think you have to assume Flames are making a move before the season which changes the dymamic on the available $'s for Tkachuk.

Yes, but we can't possibly know what that move would be, nor how much it would save. So Bingo's number is close enough, and makes the point he is trying to make.

[Bingo]

First mistake I found myself is that Boston and Vancouver already have 23 players signed ... so their "overage" has to be reduced by a replacement level salary.

Doesn't change the fact that they will go over, but they're closer to Calgary and the $1M mark than they appear.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Yes, but we can't possibly know what that move would be, nor how much it would save. So Bingo's number is close enough, and makes the point he is trying to make.

I'm not attempting to dispute the accuracy of the number To me it's more of a bright line - enough cap space or not?

Without enough cap room to sign Tkachuk currently, there isn't really an in season countdown on signing Tkachuk. As Bingo points out, you deduct Frolik from the Flames cap, and the situation is essentially solved.

IMO there is one thing you avoid at all costs. Starting the season without Tkachuk signed, and not having the cap room to sign him. Because I don't really believe in the "Treliving has a trade in his hip pocket" that he can just whip out as soon as Tkachuk signs.

So until Tkachuk is signed, I'm more interested in how much cap room Treliving is going to free up. If it's a relatively small amount, then Bingo's scenario could be very relevant. It's pretty fascinating and it's really only the parties at the table that know how far apart they are.

Of course you could sign Tkachuk tomorrow, and work on the cap situation until the start of the season. That isn't ideal IMO, but options are limited at end of August.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I'm not attempting to dispute the accuracy of the number To me it's more of a bright line - enough cap space or not?

Without enough cap room to sign Tkachuk currently, there isn't really an in season countdown on signing Tkachuk. As Bingo points out, you deduct Frolik from the Flames cap, and the situation is essentially solved.

IMO there is one thing you avoid at all costs. Starting the season without Tkachuk signed, and not having the cap room to sign him. Because I don't really believe in the "Treliving has a trade in his hip pocket" that he can just whip out as soon as Tkachuk signs.

So until Tkachuk is signed, I'm more interested in how much cap room Treliving is going to free up. If it's a relatively small amount, then Bingo's scenario could be very relevant. It's pretty fascinating and it's really only the parties at the table that know how far apart they are.

Of course you could sign Tkachuk tomorrow, and work on the cap situation until the start of the season. That isn't ideal IMO, but options are limited at end of August.

If they move Frolik they have more than enough room no doubt. But on top of that the basically hand the Tkachuk camp the ability to sit out October and November.

I'm not saying he has a Frolik deal in his hip pocket, but it's possible they have options but they don't wan to excercize one before getting Tkachuk signed.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Bingo

If they move Frolik they have more than enough room no doubt. But on top of that the basically hand the Tkachuk camp the ability to sit out October and November.

I'm not saying he has a Frolik deal in his hip pocket, but it's possible they have options but they don't wan to excercize one before getting Tkachuk signed.

Yeah I kind of thought about that too. The idea that keeping his actual cap space opaque could be a bit of a bargaining strategy. But it’s risky too, since no GM is giving Treliving some marker that he gets to cash in when he wants. If he does have options, none are carved in stone.

[McG]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Snip...

As Bingo points out, you deduct Frolik from the Flames cap, and the situation is essentially solved.

Because I don't really believe in the "Treliving has a trade in his hip pocket" that he can just whip out as soon as Tkachuk signs.

I don’t think that Treliving has a good trade in his back pocket, but I bet that he could easily have any number of bad trades from a flames perspective available from a few phone calls.

When Chucky signs, I think that the closer it is to the first day where the cap counts, the likelihood of a bad flames trade (I.e. salary dump) increases.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Yeah I kind of thought about that too. The idea that keeping his actual cap space opaque could be a bit of a bargaining strategy. But it’s risky too, since no GM is giving Treliving some marker that he gets to cash in when he wants. If he does have options, none are carved in stone.

Yeah exactly ... it's a bold move, but it's possible.

If he clears the decks he hands Tkachuk the room to hold out longer. If he keeps it murky Tkachuk will have to wonder.

He can make the argument that he had a Brodie for a top six worked out but it fell through, so now he's less driven to move Frolik. Valimaki getting hurt takes away the ease of moving Brodie.

Still thinking one of them have to go, but maybe not yet.

[SebC]

How long can the players wait before the threat of an offer sheet subsides? I think that's another factor that will hurt them if they wait too long.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by SebC

How long can the players wait before the threat of an offer sheet subsides? I think that's another factor that will hurt them if they wait too long.

Aren't we down to budget conscious teams, rebuilding (terrible) teams and clubs that only have space for their own hold outs though?

I guess Toronto could get fed up with Marner and offer sheet Tkachuk, but that would be surprising.

[Slanter]

If I understand this correctly, the whole premise here is that RFA players who hold out for part of the season still expect to be paid their full annual salary in that season.

If that is what RFAs are expecting, I'd like everyone to acknowledge the colossal stupidity (to borrow an apt Burke quote) of what the Leafs did with the Nylander contract. By setting that precedent, they essentially eliminated a major point of pressure that a team could exert on an RFA: the loss of wages for, you know, not doing your job.

I think the way the Leafs handled that contract negotiation was horrible, spineless, and frankly an affront to all of us that work for their paycheck.

But there are some bonuses: gave me another reason to hate the Leafs, and so far it doesn't look like it's working out too well for them.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Slanter

If I understand this correctly, the whole premise here is that RFA players who hold out for part of the season still expect to be paid their full annual salary in that season.

If that is what RFAs are expecting, I'd like everyone to acknowledge the colossal stupidity (to borrow an apt Burke quote) of what the Leafs did with the Nylander contract. By setting that precedent, they essentially eliminated a major point of pressure that a team could exert on an RFA: the loss of wages for, you know, not doing your job.

I think the way the Leafs handled that contract negotiation was horrible, spineless, and frankly an affront to all of us that work for their paycheck.

But there are some bonuses: gave me another reason to hate the Leafs, and so far it doesn't look like it's working out too well for them.

The real bottom line is that neither side can afford to have a hold out on an expensive RFA.

If a team has boat loads of cap space there is little change ot the landscape, and you can see that in Colorado and Columbus' case.

But for every other team/RFA negotiation there isn't much room before the whole contract has to be scrapped a new bridge deal discussed in order to fit this season.

Pressure on both sides to play less of a waiting game and get to a best offer in camp.

[Split98]

Originally Posted by Slanter

If I understand this correctly, the whole premise here is that RFA players who hold out for part of the season still expect to be paid their full annual salary in that season.

If that is what RFAs are expecting, I'd like everyone to acknowledge the colossal stupidity (to borrow an apt Burke quote) of what the Leafs did with the Nylander contract. By setting that precedent, they essentially eliminated a major point of pressure that a team could exert on an RFA: the loss of wages for, you know, not doing your job.

I think the way the Leafs handled that contract negotiation was horrible, spineless, and frankly an affront to all of us that work for their paycheck.

But there are some bonuses: gave me another reason to hate the Leafs, and so far it doesn't look like it's working out too well for them.

I think Dubas will be thought of as worse for the franchise than John Ferguson, Jr. was. He talks with confidence and he's clearly smart, so I think fans have hope... but I'm looking at what he's done, and very little of it looks good.

[Bleeding Red]

Originally Posted by Split98

I think Dubas will be thought of as worse for the franchise than John Ferguson, Jr. was. He talks with confidence and he's clearly smart, so I think fans have hope... but I'm looking at what he's done, and very little of it looks good.

Would have to think that Shanahan has a say in everything Dubas does. No?

[Split98]

Originally Posted by Bleeding Red

Would have to think that Shanahan has a say in everything Dubas does. No?

I think that was one of the factors between the Hunter vs Dubas decision - so I definitely don't doubt it!

Looking 5 years from now I think things'll be pretty rough in Leaf land if no one's wearing a ring. So if they're paired, that'll drag Shanny with him.

[blender]

Haven't read the whole thread so apologies if this has been covered.
Has anyone added up all the cap space available league-wide and compared it to a reasonable estimate of what all these unsigned players are going to cost?

In another thread someone suggested there simply wasn't enough cap space league-wide. Is this the case, and if so have the GMs mismanaged themselves and the league into a corner whereby there are good players unable to play?

Could it lead to a compliance buyout window or some sort of intervention?

Just thinking out loud, but seems like there is a fundamental problem developing.