Devils goaltending was always going to be their weakness. Well, that and their inexperience. If they got solid goaltending and build off of this year, they could be scary for a few years to come. That said, it wouldn't shock me if they regress next season.
I just need tampa to make short business of toronto, this series, and then I can go back to hating tampa and their dirtball antics.
Hey, that's the same amount as Carlo's contract.
I know, I know, they aren't going to move him but he'd be such a solution for Buffalo's RD 2nd pair issue.
How is this any different from a luxury tax? If these players are eligible to play, then the cap doesn’t really have any meaning, does it?
It’s not a tax. I don’t know why the article describes it as a penalty either.
That isn't correct. The overage does not count as part of the team's cap hit next season. Rather, the team's upper limit (the cap ceiling, in other words) is reduced by the amount of the overage. So, if the salary cap next season is the currently projected $83.5M, then Boston's cap will be at $79M accounting for the overage.
I have the mechanics of it wrong. But it works out to roughly the same thing for all intents and purposes. They have 4.5mil less to work with because their bonus cap hits are being applied to next season.
Because those contracts are only available to players of a certain age. It's a way to fight "ageism" in the league that is more and more going younger. You never know when a player will hit the wall due to age. This gives teams incentive to sign older players that might not get offers due to their age.
theathletic.com
There are differences, though. As I read the CBA, the club's Upper Limit being lowered means that numbers like the off-season cap, and the bonus cushion, are also lowered for that team, as they are defined as a percentage of the Upper Limit. Meaning that if a team hits a performance bonus overage one season, they will have less flexibility regarding performance bonuses the following season. On the other hand if the overage were a cap charge, those numbers would be unaffected.
I'm guessing the mechanism is written the way it is mostly because of the cap floor, so a team can't use bonuses earned in one year to reach the cap floor the following year.
I used to love the font size feature .... it just isn't as BIG as it used to be !I've used it for years.
If the cap stayed flat, yes (aside from the offseason and following year's performance bonus reduction nuances @dotcommunism noted)
Not necessarily because of the cap floor (such scenario would be rare indeed that a team would sign a contract the year before knowing they may "need" the performance bonuses the following year to reach the cap floor), but as a way to both enable and perhaps entice older players to sign 1-yr deals. It's a way for a player to bet on himself and for a team to "reduce risk" (depending how they structure the deal).
Considering that a team can only have an overage if they're above the cap ceiling, I'd say that's unlikely. You don't really see teams go from above the cap one year to below the floor the next. You especially don't usually see teams planning on doing that.
There are no positional restrictions regarding performance bonuses. Eligible players are:
