Speculation: Odd ramifications of a rising cap combined with multiple rebuilds occurring at the same time

[Chainshot]

I would assume one of the teams is going to allow the Habs to clear the final year of Price's contract next season.

 

[The Crypto Guy]

True.

Multiple firsts depending how my teams can’t hit the floor

 

[QuizGuy66]

Easy - sign a random bum to a 1 year $20m contract. Problem solved.

 

[DingDongCharlie]

You could literally sign an AHL veteran to a 1 year deal at whatever amount you needed too. Not that it would ever even come to that. This premise that some rebuilding clubs won't be able to reach the floor is comical. There's always veteran players in the 2nd-3rd week of free agency and now we're going to pretend that some 4th liner is going to pass up millions cause the club is rebuilding?

This should be locked.

 

[crackdown44]

Easy - sign a random bum to a 1 year $20m contract. Problem solved.

Low-key though if you’re Bedard do you just sign 1 year extensions for the max cap hit until the Blackhawks actually need the cap space to be competitive

 

[Flyer lurker]

Montreal may be coming around but they would be the exception considering their cap situation but the other four recent major rebuilds taking place in Anaheim, Chicago, Columbus, and San Jose may face an interesting challenge going into next year. This is going to sound odd but: They might have trouble reaching the floor.

I know anything can happen between now and the beginning of next season but assuming the cap goes up to $95M next season, the floor would be at about ~$71M. Then look at the contracts each of the 4 teams ALREADY have allocated for next year with available roster spots.

View attachment 954491

Seems like a good problem to have right?

But then consider the ELC's these teams may want to add or players due for raises. I made assumptions on who the teams would like to add for next year.

View attachment 954492

Now if you add those contracts to what is already in place, this would be the cap situation going into next season for these four teams.

View attachment 954493

So if nothing changes, Anaheim would have to spend $13.4M between 2 players just to reach the floor!

None of these teams would likely attract top free agents and probably wouldn't want to give players term as they're going to have to give their own players raises in the years to come. Plus with a stacked draft in 26, more teams may be joining the rebuild club leading to an interesting offseason ahead. You might be seeing teams delaying prospects on ELCs or even competing to acquire bad contracts just to reach the floor. I think it will be a great summer to be a free agent or to unload a bad contract.

If an owner is that cheap, there are still players who can count against the cap but are paid by the insurance company. See Ryan Ellis

 

[Drake1588]

I think the majority of commenters here so far have perhaps failed to grasp the severity of the problem.

There are not infinite nhlers. Every team does not have a giant Ltir contract to move, let alone a contract without move protection. The splintering of contracts due to low tax states amplifies the problem, complicates solutions, and is a major source of movement clauses, the final headwind.

The league is in the middle of an expansionary phase however the talent pool recently experienced a pandemic and likely will cause a predictable lull in nhl talent.

We have left a phase of one extreme: where a stagnant cap forced every contending team to employ acuaries to be cap compliant highlighted by Edmonton ending exactly at 0 last year iirc.

And now we have rapidly entered another. A short squeeze of sorts. On player contracts. There is no bad contract. There are only ones that can be moved. Trouba shows that bidding wars will occur for these contracts and that the market is hungry for more. Somebody(ies) will be left without a chair when the music stops.

You're wrong. It IS simple. Sign hockey player(s) for more than they are worth in free agency. You are now compliant.

It's just not a great place to be, as a manager, if you have let yourself ride the floor with so little margin that you now find yourself in that position with a cap spike coming. Yet it is simple to become compliant. Someone will take your money if you have to spend it.

An NHL player is whatever the teams say it is, and if for 18 months the teams say that an NHL player description now includes some AHL/NHL tweeners that help us become cap compliant, or overpaid role players, then the definition will flex to accommodate that, before regressing to the mean before long.

 

[matt trick]

Do you have Kovalenko and Zetterlund included for San Jose? Got to think Grier will be in on a replacement for Granlund (top 6 F), Ceci (4/5 RHD), and Kunin (3rd liner) as well. He’s acquired Tofolli, Wennberg, Walman, Ceci, Liljigren, and Kovalenko in the last 6 months. I don’t think he’ll struggle to find more quality NHLers with deep pockets, lots of futures, and a team that while shit is on the upswing.

 

[NyQuil]

You're wrong. It IS simple. Sign hockey player(s) for more than they are worth in free agency. You are now compliant.

It's just not a great place to be, as a manager, if you have let yourself ride the floor with so little margin that you now find yourself in that position with a cap spike coming. Yet it is simple to become compliant. Someone will take your money if you have to spend it.

An NHL player is whatever the teams say it is, and if for 18 months the teams say that an NHL player description now includes some AHL/NHL tweeners that help us become cap compliant, or overpaid role players, then the definition will flex to accommodate that, before regressing to the mean before long.

It can also set weak standards for performance for your own internal cap structure.

If you overpay someone to hit the floor, it can cascade into overpaying everyone as they exceed that player in performance.

A short term solution can result in a longer term headache.

 

[FiveTacos]

You're wrong. It IS simple. Sign hockey player(s) for more than they are worth in free agency. You are now compliant.

It's just not a great place to be, as a manager, if you have let yourself ride the floor with so little margin that you now find yourself in that position with a cap spike coming. Yet it is simple to become compliant. Someone will take your money if you have to spend it.

I think it's better to acquire a decent player who's overpaid, with limited term, that a team up against it wants to cap dump. Win win. In FA you're probably not only overpaying for a mediocre player willing to go to a rebuilding situation, they're probably squeezing you for even more term.

There's a reason why a number of cap floor teams were in on Trouba, who has a high AAV with only one more year after this one, yet can play at a reasonable level.

 

[Michoulicious]

Can't reach the floor, then you lose your 1st round pick. That simple.

*the sens lose a 1st round pick.

 

[Drake1588]

It can also set weak standards for performance for your own internal cap structure.

If you overpay someone to hit the floor, it can cascade into overpaying everyone as they exceed that player in performance.

A short term solution can result in a longer term headache.

It's definitely not a good place to be, and it's not a decision that will be free of future consequences, but one way or another the 32 GMs need to be compliant on day one of the season. Be it via trades, free agency signings, re-upping a star RFA to a rich deal, or giving a variety of your current RFAs smaller bumps to acknowledge the new cap reality, the teams now riding the current floor are going to have to choose the least damaging option to get to that new floor.

It's not difficult to find a way to spend that money or find takers, but yes, it will have repercussions.

If there is a consolation, it is that GMs of teams whose ownership stipulates a cap floor payroll already know about choosing the least bad option from what is a dog's breakfast. There's nothing palatable about having to operate at the cap floor when 15-20 clubs perennially operate within five percent of the cap ceiling.

 

[Jixer19]

Low-key though if you’re Bedard do you just sign 1 year extensions for the max cap hit until the Blackhawks actually need the cap space to be competitive

Biggest thing with that would be if he got injured severely (*knock on wood*) and lost X guaranteed dollars of a multi year contract vs that one year, safety net and all that

 

[StlBigFly]

You're wrong. It IS simple. Sign hockey player(s) for more than they are worth in free agency. You are now compliant.

It's just not a great place to be, as a manager, if you have let yourself ride the floor with so little margin that you now find yourself in that position with a cap spike coming. Yet it is simple to become compliant. Someone will take your money if you have to spend it.

An NHL player is whatever the teams say it is, and if for 18 months the teams say that an NHL player description now includes some AHL/NHL tweeners that help us become cap compliant, or overpaid role players, then the definition will flex to accommodate that, before regressing to the mean before long.

I believe we will observe; it won’t be that easy.

I don’t believe we are in a situation where cap compliance is in question - as in - there is a worst case scenario where everybody is compliant - Getting to the floor is an achievable goal. As you mention - there is always the last resort of being extremely generous on July 1.

But doing so with any flexibility or respecting the existing developmental depth chart is another thing. These teams will be facing the bottom of the talent barrel - often includes 1 dimensional skaters. The last thing they’ll wanna do is be forced into overpaying talent that blocks or harms developing prospects.

This imo is why contracts like Trouba (and others if they reveal themselves during the year) will soar in value. They allow you to avoid some real bad outcomes. Nyr didn’t realize how much pain they were relieving. They should have charged more.

An example of why the situation has become a problem: reportedly stl was wanting to move Krug to Anaheim however move clause decided no. Krug would have been anahiems 2026 cap floor fix. I’m not anti-move clause, but the proliferation of them on the bigger deals amplifies the current situation.

The league should have addressed this years ago. Some subset of skaters will receive a notable pay cut if they are traded to certain other teams due to huge difference in taxation. Of course they should block a giant financial loss. You can’t let $ enter the equation as an incentivizing factor. It will cause a feedback loop where everybody has clauses and problems can’t be solved. We’re almost there. Troubas deal had a clause and look what they did to their team and Trouba to move him. It’s so hard to move players that teams in giant markets are willing to absolutely destroy their club mid season.

You can’t have both a hard cap and wild differences in tax; take home pay. It prevents teams from being cap compliant while in control because it locks them out of too much of the talent pool, a group who all want move protection so they don’t get a random pay cut. They need to adjust the system before it has to be removed. Either adjust the cap based on the taxation, centralize athlete accounting, or remove the hard cap.

Columbus is 3 mil from the floor and has 9 pending ufas - almost 20 mil. It isn’t a 1 or 2 skater problem. You can’t have your decisions forced for this many decisions. Columbus should yolo for Petterson, sell him that it’s his team, overpay Vancouver a bit.

 

[Volica]

Won’t be an issue really.
There’s guys with uncertain futures in the league still, like Landeskog; that are perfect additions to these teams.

Plus they’re the ones that can raid free agrency giving middle 6 players top 6 money.

 

[Djp]

Montreal may be coming around but they would be the exception considering their cap situation but the other four recent major rebuilds taking place in Anaheim, Chicago, Columbus, and San Jose may face an interesting challenge going into next year. This is going to sound odd but: They might have trouble reaching the floor.

I know anything can happen between now and the beginning of next season but assuming the cap goes up to $95M next season, the floor would be at about ~$71M. Then look at the contracts each of the 4 teams ALREADY have allocated for next year with available roster spots.

View attachment 954491

Seems like a good problem to have right?

But then consider the ELC's these teams may want to add or players due for raises. I made assumptions on who the teams would like to add for next year.

View attachment 954492

Now if you add those contracts to what is already in place, this would be the cap situation going into next season for these four teams.

View attachment 954493

So if nothing changes, Anaheim would have to spend $13.4M between 2 players just to reach the floor!

None of these teams would likely attract top free agents and probably wouldn't want to give players term as they're going to have to give their own players raises in the years to come. Plus with a stacked draft in 26, more teams may be joining the rebuild club leading to an interesting offseason ahead. You might be seeing teams delaying prospects on ELCs or even competing to acquire bad contracts just to reach the floor. I think it will be a great summer to be a free agent or to unload a bad contract.

I dont see cap going up so much in one year.

Maybe they ammend the CBA to allow the teams to strip NMC/NTC to 2 contracts on their team and these can be sold/traded

I'm sure some teams would do large pass thru retentions of $4M to get to the floor

 

[Il Stugotz]

I think there’s plenty of UFAs who will take $4-5 million for one or two years to serve as mentors, get a lot of ice time, and not have their season go past April

 

[madmike77]

As others have noted, at the end of the day there should be enough UFAs that can be signed to expensive one-year deals to fill out the cap. The issue is those deals take up roster spots, which does limit how many developing players can be brought in. It will be a balancing act for the rebuilding teams.

 

[Xoggz22]

Don't see any issue here for Columbus. If the floor is ~$71MM, they have 13 tied up (7F, 4D, 2G) for ~$47MM with the expected re-signing of Olivier and Voronkov and, I assume, Fabbro. Between those three it's likely to be in the range of another $11-12MM and I'm not sure what the bonus structure looks like next year. So... $10-12MM to reach the floor with 6 players to fill the roster. I don't see that being difficult and I don't think they will need to be stupid to get there. Could bring back Kuraly on a similar $ deal for 1-2 years, but they'll be active in the trade market to improve the team, not take on cap dumps. They could certainly push for a high profile UFA, but I don't know that I see it with this team right now. They are also playing very well with a young roster that is inconsistent but showing they have talent and a system that is aggressive. I would think that would potentially attract players as well.

 

[blankall]

Reaching the cap floor isn't hard. Worse case scenario, you throw a little extra cash at UFA you think you can flip at the deadline.

Plus as we see inflation hit NHL contracts, a lot of previously awful contracts will become not so bad. $10 million is what a 70ish point guy will be worth soon. So they'll be teams who will finally be able to move $6-8 million underperforming contracts, and teams will be more likely to take them on and for cheaper. See Trouba.

The inflation should be pretty obvious this year, when every high end UFA starts getting $12-14. million/year.

 

[DJJones]

Ya mid tier guys are going to get paid on short term contracts. Going to have 2nd pairing defenders making 6 million

 

[StreetHawk]

Can't leave out that a few teams, like the ones OP listed, have been bad for 3 straight seasons. Terrible bad. SJ has put up 60, 47, and are on pace for 57 points this season. That's basically an Average of 1/3 of the available points (164 max or 55 per season) per season that they are obtaining. Chicago isn't much better at 59, 52, and on pace for 56.

Whether there is a push from ownership to improve the on ice product (Like, you had Bedard apologize to the Winter classic fans for their performance), we have to see.

Not easy to convince FA to sign when you are like 35 points out of a PO spot. Going to have to make trades and have players waive any trade protection for your team to get any significant improvements. See if those GMs can pull that off.

 

[Buttonwood]

LTIR contracts that are insured could actually save the owner real cash, the team can get to the cap floor but the real cash paid out is less. I'm sure that will be a consideration if the FA market doesn't make sense (CHI has already trying overpaying veteran players with not great results).

 

[StreetHawk]

LTIR contracts that are insured could actually save the owner real cash, the team can get to the cap floor but the real cash paid out is less. I'm sure that will be a consideration if the FA market doesn't make sense (CHI has already trying overpaying veteran players with not great results).

Can't have your cake and eat it too. If the goal is to "tank" for higher draft picks, you can't then expect to see a 56 pace point season result in being able to convince free agents to sign with you. Tried with Guentzal last off-season, but 52 points and 40 points out of WC2 is a tough sell even for what is considered a destination city.

 

[dgibb10]

It will be a good year to try and jettison your cap dumps