Value of: Recapture penalty
- Thread starter elite1prospects
- Start date
More than likely it will be a 4th round pick or something like that.
It will be interesting to see how the NHL deals with those penalties. Are they going to allow these players to just sit on LTIR?
It will be interesting to see how the NHL deals with those penalties. Are they going to allow these players to just sit on LTIR?
Legend123
Registered User
- Jul 3, 2016
- 9,926
- 5,112
lol another habs fan dreaming of subban. I dont think mtl can negate that recapture penalty and even if they can they wont do it for 1rst round picks cuz those picks would be useless. If Weber retires they need to shed some major cap. The only way they can is if they trade paid players (Price, Pacs, Galchenyuk, Signed UFAs, etc) for players on ELC contracts. And not any ELC players, they dont want to finish last to give the preds a favor, they want some real good young players.
Why would MTl would settle for a 4th round pick when they hold NAS by the nuts?
a 4th is nothing... I mean, Look at what it cost team to get rid of Bickell/Bolland money of their cap! recent 1st rpund picks... There is NO WAY Habs settle for anything less then that... Especially with the fact that it would cripple NSH for a LONG time
Habsfan2731
Registered User
I don't think there's anything Montreal would ask for. Both teams knew of what would happen when the deal was made in case Weber retires early.
The deal was still made with that known to both sides, so I don't think Montreal would ask for anything & Nashville will just have to deal with the consequences. They made the deal knowing what was in store down the road if Webs retires.
The deal was still made with that known to both sides, so I don't think Montreal would ask for anything & Nashville will just have to deal with the consequences. They made the deal knowing what was in store down the road if Webs retires.
Habsfan2731
Registered User
We don't get hit with the recapture penalty. Nashville does only. If he retires in 4 or 5 years whatever it is, Montreal's is minor, under $1M.
You definitely do not understand how recapture works my friend.
The cap recaptures would be against NASHVILLE cap, not MTL. Bottom line, MTL won't be affected by any recapture but NSH will if Weber retires at 38-39yo. At that point, MTL would hold the bigger part of the stick as they do not need to LTIR Weber. If he retires, it affects NSH cap. IF he wants to play, MTL can trade him to a team like PHO/CAR
mouser
Business of Hockey
Lol, so Weber would be ready to retire with Montreal, but after being traded back to Nashville he'll change his mind and not want to retire? Not sure this premise is being thought through well.
Legend123
Registered User
- Jul 3, 2016
- 9,926
- 5,112
I was implying the habs cant do anything to negate the recapture penalty penalized on the preds (as the OP was asking the value of that).
I wouldn't bet on that. Specially on that situation where a small market like Nashville had to match that stupid contract given by another team. After what happened with New Jersey, Nashville and the NHL will find a way to not enforce that.
Legend123
Registered User
- Jul 3, 2016
- 9,926
- 5,112
Don't think that's completely true, you only get hit with the years you paid him above his cap hit.
First off, how is NSH going to "convince" him to not retire?
Secondly, why would NSH give MTL anything (especially that ridiculous offer you proposed), when it doesn't matter who own's his rights - if he retires early, NSH gets hurt?
About the only reason why NSH would want to reacquire his contract is if MTL has already traded him to a crappy team, and he's thinking of retiring vs playing out his last year or two for a bottom feeder. Then it makes sense for NSH to at least look into acquiring him. But in that situation it's the 3rd party team (that MTL traded Weber to) that holds all the cards. If they keep him, they have a 7.8m cap hit with a 1m salary on the books. OR he retires and costs them nothing. However if they trade him back to NSH, and he plays, then while NSH has to deal with the 7.8m cap hit, they get to avoid the brutal recapture penalty. So in this case, the 3rd team could bend NSH over and get a premium return for Weber - but even then, it still wouldn't be anything like what you suggested it would be. Perhaps a 1st/top prospect as the best possible return for them.
Would getting hit with 12/24m as a penalty blow ass? Absolutely. But fortunately for them, that's a long ways off, and even better, it only actually happens if Weber retires - which means he'd be voluntary walking away from money that's owed to him. Realistically that probably doesn't happen, and in fact rarely happens in today's NHL.
Secondly, why would NSH give MTL anything (especially that ridiculous offer you proposed), when it doesn't matter who own's his rights - if he retires early, NSH gets hurt?
About the only reason why NSH would want to reacquire his contract is if MTL has already traded him to a crappy team, and he's thinking of retiring vs playing out his last year or two for a bottom feeder. Then it makes sense for NSH to at least look into acquiring him. But in that situation it's the 3rd party team (that MTL traded Weber to) that holds all the cards. If they keep him, they have a 7.8m cap hit with a 1m salary on the books. OR he retires and costs them nothing. However if they trade him back to NSH, and he plays, then while NSH has to deal with the 7.8m cap hit, they get to avoid the brutal recapture penalty. So in this case, the 3rd team could bend NSH over and get a premium return for Weber - but even then, it still wouldn't be anything like what you suggested it would be. Perhaps a 1st/top prospect as the best possible return for them.
Would getting hit with 12/24m as a penalty blow ass? Absolutely. But fortunately for them, that's a long ways off, and even better, it only actually happens if Weber retires - which means he'd be voluntary walking away from money that's owed to him. Realistically that probably doesn't happen, and in fact rarely happens in today's NHL.
Last edited by a moderator:
We'll see. It was something they specifically chose to address last CBA. They didn't do that for no reason. They won't be able to selectively apply the rule unless they want to get sued.
He'd be voluntarily walking away from $1 million a year for 3 years after making $107 million over the past 11 years. I'm going to go ahead and guess that isn't unlikely to happen.
Last edited by a moderator:
3m is still 3m.
Other than Lecavillier, when was the last player to "retire" when he still had a valid contract in place (and didn't go to the KHL/another league that paid a similar contract)?
We all know why Lecavillier did it - the only way LA was going to trade for him was if he retired at the end of the season. VL wanted another chance to show that he could still play at this level, and LA gave him that.
So while it's possible that Weber could end up in the same situation, historically, it's extremely rare that players walk away from free money.
Slightly off topic. What happens if Weber were traded back to NSH, and NSH bought him out of his final 2 years vs him retiring?
Legend123
Registered User
- Jul 3, 2016
- 9,926
- 5,112
Hes most likely to retire anyways. The habs wont need him (the habs have sergechev) and the habs surely wont try to convince to not retire esp if the Subban-Weber trade becomes so lopsided in Nas's favor. If it does become so, it will be a perfect way to get back at the preds, convince him to retire and force those preds to shed some heavy salary.
Anton Babchuk
Registered User
Jason Smith retired with one year left at $2.6M and never played again after that. Markus Naslund retired with year left at $4M (he played one partial season in the SEL after that, but didn't take a salary). It's unlikely to happen but not unprecedented.
Odds are the next CBA will change the way the recapture penalty is calculated if not removing it completely. Nashville received no benefit from paying Weber more while having a lower caphit since they are not a cap team. As such I imagine the nhl will take that into account. Either way the next CBA will likely make all this moot.
Clamshells
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- Aug 11, 2009
- 2,494
- 1,317
if the gm who pulled that kind of move wanted to completely alienate themselves from the rest of the league, never get to make another deal ever again, losing the respect of his peers, and eventually his job. then yeah he'll go for it.
there is a lot of mutual respect among most of the franchises, which is why teams allow each other to interview for coaching positions, let players negotiate their own trades, etc. management doesnt treat each other the way we do on this forum.
they will get a favourable deal out of it, but nashville isn't going to get sandbagged as hard as some people think.
KevinRedkey
12/18/23 and beyond!
- Jan 22, 2010
- 10,527
- 5,817
If you have garbage, and I offer you $100 for it - why wouldn't you take it?
It's not worth $100 to anyone other than me, but to me it's worth $500.
You have the advantage of knowing I value it at $500
I have the advantage of knowing no one else will offer anything at all.
A reasonable person would take the $100, or whatever Nashville is offering.
GMs are in it to win... not screw each other over. Getting a 4th is better than nothing.
Note:
I really don't know what Nashville would offer, but I don't think Montreal can strong-arm Nashville like many are suggesting.
PS: My real guess is the CBA is changed and the Weber thing doesnt matter by then anyways.
Canada4Gold
Registered User
- Dec 22, 2010
- 43,055
- 9,244
This isn't how it works. They wouldn't have 8, 12 and then 24 penalties in consecutive years. Nashville gained 24.5 and change difference between Weber's salary and cap hit during the part of his contract in Nashville, so if he retires early Nashville has to make that up.
So if he retires when you say, 3 years early, it would be 8 million and change for 3 years each, if he retires 2 years early it's 12 million and change for 2 years each, and if he retires with just 1 year left that's where the 24.5 million and change penalty comes into play for 1 season.
And Nashville reacquiring Weber's contract at that time wouldn't chance anything. If he plans on retiring and they can't talk him out of it they pay that penalty regardless if they reacquire him before he retires or not. The only way they avoid the penalty is if they get him back in the next couple years so they they start making up that 24.5 million difference when his salary drops and is lower than his cap hit. Or if Weber plays out his entire contract.
http://www.stanleycupofchowder.com/...Weber-Nashville-Predators--Flyers-Offer-Sheet
Mtl would not care if Weber retired as it does not affect them but Nsh has to deal with cap recapture however if NSH trades for Weber, they can just put him on LTIR for remainder of contract which MTL may not want to do.
