Value of: Recapture penalty

[AdmiralsFan24]

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.

Well, Nashville matched Weber's offer sheet before the new CBA was in place. That kind of matters. It's hard to enforce a rule in the CBA when the contract was signed before the current CBA and new rule was in place.

 

[jacks*]

Don't think that's completely true, you only get hit with the years you paid him above his cap hit.

The Habs only get a hit if he retires in yr 1,2 or 3.After those fisr 3 yts the cap hit reverts all to Nashville.

 

[Hivemind]

No. They put the recapture rules on the books for a reason. They'll enforce them.

They also put the 35+ contract rules on the books for a reason, but have allowed LTIRment to turn them into a joke.

 

[Sens Rule]

No. They put the recapture rules on the books for a reason. They'll enforce them.

I think they won't fully enforce the worst possible ones... If they ever actually come to fruition.

No way they enforce a $ 23.5 million cap penalty on a team in one season. Sure $4,5 million dollar ones they likely will. If some team ends up with a ridiculous 8 figure cap penalty and will need to sell off multiple core players... The league will figure out how to spread the penalty over multiple years, or take away draft picks.

It makes little business sense to penalize a team so greatly that they lose thousands of fans each game because their team is terrible.

Say it is Nashville... And 23.5 million. How does it benefit the NHL or the NHLPA if Nashville's revenue drops by tens of millions of dollars because thousands of fans don't show up to each game (likely would carry over for years after as well). It doesn't.

 

[elite1prospects]

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 boned?

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.

pretty sure they can convnce him by saying here's the 1 million for each of the next 3 years and place him on LTIR, something montreal wouldn't be to inclined to do knowing how much nashville would need to make that deal

 

[Riptide]

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.

How does this "get back at the Preds" ? MTL agreed to the trade. If they didn't like it, or it's potential long term consequences, then they shouldn't have made it.

 

[Legend123]

How does this "get back at the Preds" ? MTL agreed to the trade. If they didn't like it, or it's potential long term consequences, then they shouldn't have made it.

Can you read brah?? If it becomes lopsided... Esp if MB and MT are fired.

 

[Riptide]

pretty sure they can convnce him by saying here's the 1 million for each of the next 3 years and place him on LTIR, something montreal wouldn't be to inclined to do knowing how much nashville would need to make that deal

You can only place a player on LTIR if they're legitimately injured. If Weber wants to retire because he doesn't believe he can play at that level, or is just "tired" and doesn't have the drive/willpower to play at the NHL level... then no team can LTIR him. It's either allow him to retire or buy him out.

I'm just not sure if NSH gets any benefit from buying out Weber vs allowing him to retire.

 

[Riptide]

Can you read brah?? If it becomes lopsided... Esp if MB and MT are fired.

So brah, the new GM wants to "get back" at another team because of a stupid decision the previous GM made? Yep, happens all the time brah, because that's just how childish and juvenile the NHL is.... oh wait... never mind, these are adults and professionals not 16 yr old kids, brah.

 

[Legend123]

So brah, the new GM wants to "get back" at another team because of a stupid decision the previous GM made? Yep, happens all the time brah, because that's just how childish and juvenile the NHL is.... oh wait... never mind, these are adults and professionals not 16 yr old kids, brah.

hahah brah

 

[whlscowt]

The only way I see a cap recapture coming into effect is if the player hated his original team (Roy - with the Canadiens) and wanted to stick it to them. Weber seems like too much of a standup guy who loved Nashville; I can't see him ever making a move like that.

The only one I'd be concerned about (and it's barely a concern) is Lu with Vancouver. Things weren't handled well with him, but at the end of the day I honestly believe Lu is too much a standup guy to do something like this. Aquilini would have had to have had an affair with Lu's wife or something terrible for him to even consider something like that.

 

[Mad Brills*]

Unless he retires before the CBA expires in 2020, they will be fine. new cba will change it.

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

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.

the longer he plays the less montreal gets hit but if he retires in 2 years montreal gets hit for more than 8 mill total

than that number goes down by almost 2 mill each of the next 4 seasons... so by the time the last 3 years are here, montreals risk is zero

 

[Eric Sachs]

The only way I see a cap recapture coming into effect is if the player hated his original team (Roy - with the Canadiens) and wanted to stick it to them. Weber seems like too much of a standup guy who loved Nashville; I can't see him ever making a move like that.

The only one I'd be concerned about (and it's barely a concern) is Lu with Vancouver. Things weren't handled well with him, but at the end of the day I honestly believe Lu is too much a standup guy to do something like this. Aquilini would have had to have had an affair with Lu's wife or something terrible for him to even consider something like that.

What is "a move like that"? Retiring?

No player is going to continue playing in the league despite wanting to retire purely so his former team can be helped out.

 

[Eric Sachs]

Ok so theres always talk about the Weber Subban trade but lets fast forward time a bit and have some fun. let's say the 2022-2023 season just finished (and another lottery win for Toronto lol). A healthy 38 year old Shea Weber is conteplating retirement and who can blame him 1 mill per year at that point in his contract.. And lets say you are the Nashville GM and are very well aware of the situation and relize next year you will pay 8 mill in cap for year 1, 12 mill for year 2 and a team crippling 24.5 million for year 3. what do you offer montreal to get that contract and save any channce of negating the penalty... If im montreals GM i ask for a return of 2 firsts and a much older and mature P.K Subban. what do you ask for and what are you willing to give up givving the circumstances. By the looks of it Montreal will soon have Nashville by the throat and will be willing to ask pretty much anything.

Getting the contract does absolutely nothing in terms of negating the penalty. There is nothing Nashville can do to avoid the cap recapture.

If Weber retires before his contract is over, they will be hit with cap recapture. It doesn't matter what team he plays for when retiring.

If Weber is injured, he can go on LTIR.. and both MTL or any other team can do that.. it doesn't require Nashville.

Is Weber going to suddenly decide to keep playing hockey because Nashville asked nicely? I suppose Nashville can acquire his contract and tell him to just stay home for the rest of his deal.. but that means they would have to carry him on their active roster (or stow him in the AHL, I guess), pay him actual $$$ and still carry his normal cap hit. I doubt that occurs.

 

[crowi]

There will be another lockout (or 2-3) way before Weber's deal ends. I'd guess they'll just remove this recapture rule in one of those as those old deals will mostly be gone by then.

You can't use recapture penalty as a reason for a team to make a trade.

 

[mouser]

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)?

Rafalski retired with $6m remaining. Shanahan retired on a $800k contract, though he would have had to play in the AHL which I'm sure he had no interest in. Rod Brind'amour was going to retire with a year remaining, but Carolina was nice enough to buyout his final year and give him a job with the team.

 

[mouser]

Well, Nashville matched Weber's offer sheet before the new CBA was in place. That kind of matters. It's hard to enforce a rule in the CBA when the contract was signed before the current CBA and new rule was in place.

It's not hard at all. In fact the CBA explicitly says the recapture rule was put in place to address contracts that were signed before the new CBA.

The league has already applied recapture penalties twice now to contracts that were signed before the latest CBA in Kovalchuk and Richards.

 

[Riptide]

Rafalski retired with $6m remaining. Shanahan retired on a $800k contract, though he would have had to play in the AHL which I'm sure he had no interest in. Rod Brind'amour was going to retire with a year remaining, but Carolina was nice enough to buyout his final year and give him a job with the team.

That one surprised me (even at the time) - especially as he could have gone onto LTIR. But my point still stands - it's pretty rare for that to happen - and seems pretty much unheard of now when players could go onto LTIR and still get paid the money the team owes them.

What's much more likely to happen is if Weber wants to retire, that NSH will acquire his rights, send him to the AHL and tell him to stay home. Then they have around a 6.7m or so cap hit (7.8-whatever can be buried in the AHL) on the books and they have to pay him 1m per season... but Weber can "retire" - aka not play and not try to get into game shape, and NSH can avoid the recapture penalty.

Mouser, could NSH buy him out to avoid the recapture?

 

[mouser]

Mouser, could NSH buy him out to avoid the recapture?

Unknown. We know that the most recent compliance buyouts didn't have recapture. Not clear whether ordinary course buyouts would.

With an ordinary course buyout I would argue that if the player stayed on the same team the entire time of their contract, then the ordinary course buyout should cancel the recapture. Because the buyout cap hit formula works similarly to the recapture penalty the team would end up with all of the recapture amount in the buyout cap hit, though the cap hits would be spread out differently. So the spirit of the recapture rule is maintained.

Where that doesn't work well though is if the player didn't spend the entire term of the contract on the team. Which would be the case with a hypothetical future buyout of Weber by Nashville. In that situation a buyout could yield a very different total cap hit then the recapture rule depending on when the buyout took place.

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

Getting the contract does absolutely nothing in terms of negating the penalty. There is nothing Nashville can do to avoid the cap recapture.

If Weber retires before his contract is over, they will be hit with cap recapture. It doesn't matter what team he plays for when retiring.

If Weber is injured, he can go on LTIR.. and both MTL or any other team can do that.. it doesn't require Nashville.

Is Weber going to suddenly decide to keep playing hockey because Nashville asked nicely? I suppose Nashville can acquire his contract and tell him to just stay home for the rest of his deal.. but that means they would have to carry him on their active roster (or stow him in the AHL, I guess), pay him actual $$$ and still carry his normal cap hit. I doubt that occurs.

thats not true

cap recapture is calculated on total benifit minus total penalty and then averaged over remaining years

webers last 3 years are 1 mill salary any 7.8 hit... a penalty of 6.8

if nashville has him for 1 year playing... the recapture goes down 6.8
if nashville has him 2 years before he retires the recapture shrinks to just 6.8 mill

even if weber might retire the last season... nashville should still trade for him with those last 3 years left

montreals penalty will be off the books by then but nasvilles will never go away and will be nearly 7 mill the final year no matter what they do

edit im prob wrong about the 7 mill... but basically nasville can reduce the cap recapture by 6.8 mill for any of the last 3 years he might play for them before he retires... 4.8 mill the year before that... and 1.8 mill the seasons before that.

any year he makes less than his cap hit would reduce the cap recapture assumi g hes playing for nashville

 

[NoShowWilly]

The only way I see a cap recapture coming into effect is if the player hated his original team (Roy - with the Canadiens) and wanted to stick it to them. Weber seems like too much of a standup guy who loved Nashville; I can't see him ever making a move like that.

The only one I'd be concerned about (and it's barely a concern) is Lu with Vancouver. Things weren't handled well with him, but at the end of the day I honestly believe Lu is too much a standup guy to do something like this. Aquilini would have had to have had an affair with Lu's wife or something terrible for him to even consider something like that.

Wasn't handled well but still Gillis got him to the exact place he and moreso his wife wanted to be.

Would be a pretty low by luongo.

That said, the rule is dumb. League accepted the contract. the only people it hurts is players who are having money taken out of the pool and the new gm who will have to work with less.

 

[mouser]

Wasn't handled well but still Gillis got him to the exact place he and moreso his wife wanted to be.

Would be a pretty low by luongo.

That said, the rule is dumb. League accepted the contract. the only people it hurts is players who are having money taken out of the pool and the new gm who will have to work with less.

Technically, taking money out of the pool helps all the players under contract. It only hurts the player(s) that might have signed a new or larger contract with the missing money. Similarly, players like Weber having many front-loaded years in their contracts where their salaries are significantly larger then their average cap hit hurt the other players who didn't have those types of deals by increasing their escrow clawback.

 

[jacks*]

the longer he plays the less montreal gets hit but if he retires in 2 years montreal gets hit for more than 8 mill total

than that number goes down by almost 2 mill each of the next 4 seasons... so by the time the last 3 years are here, montreals risk is zero

Totally wrong.
http://www.stanleycupofchowder.com/...Weber-Nashville-Predators--Flyers-Offer-Sheet

Highest the Habs can be hit with is $460.317 and that is if he retires in 2017/18 season
next hit for the Habs would be $285.714 if he retires in 2018/19 season
and last but not least the last hit for the habs would be $61.224 if he retires in 2019/20.
After those first 3 yrs the Habs are hit free.

 

[mouser]

Totally wrong.
http://www.stanleycupofchowder.com/...Weber-Nashville-Predators--Flyers-Offer-Sheet

Highest the Habs can be hit with is $460.317 and that is if he retires in 2017/18 season
next hit for the Habs would be $285.714 if he retires in 2018/19 season
and last but not least the last hit for the habs would be $61.224 if he retires in 2019/20.
After those first 3 yrs the Habs are hit free.

That article is wrong, was discussed back when it was posted for the first time. Habs would have a penalty if Weber retired earlier then 2023-24.