Would the NHL reject a max length contract for Crosby?

[Golden_Jet]

I think the CBA gives the commissioner wide latitude to punish actions that violate “the spirit” of the salary cap/CBA, even if those actions are not explicitly prohibited by the letter of the law.

An example would be Washington trading Brooks Orpik to Colorado, Colorado buying out his contract, and Washington reacquiring him. Soon after that the league warned other teams that going forward this would be considered cap circumvention and would be punished accordingly.

Cannot re-sign until a year expires after a buy-out from same team.

 

[MXD]

I think the CBA gives the commissioner wide latitude to punish actions that violate “the spirit” of the salary cap/CBA, even if those actions are not explicitly prohibited by the letter of the law.

An example would be Washington trading Brooks Orpik to Colorado, Colorado buying out his contract, and Washington reacquiring him. Soon after that the league warned other teams that going forward this would be considered cap circumvention and would be punished accordingly.

This violated a provisio of the CBA.

Does he make those 9.5 in the first 3 years ?

Yes. Talking about a flatline deal.

Signing for 9.5 X 3
Or
Signing for 9.5 X 7 (but Crosby retiring after 3)

Crosby doesn't lose a single penny here.
But Pens get 9.5M on their salary cap in their rebuild that they don'T have to spend an actually penny for.

 

[MadLuke]

Yes. Talking about a flatline deal.

A get it now, would be a long and extreme rebuild to need to stay above the floor that long too.

 

[Nogatco Rd]

Cannot re-sign until a year expires after a buy-out from same team.

The Caps traded him to Colorado so Colorado could buy out him out, instead of buying him out themselves. So Orpik did not in fact re-sign with the team that bought him out.

This violated a provisio of the CBA.

It certainly did not. There are plenty of articles out there that address that specific incident if you’re interested in reading more about it. Here is an excerpt from RMNB, Sept 2018:

“the Capitals dealt Orpik and Grubauer to the Avalanche for a 2018 second round pick […]

The Avs then bought out the last year of Orpik’s five year, $27.5 million deal, which came in at an AAV of $5.5 million.

Then, Washington re-signed the 37-year-old Orpik to a one year, $1 million deal, which included performance bonuses that could result in another $500k.

According to CapFriendly, Orpik’s buyout will cost the Avalanche $2.5 million this season and $1.5 million for the 2019-20 season. Thus Orpik will likely make the same amount of money – albeit on a different time frame and through two teams – but remains on Washington and has a different cap hit. That’s cap circumvention at its finest, people.

There is currently no rule in the NHL’s collective bargaining agreement preventing this sort of maneuver. But it could mean a rule change in the upcoming CBA.”

OG article:

Report: The NHL had concerns about how the Capitals dealt with Brooks Orpik’s cap space

In Elliotte Friedman's Friday edition of his column 31 Thoughts, he mentions the trade that sent Brooks Orpik and Philipp Grubauer to…

russianmachineneverbreaks.com

Contemporary HF thread about it:

https://forums.hfboards.com/threads/is-brooks-orpiks-new-contract-cap-circumvention.2521441/

 

[Jumptheshark]

A max length extension would take Sid out til age 45. Would the NHL reject the contract.

Sid is hockey nut who has based his whole life around hockey. Nobody could deny that if he had goals and expectations to play til his mid 40's that he wouldn't do it. But would the NHL reject the contract?

NHL got rid of the Hossa loop hole. IS there a +35 contract limit? that is the question

 

[benfranklin]

Why would they? Its not insane to think Sid will easily be a 2nd line player at 45.

 

[The Nuge]

They didn’t reject Tanev’s contract and he won’t play that one out lol

Exactly. I can’t help but feel like Crosby is more likely to make it to 45 than Tanev is to make it to 40

 

[SjMilhouse]

This violated a provisio of the CBA.



Yes. Talking about a flatline deal.

Signing for 9.5 X 3
Or
Signing for 9.5 X 7 (but Crosby retiring after 3)

Crosby doesn't lose a single penny here.
But Pens get 9.5M on their salary cap in their rebuild that they don'T have to spend an actually penny for.

I don't think the league would care about this since it's a "negative" impact to their cap (Despite using it for floor reasons in a rebuild)

What the league apparently warned teams against would be more like the below I think:
$9m x 3 = $27m (awesome)
$3.375 x 8 = $27m (bad, don't do this) where he presumably LTIRs after 3-4 years

The example I saw was basically a scenario where Stamkos stays with Tampa beyond what anyone would reasonably believe he'd actually play but get the same total $ just over a longer term to reduce the cap hit which would be circumvention

Edit: I have no idea if this is true or even how the cap works, but that was my understanding of what the league doesn't want happening given potential for LTIR abuse in retirement

 

[Rodgerwilco]

Considering that:

• 35+ Rule: If a player signs a multi-year contract at the age of 35 or older, the cap hit remains on the team's salary cap even if the player retires. This rule is in place to prevent teams from circumventing the salary cap by signing older players to front-loaded contracts.

That rules, make it they do not need to care much ? the rules is already in place that a team-player cannot take advantage of retiring mid-contract. Would he fake LTIR retire, then they could act or let it go....

Would this still apply if Crosby developed a random allergy to his equipment halfway through the contract?

 

[Golden_Jet]

The Caps traded him to Colorado so Colorado could buy out him out, instead of buying him out themselves. So Orpik did not in fact re-sign with the team that bought him out.



It certainly did not. There are plenty of articles out there that address that specific incident if you’re interested in reading more about it. Here is an excerpt from RMNB, Sept 2018:

“the Capitals dealt Orpik and Grubauer to the Avalanche for a 2018 second round pick […]

The Avs then bought out the last year of Orpik’s five year, $27.5 million deal, which came in at an AAV of $5.5 million.

Then, Washington re-signed the 37-year-old Orpik to a one year, $1 million deal, which included performance bonuses that could result in another $500k.

According to CapFriendly, Orpik’s buyout will cost the Avalanche $2.5 million this season and $1.5 million for the 2019-20 season. Thus Orpik will likely make the same amount of money – albeit on a different time frame and through two teams – but remains on Washington and has a different cap hit. That’s cap circumvention at its finest, people.

There is currently no rule in the NHL’s collective bargaining agreement preventing this sort of maneuver. But it could mean a rule change in the upcoming CBA.”

OG article:

Report: The NHL had concerns about how the Capitals dealt with Brooks Orpik’s cap space

In Elliotte Friedman's Friday edition of his column 31 Thoughts, he mentions the trade that sent Brooks Orpik and Philipp Grubauer to…

russianmachineneverbreaks.com

Contemporary HF thread about it:

https://forums.hfboards.com/threads/is-brooks-orpiks-new-contract-cap-circumvention.2521441/

Ya that’s right, I read it too fast looks like.
Thought you were saying Washington bought him out.
Ya your scenario is fine currently.
Although ya that does look like it was a wink wink.

Would this still apply if Crosby developed a random allergy to his equipment halfway through the contract?

That was legit lol.
He tried fighting that for 2-3 years, even stopped practicing.
Still flares up, said it flared up after HHOF game, after not playing for 3 years.

 

[MadLuke]

Would this still apply if Crosby developed a random allergy to his equipment halfway through the contract?

Maybe if it is really itchy, I sympathize with the league and NHLPA here too, trying to trace the line of an career ending global health or specific injury by a third party.... good luck.

But if he is on LTIR the pens would not save any money... that a strategy for top cap spending teams, not floor wanting one.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Mostly a question of what approach they want to take towards these LTIRetirements

 

[DrDangles]

Tbf if anybody in this league could play until 44-45, it's Sid

 

[Leafs87]

I get why the league would not want to start a battle with the fake LTIR retirement (no one want that can of worm to open).

Not a fake retirement. He signed this contract before 35

 

[dgibb10]

Actively planning to suck for the next 8 years would certainly be something.

No owner would agree to lighting potentially up to or more than 50 million dollars of cap space on fire.

Also, if a team decides they want to commit to putting out a lineup 10 million dollars below the salary cap floor for a half decade, fans aren't going to show up. You'll lose more money in revenue than you save with this fake contract

 

[njdevils1982]

Would this still apply if Crosby developed a random allergy to his equipment halfway through the contract?

 

[StreetHawk]

Considering that:

• 35+ Rule: If a player signs a multi-year contract at the age of 35 or older, the cap hit remains on the team's salary cap even if the player retires. This rule is in place to prevent teams from circumventing the salary cap by signing older players to front-loaded contracts.

That rules, make it they do not need to care much ? the rules is already in place that a team-player cannot take advantage of retiring mid-contract. Would he fake LTIR retire, then they could act or let it go....

Revised Rules for 35+ Contracts | Puckpedia

The rules for 35+ contracts changed in the 2020 CBA MOU. Now, a contract is not considered "35+" if: -total compensation either stays the same or increases from one year to the subsequent year -there are no signing bonuses after Year 1 If those criteria are met, the contract is not considered...

puckpedia.com

That’s the updated 35+ rule from the mou.

To avoid the rule no SB after year 1 and no decrease in pay.
Suter when he signed with Dallas his deal was backloaded with year 4 salary higher than AAV. So not 35+ deal.

Again the only benefit of this term is the high chance of ltir as the player ages.

But then would insurance cover someone for 5 seasons into their 40’s?

 

[Curufinwe]

Would this still apply if Crosby developed a random allergy to his equipment halfway through the contract?

If Crosby had to take cyclosporine pills in order to avoid oozing blood and pus all over his bed at night, he'd stop playing hockey, too. You people don't have to remain ignorant on this topic forever.



On the onset of the skin condition:

It’s weird, I never had such problems before. It began 4 years before my last season and it kept intensifying each year. I started noticing patches of irritated skin especially in places where gear wraps up around the body like elbow pads etc…It started itching and later became so unbearable that I was scratching it till it was bloody. My wife was grabbing my hands…I couldn’t sleep in short sleeves since my bed was all bloody and my wife had to wash sheets constantly. Then the doctors gave me the meds which I took to keep playing during my last year.”

On the worsening of the condition

“Before the 2016 WCup finals the team doctors wrapped me in bandages like a mummy, I wasn’t even sure I was gonna play. Next year after we lost to Nashville in playoffs I came home, threw all meds in the garbage and called it quits”

On the skin condition during WCup:

“I skipped team dinners and ordered room service since it was all seeping through my clothes and it was very nasty”

About the process of getting on LTIR and retiring:

“The league sent me to see a specialist in medical clinic in Minneapolis, apparently the best clinic in USA. There they assigned a doctor to me, a random one not affiliated with Hawks in any way (for obvious reasons). He studied my medical records and asked me if I still want to play hockey. I said yes but I’m taking these and these meds to do so and I don’t want to. He said that I made a good choice cause if I continued to take them it’s like chemotherapy.”

 

[cptjeff]

He was happy and able to manage his skin condition right up until his salary dropped from $4 million to $1 million. Could he have kept managing it with the same meds he had been using? Yes. Did he want to for a vastly reduced salary? No.

The Blackhawks should have been hit with the recapture penalty, plain and simple.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Could he have kept managing it with the same meds he had been using? Yes. Did he want to for a vastly reduced salary? No.

Lmao, how many doctors would recommend taking the drug for long periods of time. None.
Unless you don’t care about your liver, or other medical issues.

 

[Rodgerwilco]

If Crosby had to take cyclosporine pills in order to avoid oozing blood and pus all over his bed at night, he'd stop playing hockey, too. You people don't have to remain ignorant on this topic forever.



On the onset of the skin condition:

It’s weird, I never had such problems before. It began 4 years before my last season and it kept intensifying each year. I started noticing patches of irritated skin especially in places where gear wraps up around the body like elbow pads etc…It started itching and later became so unbearable that I was scratching it till it was bloody. My wife was grabbing my hands…I couldn’t sleep in short sleeves since my bed was all bloody and my wife had to wash sheets constantly. Then the doctors gave me the meds which I took to keep playing during my last year.”

On the worsening of the condition

“Before the 2016 WCup finals the team doctors wrapped me in bandages like a mummy, I wasn’t even sure I was gonna play. Next year after we lost to Nashville in playoffs I came home, threw all meds in the garbage and called it quits”

On the skin condition during WCup:

“I skipped team dinners and ordered room service since it was all seeping through my clothes and it was very nasty”

About the process of getting on LTIR and retiring:

“The league sent me to see a specialist in medical clinic in Minneapolis, apparently the best clinic in USA. There they assigned a doctor to me, a random one not affiliated with Hawks in any way (for obvious reasons). He studied my medical records and asked me if I still want to play hockey. I said yes but I’m taking these and these meds to do so and I don’t want to. He said that I made a good choice cause if I continued to take them it’s like chemotherapy.”

bruh it was a joke lol. Hossa is one of my favorite players I've watched in my time following hockey.

 

[cptjeff]

Lmao, how many doctors would recommend taking the drug for long periods of time. None.
Unless you don’t care about your liver, or other medical issues.

He *had* been taking the pills for long periods of time. He suddenly was less willing to take them when his contract dropped substantially.

Nothing changed about his condition or the treatment in that offseason. Nothing. The only thing that changed was the money.

And that's not to say it wasn't a perfectly reasonable and rational personal decision on his part. It was. But his contact was structured in a way that saved the Blackhawks a large amount of cap space if he didn't play those years, and it was obvious to all but the dumbest of us that the decision to retire at that *particular* point was due primarily to the vastly diminished salary. It was circumvention and should have been penalized.

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

Exactly. I can’t help but feel like Crosby is more likely to make it to 45 than Tanev is to make it to 40

I agree with you on the likelyhood - but history tells us something else. It's not impossible to play to 40, but it's almost impossible to play to 45.

I know that Kovalchuk's initial contract with the Devils that ran until he was 44 was deemed circumvention because the "fake" years at $1M per at the end to reduce the cap hit. If Crosby's contract was going to a similar age, but wasn't backloaded, I don't think that you could call it circumvention because with the "new" rule the cap hit would equal the cash paid to Crosby.

 

[StreetHawk]

I agree with you on the likelyhood - but history tells us something else. It's not impossible to play to 40, but it's almost impossible to play to 45.

I know that Kovalchuk's initial contract with the Devils that ran until he was 44 was deemed circumvention because the "fake" years at $1M per at the end to reduce the cap hit. If Crosby's contract was going to a similar age, but wasn't backloaded, I don't think that you could call it circumvention because with the "new" rule the cap hit would equal the cash paid to Crosby.

That's correct. And again, the only benefit of a max term deal like that is LTIR money over his current contract. Assuming the Pens and Sid were able to get that contract insured, then if "wear and tear" occurred as we've seen with a couple of guys like Callahan for example, hit, then Sid would get $40 mill or whatever the last 4 years or whatever are worth.

My understanding is that 1 company insures all 32 NHL clubs, which makes sense as some clubs they would lose money on, ala NJ this past year, while others they would make money on. So long as their return reaches their target % based on their premiums they charge, they are fine. But, Insurance has refused to cover players with injury history. Ferland contract with the Canucks was not insured for example. Sid has been relatively healthy since his concussion scare earlier in his career. But, could see them point to that still in not wanting to cover from age 38 to 45 for example plus the extremely small chance any player is capable of playing to that old age. And given that this isn't a back diving deal where it is $10 mill total over those 4 years, but $40 mill.... Not sure that would be realistic.

 

[tucker3434]

There’s no longer a team benefit to that anymore so why would the league care? If the penguins want to front load an 8 year deal, they’ll have to deal with the cap implications when he retires. And you can’t even front load contracts the way that you used to so there really isn’t that much benefit.