NHL Analysis: Understanding the Salary Cap
Our friend Dave over at Blue Seat Blogs put this together, and was nice enough to share it with us. It is a terrific breakdown of how the salary cap works, as well as buyouts, free agency, waivers, arbitration, and everything in between. Best of all, he explains in a way even a dingbat like me can understand. Since the off season is in full swing for us, I think it would be a good idea to start with an education for all of us of how it all works. I guarantee you that by the time you finish reading this you will have a better understanding of how the NHL Salary Cap works.
Understanding the Cap
With the salary-cap era well underway, there are always questions about how the cap works, and that leads to questions on the CBA (Collective Bargaining Agreement). We are no masters of the CBA, but we generally understand the verbiage behind it regarding the salary cap, so let's go through it:
Salary Cap Ceiling: The maximum amount of money a team can spend on player salaries. This number varies from year to year based on the NHL's revenue from two seasons ago. For example, the salary cap for the 2008-2009 season was set based on the NHL revenues from the 2006-2007 season. The NHL is looking at a decreasing cap figure for the 2010-2011 season due to less revenues during the 2008-2009 season.
- No player can earn more than 20% of the salary cap
- The minimum player salary will rise to $525,000 by 2011-2012
- There is a clause in the CBA (Collective Bargaining Agreement) that allows the players to enact a 5% increase on the cap ceiling. This clause was enacted in June 2009, thus preventing a decrease in the salary cap ceiling for the 2009-2010 season.
Salary Cap Floor: Similar to the salary cap ceiling, this is the minimum amount that a team must spend on player salaries. This is more of a formality, but it prevents teams from intentionally tanking the season, and ensures players are paid market value. This number is generally set as $16 million below the cap ceiling.
Salary Cap Hit: The amount of salary cap room that a player takes up. This number is calculated by the average dollar figure of the contract. For example, Markus Naslund signed a two year, $8 million contract. His cap hit for those two years is $4 million, despite the fact that he earned $5 million in the first year of the contract. Weighted contracts have no effect on the cap hit.
- For an explanation on why GMs are giving out such long term deals to free agents, and the affect these contracts have on the cap hit read my post here.
Performance Based Bonuses: Players on entry level contracts, veterans who have played over 400 games, players who sign a one year contract and are over 35 years old, or players who have spent 100+ days on the IR are all eligible for performance based bonuses. These bonuses count against the following seasons cap.
Entry Level Deals: Entry level contracts are capped at $925,000 (by 2011). These contracts vary in length. For those aged 18-21, the entry level contract is for three years, 22-23 are for two years, and 24 are for one year.
- Entry Level Bonuses: Bonuses for entry level contracts are capped at 10% of the players contract. These bonuses count against the cap. For example, Lauri Korpikoski's salary in 2008-2009 was roughly $900,000, but his cap hit was over $1 million because of the signing bonus.
Waivers: When a player is waived (sent to the minors), each of the 29 NHL teams can put in a claim for the player. In the case that more than one team puts in a claim for a waived player, the team with the worst record gets the claim. The player is moved to the claiming team for the full (or, if mid season, pro-rated) salary cap hit. If a player clears waivers, he can be reassigned to the minors, and the salary cap hit is cleared until the player is recalled.
- Waiver Eligibility: Waiver eligibility is actually incredibly complicated, but the guys over at NHLSCap.com have a very detailed explanation of the process. I'm not going to rehash it here, so head over and check it out for a full definition of what exactly the waiver restrictions are. In short, waiver eligibility depends on the age the player signs his first NHL contract, and the number of NHL games played, including playoffs. There's a nice table put together at NHLSCap.
Re-Entry Waivers: When a player clears waivers, and is recalled to the NHL, he must pass through re-entry waivers. Re-entry waivers is similar to regular waivers, however the claiming team can claim the player for 1/2 of the players remaining salary, while the original team picks up the other 1/2. For example, if the Rangers claimed Sean Avery when he was initially waived, they were going to be on the hook for the full $4 million cap hit. They claimed him on re-entry waivers, and thus only are responsible for the $2 million cap hit (Dallas picks up the remaining $2 million). Re-entry waiver eligibility is the same as waiver eligibility, described above.
Over 35 Signings: If a player who, as of June 30 of the upcoming season, is over the age of 35 signs a multi-year deal, the signing team will take a cap hit for each year on the contract, regardless of if the player retires. For example, if Chris Chelios signs a 3 year deal worth $2 million per year, and retires after the first year, the signing team still takes a $2 million cap hit for the remaining years on the contract. However, since Markus Naslund's 35th birthday was after June 30, he was 34 as of June 30, thus his retirement removes his cap hit.
- Waiving a 35+ Signing: In the event that a player signed to a 35+ contract is waived and sent to the minors, the NHL cap hit is reduced by $100,000.
Restricted Free Agents: A player set to become a restricted will become an unrestricted free agent if his current team does not make him a qualifying offer that adheres to the minimum raise policy of the CBA. The deadline to qualify all RFA's is June 29
- Qualifying Offers: A qualifying offer must include the following minimum raises:
- Previous salary < $660,000: 10% increase in salary
- Previous salary < $1,000,000: 5% increase in salary
- Previous salary > $1,000,000: Match previous season's salary
- RFA Ages: A player remains a restricted free agent until his age 27 season. No player can become an unrestricted free agent until he turns 27.
- Compensation for Offer Sheets: If an RFA signs an offer sheet from a different team, the original team is entitled to compensation in the form of draft picks from the next year's draft (All figures are estimates, and change each season):
- Offer sheet < $860,000 annually: No compensation
- Offer sheet between $860,000 - $1.3 million annually: 3rd round pick
- Offer sheet between $1.3 million - $2.6 million annually: 2nd round pick
- Offer sheet between $2.6 million - $4 million annually: 1st and 3rd round pick
- Offer sheet between $4 million - $5.2 million annually: 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round pick
- Offer sheet between $5.2 million - $6.5 million annually: Two 1sts, one 2nd, and one 3rd round pick
- Offer sheet > $6.5 million annually: Four 1st round picks
Arbitration: RFA's that are eligible (see below) can file for arbitration if a contract agreement cannot be met. Players filing for arbitration are protected from offer sheets, as described above. In an arbitration hearing, both sides (player, team) present their case/argument to an impartial third party, who then comes to a decision based on the cases heard. Cases are usually based around stats, tenure with the team, injury history, overall contribution, and a comparable players salary who signed as an RFA (UFA salaries are inadmissible).
- Eligibility: A player is eligible for arbitration if he meets one of the following criteria:
- Players who have four years or more of professional experience under NHL contract. (The exception to this rule is for players who started their pro careers in the 2004-05 lockout season, as that year does not count for determining salary arbitration eligibility).
- Players whose age at signing their first NHL contract plus their number of years of pro experience under NHL contract adds up to 24 or more.
Eligibility is fairly complicated, so let's use Brandon Dubinsky in 2009 as an example. Dubinsky, born in 1986 (22 years old), signed with the Rangers for the 2005-2006 season (played in the AHL). He was 19 when he signed the deal, and has 4 years of professional level experience (2005-2006 thru 2008-2009), since his age at contract signing (19) plus his NHL experience (4) is less than 24 (23), he does not have arbitration rights. He will have arbitration rights after the 2009-2010 season.
Buyouts: Buyouts are a more complicated business, as it requires some serious calculations.
- A player over 26 can be bought out for 2/3 of his remaining contract worth. Note, this is not the salary cap hit, this is the actual dollar amount left on the contract.
- A player 26 and under can be bought out for 1/3 of his remaining contract. Note, this is not the salary cap hit, this is the actual dollar amount left on the contract.
- The cap hit for the buyout is calculated as follows:
- Calculate the buyout amount (as explained above)
- Spread the buyout amount evenly over twice the remaining years on the contract.
- Take this amount, and subtract it from that year's actual salary (not the cap hit). Let's call this number the "savings"
- Now, take the "savings" and deduct this from the cap hit (not the actual salary). This is your cap hit for the remaining years of the contract.
- For the years that exceed the contract, the cap hit is the original buyout amount that was divided evenly across twice the years on the contract (step 2).
This is relatively complicated math. Luckily, the guys over at CapGeek have a great tool for easily calculating the buyout. I recommend using it.
Trade Deadline: The trade deadline is the last day that general managers are allowed to make trades with other teams. The date is generally set six weeks before the end of the season.
- Post-Deadline Call-Ups: After the trade deadline, teams are allowed a maximum of four AHL call-ups until the end of the season.
No Trade/Movement Clauses: A player with a no trade clause must first approve the trade, and waive his no trade clause, in order to be traded. A player with a no movement clause also has to approve a trade, but also has the ability to veto an assignment to the AHL. A player with a no trade clause does not have the ability to veto an AHL assignment.
- Limited No Trade Clause: A player with a limited no trade clause can select a number, usually determined at the signing of the contract, of teams that he will/will not accept a trade to. The team must work within these limitations to trade the player.
Max Number of Contracts: NHL teams are only allowed to have a maximum of 50 NHL contracts. This includes the NHL, AHL, and ECHL.
Picking Up Salary: Note that currently, GMs are not permitted to pick up a portion of a player's salary/cap hit to alleviate possible trade complications.
Releasing Players: Under the current CBA, GMs cannot release players. Once a player is signed, the life of the contract must be observed, or bought out.
The current CBA expires in September, 2011.
68 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
You get my seal of approval Dave
does that count for anything?
Blueshirt Banter: Covering the New York Rangers the only NHL team with three home arenas.
"We can trade Lisin for a gun, then hold it to Drury’s head and make him waive the no-movement clause" - XLII
by Joe Fortunato on Apr 28, 2010 10:48 AM EDT up reply actions
Yes it does. It’s good to have the Blueshirt Banter seal of approval. Feels nice.
by Dave Shapiro on Apr 28, 2010 10:52 AM EDT up reply actions
This certainly explains a lot
and helps me understand why Glen Sather tries to hit the home run with every signing.
I Am HockeyMan!!
Not Dolphins, Penguins, or Shoe-Ins...just Rangers, nothin' but Rangers!!
and also fails.
I Am HockeyMan!!
Not Dolphins, Penguins, or Shoe-Ins...just Rangers, nothin' but Rangers!!
He hit a HR with Prospal and Gaborik. It’s just every other UFA signing he struck out with.
by Dave Shapiro on Apr 28, 2010 9:24 AM EDT up reply actions
Redden Waivers
This is really helpful. Would it make sense to waive Redden, assume he clears waivers, then have him go through re-entry waivers and hope someone claims him for half his salary, a la Avery? We’d eat half his salary through 2013-2014, but we’d be rid of his cap hit sooner than if we bought him out. You think someone would claim him for half-price?
He will definitely clear regular waivers. I’m not sure if he would clear re-entry waivers, but teams desperate for defensive depth may take a long look at him at $3.25 million. If I had to pick my poison, it would be someone claiming him from re-entry waivers and freeing up $3.25 million in cap space and opening up a spot on the blue line.
by Dave Shapiro on Apr 28, 2010 9:48 AM EDT up reply actions
I guess 3.25m dead money over 4 years is better than 1.92 over 8. (with the notable exceptions of 2012-13 and 13-14 where the dead money is 3.42).
Both are highly unattractive.
Camp Tortorella - Where Vomit is a Mainstay
by George E. Ays on Apr 28, 2010 9:51 AM EDT up reply actions
At that point I guess you have to look at the lesser of the evils. Is $3.25 of dead money and a free roster spot better than $6.5 of dead money and no roster spot?
I think a buyout is too expensive, and they won’t pursue it.
by Dave Shapiro on Apr 28, 2010 9:59 AM EDT up reply actions
Making the assumption that shipping Redden to Hartford won’t/can’t happen?
Camp Tortorella - Where Vomit is a Mainstay
by George E. Ays on Apr 28, 2010 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m going with won’t, but yea, unfortunately I am making that assumption. That assumption makes me want to kick puppies.
by Dave Shapiro on Apr 28, 2010 10:11 AM EDT up reply actions
M. Vick made that too uncomfortable. I’ve gone with “makes me want to punch babies.”
Camp Tortorella - Where Vomit is a Mainstay
by George E. Ays on Apr 28, 2010 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions
Sold.
Camp Tortorella - Where Vomit is a Mainstay
by George E. Ays on Apr 28, 2010 11:37 AM EDT up reply actions
Sending him to Hartford to stay means Sather telling Dolan he f’d up and it’s costing Dolan $6.5 mil/year for a minor leaguer. Now do you see that happening?
It won’t happen, there are too many financial ramifications, especially since MSG split from Cablevision.
by Dave Shapiro on Apr 28, 2010 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Who knows, maybe we can call the Avangard Omsk and arrange for them to take Redden’s contract. if Marcel Hossa is the leading scorer there, then Redden can surely win the KHL Norris.
And that’s the truth. I’m sure Ales Kotalik’s next plane ticket is set for the heart of the KHL as well…
Bettman's Nightmare: We See a Good Bettman/Fans Metaphor When We See One, and Frankly, Lane Smith Was Too Hard on Emilio Estevez When He Was A Kid.
http://bettmansnightmare.blogspot.com/
by Bettman's Nightmare on Apr 28, 2010 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions
If he goes to the KHL, then Sutter breathes a sigh of relief. What a terrible trade.
by Dave Shapiro on Apr 28, 2010 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions
So does Redden have a no trade clause or a no movement clause? If it’s the latter then he can veto a move to Hartford. Correct?
Lundqvist-Staal-MDZ-McDonagh-Krieder-Stepan-MZA-Cally-Dubi-Gabby-AA-Grachev.
The core of the 2014 Stanley Cup winners!
He has a no-trade: http://www.blueseatblogs.com/ntcsnmcs/
He lists 8 teams that he will not accept a trade to.
by Dave Shapiro on Apr 28, 2010 11:35 AM EDT up reply actions
which is exactly why you send him to the minors
Blueshirt Banter: Covering the New York Rangers the only NHL team with three home arenas.
"We can trade Lisin for a gun, then hold it to Drury’s head and make him waive the no-movement clause" - XLII
by Joe Fortunato on Apr 28, 2010 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions
Or banish him to the KHL with Marcel Hossa. Either way, I’m ok with it.
by Dave Shapiro on Apr 28, 2010 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions
I mostly just want the roster spot to be open, the cleared salary cap room is a bonus.
by Dave Shapiro on Apr 28, 2010 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions
Any reason Avery’s NTC is full for 1.5 months then partial the rest of the year? Probably just because he likes to do things differently across the board – lol
He probably just didn’t want to get traded during the free agency period.
by Dave Shapiro on Apr 28, 2010 2:04 PM EDT up reply actions
bet thats why Slats could not send r or R to Edmonton before the trade deadline and will in all likelihood prevent it from happening this summer. Best shot is the waiver process I guess. They would be better off dumping both and see what the prospects can do.
Kotalik’s limited NTC said no to Calgary, so nothing is impossible. Tambellini just didn’t want Rozsival.
Camp Tortorella - Where Vomit is a Mainstay
by George E. Ays on Apr 28, 2010 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Souray?
I thought it was because Souray was who we were getting back in the Edmonton deal and he broke his hand in that fight with Igilna that put him on IR for the rest of the season?
by Mike_from_NNJ on Apr 28, 2010 1:31 PM EDT up reply actions
Despite the rumors, several of us had heard that Souray’s name was not being mentioned at the deadline, it was Tom Gilbert.
Camp Tortorella - Where Vomit is a Mainstay
by George E. Ays on Apr 28, 2010 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions
I would have shot someone if Gilbert wound up as a Ranger. What a terrible contract.
by Dave Shapiro on Apr 28, 2010 2:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Rozsival > Gilbert. Gilbert = Redden. The only difference is that Redden I’m used to dealing with. GIlbert has another 30 years on that contract.
by Dave Shapiro on Apr 28, 2010 2:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Actually they both end after the 13’-14’ season, difference of 2.5m.
There’s nothing enviable about him though…unless Sather had a syringe full of Drano stuck in Tambellini’s neck and got him to trade Gilbert for Redden and a low round draft pick.
It was supposedly Rozsival for Gilbert, but that’s just a terrible deal for the Rangers.
by Dave Shapiro on Apr 28, 2010 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions
It was worse than that
Add the names Dubinsky and Cogliano to it.
Camp Tortorella - Where Vomit is a Mainstay
by George E. Ays on Apr 28, 2010 3:03 PM EDT up reply actions
While we’re on the subject of explaining mystifying things about hockey, what is GAON? Did a quick web search and came up with “The Assamese word Gaon is used to define an area in Assam which is similar in meaning with the English word Village.” For some reason, this doesn’t seem like a hockey stat to me.
Actually, that's exactly what it is.
Or it’s Goals Against while ON the ice, per 60 min. of ice time.
I forget which.
Camp Tortorella - Where Vomit is a Mainstay
by George E. Ays on Apr 28, 2010 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Essentially yes, but when you work with QUALCOMP (quality of competition against), it really shows how effective someone can be on the defensive side of the puck.
You have to be careful though, it doesn’t factor in even strength vs PK goals. For that, you have to look at even strength GAON/60.
www.behindthenet.ca has everything you’ll need for that.
by Dave Shapiro on Apr 28, 2010 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions
What he said.
Camp Tortorella - Where Vomit is a Mainstay
by George E. Ays on Apr 28, 2010 3:58 PM EDT up reply actions
If you were Davette maybe.
Camp Tortorella - Where Vomit is a Mainstay
by George E. Ays on Apr 28, 2010 3:59 PM EDT up reply actions
GAON is goals against while on the ice. GAON/60 is goals against while on the ice per 60 mins :)
by Dave Shapiro on Apr 28, 2010 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Picky picky. I very rarely reference the former.
Camp Tortorella - Where Vomit is a Mainstay
by George E. Ays on Apr 28, 2010 3:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Ew. What a terrible deal that would have been.
by Dave Shapiro on Apr 28, 2010 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions
I damn near threw up when I heard it was even being talked about. Tambellini turned down Rozsival.
Thank god he’s a bigger idiot than Sather.
Camp Tortorella - Where Vomit is a Mainstay
by George E. Ays on Apr 28, 2010 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t see why Sather would make that trade though. It’s mind boggling.
by Dave Shapiro on Apr 28, 2010 3:58 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m hoping there was a name lost somewhere along the way.
Camp Tortorella - Where Vomit is a Mainstay
by George E. Ays on Apr 28, 2010 3:59 PM EDT up reply actions
If it wasn’t Nash or Omark (assuming Eberle and Svensson are untouchable), then I see no reason for that deal to ever be made.
by Dave Shapiro on Apr 28, 2010 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions
That’s why I’m a fan of Blue Seat Blogs…great stuff, Dave.
Bettman's Nightmare: We See a Good Bettman/Fans Metaphor When We See One, and Frankly, Lane Smith Was Too Hard on Emilio Estevez When He Was A Kid.
http://bettmansnightmare.blogspot.com/
by Bettman's Nightmare on Apr 28, 2010 1:42 PM EDT reply actions
Fantastic writeup Dave thanks again for sharing it
Blueshirt Banter: Covering the New York Rangers
Big Blue View: Unofficial New York Giants blog
by Jim Schmiedeberg on Apr 28, 2010 2:07 PM EDT reply actions
Very nicely done, Dave. Even I learned some new things by reading it!
Blueshirt Banter: Covering the New York Rangers for SB Nation.
The Rangers Tribune: A hockey blog dedicated to covering the New York Rangers since 2009.
by Nick Montemagno on Apr 28, 2010 2:48 PM EDT reply actions
The NHL is a real players league
I mean you can’t release players, it’s really looked down upon to shun somone to the minors and in order to get rid of somone not through trade you must buy out their contract and on top of that it goes against your cap still for double the years on the remaining contract but for half price, and don’t even get me started on the 35+ age contract thing these stipulations are almost out of this world retarded. In a salary cap era if anything we should be able to release and do as we want if the players underperform at least as bad as redden has. I mean i understand you cannot just cut everyone who plays awful but these organizations really have their hands tied when it comes to these things. This is why we need a reall gm that cAn get these contracts right the first time around.
by klh2009 on Apr 28, 2010 7:27 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
Great Post
Really helped me out since everytime I talk with my Pop’s about this stuff he completely blows my mind. Now I will be able to keep up, I hope.
I think my favorite part though, is when you call yourself a ‘dingbat’ – what 80 year old woman did you quote to get that adjective?

by 































