Knightrider Posted December 13, 2006 Report Share Posted December 13, 2006 Last night, I thought heard Riter and Hamilton say that his salary cap number would be pro-rated for the number of healthy days he ends up playing. The league clarified this point and that the daily call ups were unnecessary. Did I hear that wrong? Tom L. at Sabre Rattling thinks so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted December 13, 2006 Report Share Posted December 13, 2006 Last night, I thought heard Riter and Hamilton say that his salary cap number would be pro-rated for the number of healthy days he ends up playing. The league clarified this point and that the daily call ups were unnecessary. Did I hear that wrong? Tom L. at Sabre Rattling thinks so. Tom L is incorrect. Technically, Brad and Paul are correct in that the Sabres don't HAVE to be sending people up and down to fit Timmy back in under the cap. What the Sabres were trying to do when they didn't have a herd of sick / injured players was maintain the little bit of cap room they originally had at the beginning of the season under the cap before they started bringing players up so that they could maintain some miniscule cap flexibility. The Sabres are also saving actual $'s when sending players back down to Ra-cha-cha. Don't forget that important piece of the picture. Not that Tommy G. is the tightwad that some make him out to be, but if he doesn't need to throw away a couple hundred k, I can't blame him for not throwing it away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted December 13, 2006 Report Share Posted December 13, 2006 I'm tired of trying to understand it. The day Connolly is healthy enough to play again and can't be inserted in the lineup because of cap issues is the day I will start worrying about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knightrider Posted December 13, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 13, 2006 I'm tired of trying to understand it. The day Connolly is healthy enough to play again and can't be inserted in the lineup because of cap issues is the day I will start worrying about it. :lol: I hear ya. It just seems like every time I start to think I get it, someone pulls the rug out from under me... Dave, did you ever find an online resource with the cap rules? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted December 13, 2006 Report Share Posted December 13, 2006 :lol: I hear ya. It just seems like every time I start to think I get it, someone pulls the rug out from under me... Dave, did you ever find an online resource with the cap rules? You mean besides the CBA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knightrider Posted December 13, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 13, 2006 You mean besides the CBA? Do you have a link to that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted December 13, 2006 Report Share Posted December 13, 2006 Do you have a link to that? Go to nhlpa.com. It'll be one of the side tabs on the webpage. Good luck trying to read that thing. :wallbash: Anyway, this thread is a good example of what I'm getting sick of. The know it all media types keep reporting incorrect information. On top of that, their interpretation of the cap changes from day to day. Stop reading/listening to this crap and you'll avoid many headaches. There is no pro-rating going on here. Connolly has counted against our cap from day one and he will continue to count against the cap unless he retires for some reason. Since he's on long term IR, the team is allowed to go over the cap by an amount equal to Connolly's salary. Once he's healthy, that relief is gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted December 13, 2006 Report Share Posted December 13, 2006 Do you have a link to that? The CBA is on the NHL's website. Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted December 13, 2006 Report Share Posted December 13, 2006 Go to nhlpa.com. It'll be one of the side tabs on the webpage. Good luck trying to read that thing. :wallbash: Anyway, this thread is a good example of what I'm getting sick of. The know it all media types keep reporting incorrect information. On top of that, their interpretation of the cap changes from day to day. Stop reading/listening to this crap and you'll avoid many headaches. There is no pro-rating going on here. Connolly has counted against our cap from day one and he will continue to count against the cap unless he retires for some reason. Since he's on long term IR, the team is allowed to go over the cap by an amount equal to Connolly's salary. Once he's healthy, that relief is gone. Really, if I were writing a piece on the cap, I think I would be trying to verify (uh-oh, that word again) my interpretation before posting an article. My guess would be that people are getting hung up on the idea of the cap being calculated daily, which is leading to a misuse of the term pro-rate. Then again, I could be wrong - I pretty much have no friggin' clue anymore about the CBA, cap or salaries, except that I know when a player is too expensive to keep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted December 13, 2006 Report Share Posted December 13, 2006 Really, if I were writing a piece on the cap, I think I would be trying to verify (uh-oh, that word again) my interpretation before posting an article. My guess would be that people are getting hung up on the idea of the cap being calculated daily, which is leading to a misuse of the term pro-rate. Then again, I could be wrong - I pretty much have no friggin' clue anymore about the CBA, cap or salaries, except that I know when a player is too expensive to keep. Reading through the blog linked earlier, it was going with the idea that the team has to suddenly repay all the relief they get while Connolly is on LTIR the second he returns. That's not the case. They just have to get back under the cap again. The blog is suggesting that the cap somehow decreases when Connolly returns, but that's not the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted December 13, 2006 Report Share Posted December 13, 2006 Reading through the blog linked earlier, it was going with the idea that the team has to suddenly repay all the relief they get while Connolly is on LTIR the second he returns. That's not the case. They just have to get back under the cap again. The blog is suggesting that the cap somehow decreases when Connolly returns, but that's not the case. And is getting back under the cap again as simple as sending Stafford, Paille, Sekera, etc. back down to Rochester? Or do they need to do anything else (ie cut Peters and/or unload someone else)? Sorry to keep beating this horse but I've been left with the impression that if Timmy comes back (the prospects of which were unfortunately dampened by the article in the News today relating that he still has headaches) we were going to need to unload a regular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JujuFish Posted December 13, 2006 Report Share Posted December 13, 2006 Taken from the CBA, 50.10 (d) Bona-Fide Long-TermInjury/Illness Exception to the Upper Limit. (iv) The replacement Player Salary and Bonuses for any Player(s) that replace(s) an unfit-to-play Player may be added to the Club's Averaged Club Salary until such time as the Club's Averaged Club Salary reaches the Upper Limit. A Club may then exceed the Upper Limit due to the addition of replacement Player Salary and Bonuses of Players who have replaced an unfit-to-play Player, provided, however, that when the unfit-to-play Player is once again fit to play (including any period such Player is on a Bona Fide Long-Term Injury/Illness Exception Conditioning Loan to another league), the Club shall be required to once again reduce its Averaged Club Salary to a level at or below the Upper Limit prior to the Player being able to rejoin the Club. To the extent any Player who is unfit-to-play becomes fit to play during the period of the Roster Freeze set forth in Article 13, the provisions of this Section 50.10(d)(iv) requiring a Club to come back into compliance with the Payroll Range shall supersede the provisions of Article 13 restricting transactions during the Roster Freeze; General Illustration: A Player with a Player Salary of $1.5 million becomes unfit to play for more than 24 calendar days and 10 NHL Regular Season games. At the time the Player becomes unfit to play, his Club has an Averaged Club Salary of $39.5 million, and the Upper Limit in that League Year is $40 million. The Club may replace the unfit-to-play Player with another Player or Players with an aggregate Player Salary and Bonuses of up to $1.5 million. The first $500,000 of such replacement Player Salary and Bonuses shall count toward the Club's Averaged Club Salary, bringing the Averaged Club Salary to the Upper Limit. The Club may then exceed the Upper Limit by up to another $1 million as a result of the replacement Player Salary and Bonuses. However, if the unfit-to-play Player once again becomes fit to play, and the Club has not otherwise created any Payroll Room during the interim period, then the Player shall not be permitted to rejoin the Club until such time as the Club reduces its Averaged Club Salary to below the Upper Limit. Based on this example, it looks to me like the Sabres can exceed the salary cap by nearly Timmy C's full pay (since we were so close to the cap in the first place), so long as we bring the average salary counting Timmy back down to beneath the cap levels when he returns. :unsure: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted December 14, 2006 Report Share Posted December 14, 2006 And is getting back under the cap again as simple as sending Stafford, Paille, Sekera, etc. back down to Rochester? Or do they need to do anything else (ie cut Peters and/or unload someone else)? Sorry to keep beating this horse but I've been left with the impression that if Timmy comes back (the prospects of which were unfortunately dampened by the article in the News today relating that he still has headaches) we were going to need to unload a regular. Yes. No. Unless you consider Paille, Stafford, or Sekera a regular, the Sabres will not have release a regular to make room for Timmy. (This assumes the Sabres don't make any trades in the interim which could change that state of affairs.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matter2003 Posted December 14, 2006 Report Share Posted December 14, 2006 No, Darcy was on WGR and said the league clarified it and said that Connolly's salary will not count when he is on IR ,and will be pro-rated when he comes back off IR. So while he is on IR, the Sabres do not need to keep sending people u pand down to avoid accruing money, since they would be paying more than what they are paying these guys to Connolly if he was healthy. Once Connolly comes back, they merley would have to just send the guys back down to Rochester like Paille, Stafford and Sekera and be under the cap... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted December 14, 2006 Report Share Posted December 14, 2006 The reason we've been sending players down with such frequency is because Tommy G. couldn't grab enough sugar packets during his last trip to Tim Hortons. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted December 14, 2006 Report Share Posted December 14, 2006 No, Darcy was on WGR and said the league clarified it and said that Connolly's salary will not count when he is on IR ,and will be pro-rated when he comes back off IR. So while he is on IR, the Sabres do not need to keep sending people u pand down to avoid accruing money, since they would be paying more than what they are paying these guys to Connolly if he was healthy. Once Connolly comes back, they merley would have to just send the guys back down to Rochester like Paille, Stafford and Sekera and be under the cap... They never had to keep sending the guys back to Rochester daily, but it's a smart move. It's a small amount of money, but they're saving it for future use down the stretch. When all is said and done, they're allowed to spend $44 million over the course of the season (not an exact figure due to the cap being based on average salaries over the life of the contract), plus the Connolly relief (only while he's out). It's common sense to save some money just in case you'll need it later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted December 14, 2006 Report Share Posted December 14, 2006 The reason we've been sending players down with such frequency is because Tommy G. couldn't grab enough sugar packets during his last trip to Tim Hortons. ;) He's probably hoping to win Horton's next "Roll Up the Rim to Win" promo to see if we can keep both Danny & Drury...I heard his first attempt to raise the extra cash was trying to win McDonald's Monopoly game, but he couldn't find those elusive Boardwalk and Short Line pieces... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted December 14, 2006 Report Share Posted December 14, 2006 If I have enough time, I think I'm going to throw together something that lists exactly what we've spent so far this year and how much money the team has left. It won't be exact since it'll be pretty hard to figure out exactly how many days each of the Rochester guys have been with the team, but it should help clear things up a bit. Again, this is if I can find the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnkirishone Posted December 15, 2006 Report Share Posted December 15, 2006 My understanding of the cap in this instance is that at the start of the season we had like 90k to use for call ups (counting Timmies salary). But since Timmy is on long term IR we can exceed the cap by about 2.9 million until such time that he is healthy. So the sabres were trying to save as much of the 90k for call ups for when Timmy came back from long term IR, cause at that time his salary would count on are cap and we would only be left with the 90k to use for call ups unless someone else went on long term IR. Now if we get over the 90k and start to use the 2.9 million from Timmy's salary we are in trouble when tim comes back cause then we can't call anyone up to cover for small injuries like flu or broken toes and such without tradeing, waiving, or doing some other type of salary dump Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matter2003 Posted December 15, 2006 Report Share Posted December 15, 2006 My understanding of the cap in this instance is that at the start of the season we had like 90k to use for call ups (counting Timmies salary). But since Timmy is on long term IR we can exceed the cap by about 2.9 million until such time that he is healthy. So the sabres were trying to save as much of the 90k for call ups for when Timmy came back from long term IR, cause at that time his salary would count on are cap and we would only be left with the 90k to use for call ups unless someone else went on long term IR. Now if we get over the 90k and start to use the 2.9 million from Timmy's salary we are in trouble when tim comes back cause then we can't call anyone up to cover for small injuries like flu or broken toes and such without tradeing, waiving, or doing some other type of salary dump The NHL clarified this to be incorrect. Connolly's salary is pro-rated for only the games he is playing. His salary does not count while he is on Long Term IR, and when he comes back, only the portion of games he is off IR for count towards the cap. Therefore, say if he comes back with 20 games left in the season, his salary counts only $707,317 towards the cap($35,365 per game X 20 games). There is no way the Sabres will come anywhere near the cap while Connolly is on IR, as the players they are calling up are only getting 2-3K per day. There is no need to keep sending them back and forth, and IMHO, it would be better for them to be able to practice with the team if they are going to be up for any length of time.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted December 15, 2006 Report Share Posted December 15, 2006 The NHL clarified this to be incorrect. Connolly's salary is pro-rated for only the games he is playing. His salary does not count while he is on Long Term IR, and when he comes back, only the portion of games he is off IR for count towards the cap. Therefore, say if he comes back with 20 games left in the season, his salary counts only $707,317 towards the cap($35,365 per game X 20 games). There is no way the Sabres will come anywhere near the cap while Connolly is on IR, as the players they are calling up are only getting 2-3K per day. There is no need to keep sending them back and forth, and IMHO, it would be better for them to be able to practice with the team if they are going to be up for any length of time.... I don't know if someone misread a comment from the NHL, but this is not correct. Connolly's salary does not get pro-rated. It counts against the cap the entire season regardless of whether or not he's on LTIR. While he's on LTIR, they're allowed to go over the cap by an amount equal to his salary. If some official NHL source is actually saying what you just did, they're seriously misreading the CBA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted December 15, 2006 Report Share Posted December 15, 2006 The reason we've been sending players down with such frequency is because Tommy G. couldn't grab enough sugar packets during his last trip to Tim Hortons. ;) Word. By the way, what's with Tim Hortons' lunch deals? It's always like an eggsalad sandwich on an English muffin, a side of scalloped potatoes and a mug of cocoa. Is this how Canadians eat? Eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnkirishone Posted December 15, 2006 Report Share Posted December 15, 2006 other than some people on the message boards I have never heard anyone say anything about Timmys salary being prorated to the number of games he plays Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.